The revelation that Labour sent troops to Iraq to protect Fonterra’s valuable milk contracts to the UN has been out there for a few days. There had, until Helen Clark squawked, not a word from anyone in labour. The moment she squealed and took umbrage we hear from Phil Goff.
Mr Goff yesterday said the allegation was ridiculous.
“No such trade-off was ever suggested and if it ever had been, it would have been rejected out-of-hand. We do not trade putting the lives of our military personnel at risk for commercial deals. It is a completely false claim.”
Hmmm is this the same Phil Goff who is quoted in other leaked cables as expressing a closeness to the US Army? (page 263)
5. c. Defense Minister Phil Goff discussed many of the same issues with the General. Goff mentioned to the General (as he does with virtually all U.S. officials) that he had two nephews that were West Point graduates and felt a closeness to the U.S. Army. Goff told the General that he could expect a positive outcome on redeploying the PRT past Sept 2006 and was reasonably assured the SAS (Special Forces) would deploy again after regeneration.
Is that the same closeness to the US Army as when he flew the Viet Cong flag from the cenotaph in Auckland in 1975 at the fall of Saigon?
But back to Phil Goff and his comments about when and where we send troops. It is abundantly clear from the Wikileaks cables that Phil Goff is a warrior in private to US Generals and a mouse in public, much like his former leader. Just do a search on SAS and have a look at the number of commitments Phil Goff made to send troops. Now again, don’t get me wrong, I beleive that our troops should be in Afghanistan and in Iraq. I am simply pointing out the sheer hypocrisy of Labour pretending domestically to be against such things and privately to US Generals and diplomats telling a completely different story. Phil Goff was even suggesting that NZ send troops as a PRT into Iraq off of the back of the success in Afghanistan of the NZ deployment to Bamiyan (page 226)
c. Defense Minister Phil Goff kicked off thepolitical-level meetings, welcoming the Admiral, stressing the importance of the bilateral defense relationship and pointing to New Zealand’s contributions to the War on Terror,including NZDF deployments to Afghanistan and support for theProliferation Security Inititiative (PSI). Admiral Fallon expressed U.S. appreciation for those contributions, noting that the NZDF’s Provincial Reconstruction Team in Bamiyan provided a good general model for future PRTs and its SAS contingent had worked extremely well with U.S. counterparts. Goff said the Cabinet would decide by the end of February whether to extend the PRT beyond September 2006; he did not comment on further SAS deployments. Goff noted Senator McCain’s comment that New Zealand should think about replicating its success in Bamiyan by heading a PRT in Iraq.The Minister said he told McCain that New Zealand was not averse to doing so once the security situation had stabilized.
Of course it failed to escape the US that NZ is physically incapable of deploying to both Iraq and Afghanistan simultaneously, but that didn’t stop Goff suggesting we weren’t averse to doing it.
