Foreign Minister Winston Peters has hit back at the "wild rhetoric" around the AUKUS security partnership, denying it would mean the Government is abandoning independent foreign policy.
On Wednesday, Peters said the Coalition Government is still on the same pathway as the previous Labour Government was when it comes to AUKUS Pillar 2.
Peters delivered a major foreign policy speech to the Institute of International Affairs on Wednesday night in which he addressed the public debate surrounding AUKUS.
The trilateral collective security agreement was signed by Australia, the United Kingdom and the United States in 2021.
Pillar 1 of the alliance relates to nuclear-powered submarines; however, Pillar 2 relates to technology and intelligence.
New Zealand has been exploring the option of becoming a potential AUKUS Pillar 2 partner which has been met with fierce criticism.
Labour hosted an anti-AUKUS summit in April, accusing the Coalition of advancing New Zealand's AUKUS interest beyond what was promised, despite Prime Minister Christopher Luxon saying there has been no change in position since when Labour was in Government.
Peters stated Pillar 2 discussions were initiated by Labour and the current Government is continuing the process already begun by its predecessor.
Peters said there are two conditions before New Zealand could or would participate in Pillar 2.
Firstly, AUKUS partners need to invite Aotearoa to participate, which Peters said they have not.
"This Government, like its predecessor, has its ministers and officials seeking information and in discussions with their counterparts so that we can better understand what opportunities and benefits Pillar 2's advanced technologies may offer New Zealand," he said.
"We must also carefully examine what utilities, if any, we might offer, or be expected to offer Pillar 2 partners, in return. That will take time."
If Aotearoa is invited sometime in the future, we would then need to decide whether or not to accept a decision, which Peters said the Government was a long way from making.
Peters emphasised it would be "utterly irresponsible" for any Government to not consider whether collaborating with like-minded partners on advances in technology is in our national interest.
"Prudence also dictates exploring technological advancement to assess its potential significant benefits for our economy, military and space sectors, and how these benefits might then flow into wider society," he said.
Peters said that is why former Prime Minister Chris Hipkins and his Cabinet Ministers were open to exploring Pillar 2's opportunities, but since then have apparently changed their stance.
"Openness in government is transforming before our eyes into close-mindedness in opposition," Peters said.
"We are disquieted by any potential breakdown in foreign policy bipartisanship over Pillar 2. Bipartisanship in foreign policy is not a luxury for our small state, it's a necessary condition for advancing our sovereign interests effectively, thereby keeping New Zealanders secure and prosperous. We urge them to hold their nerve."
Peters then turned to the critics of Pillar 2 and challenged their reasoning.
There has been widespread opposition to AUKUS from Opposition politicians, former prime ministers, journalists, political commentators and activists.
Former Prime Minister Helen Clark and then-National leader Don Brash have voiced their opposition to New Zealand joining AUKUS. Clark said the statements made about AUKUS being good for us are "highly contestable" and in an opinion piece in the NZ Herald the pair said it appeared the decision would see the country "abandon our independent foreign policy in favour of unqualified support for America's 'China containment policy'."
Peters disagrees.
"Wild rhetoric about New Zealand acquiring hypersonic weaponry and New Zealand facing no threats to its security are repeated by journalists and commentators who should better appreciate this fundamental information imbalance," he said.
"Pillar 2 is not a military alliance but a technology sharing mechanism being developed by three of our closest traditional security partners. It is being developed as a response to a deteriorating strategic environment. It seeks to strengthen defence capabilities, deter coercion or aggression in our region, and support security and stability."
He lashed out at the criticism that the Coalition was abandoning an independent foreign policy as "anti-Americanism" and said the countries critics are "scaremongering" about are "three of our closest friends on the international stage", meaning the US, UK and Australia.
