MORE ON FM PETER'S E-MAIL OUTBURST: AN ANTI-GOFF

C O N F I D E N T I A L WELLINGTON 000389

SIPDIS

NOFORN
SIPDIS

STATE FOR D (FRITZ),EAP/FO, AND EAP/ANP
NSC FOR VICTOR CHA
SECDEF FOR OSD/ISD LIZ PHU
PACOM FOR JO1E/J2/J233/J5/SJFHQ

E.O. 12958: DECL: 05/19/2016
TAGS: PREL PGOV NZ
SUBJECT: MORE ON FM PETER'S E-MAIL OUTBURST: AN ANTI-GOFF
PLOT?

REF: WELLINGTON 380

Classified By: DCM David R. Burnett,
for reasons 1.4 (b) and (d)


1. (C) Summary: Chris Trotter, New Zealand's leading
left-wing political analyst believes the recent attack by New
Zealand First leader and Foreign Minister Winston Peters on
National Party Leader Don Brash was actually aimed at Trade
and Defense Minister Phil Goff. In a recent article in the
"Independent Financial Review," Trotter contends that Peters
wants more control over the Foreign Affairs Portfolio, which
is still largely Goff's in fact, if not in name. The Foreign
Minister and NZ First Leader's outburst also serves the
purpose of Labour's Left, particularly Cabinet Minister
Trevor Mallard, who want to undercut Goff because he
represents the party's more conservative wing. Trotter's
account tracks closely with the views of US-NZ Partnership
Forum participants Charles Finny and Murray McCully, who
believe Prime Minister Clark wants to undermine the forum
because of its links to her political rival Goff. End
Summary.

Peters wants foreign policy control
--------------


2. (U) As noted reftel, Peters recently disclosed a leaked
email that Brash sent his election team last year seeking
advice on whether to employ two American strategists. Peters
later said he made his claims to prove that Brash, who had
previously denied U.S. involvement in National's campaign,
was not a trustworthy leader. But Trotter points out that
Peters made his outburst on the very day that the Australian
media reported A/S Hill's positive take on the US-NZ
relationship. According to Trotter, this means that Peters
was either putting domestic politics ahead of his
responsibilities as Foreign Minister or was sabotaging the
diplomatic advances made by Goff during his recent trip to
Washington. Either way, Trotter says, Peters does not
deserve his foreign minister position.


3. (U) Trotter writes that it was notable that Goff, not
Peters headed the mission to Washington. He thinks that
despite the trade-orientated agenda, Peters' absence was
intended to serve as a signal to Washington that in reality
Goff "remains this country's real foreign minister." Trotter
notes that Goff, and indeed Brash, with whom Goff presented a
united front in Washington, emerged with kudos as a result
of the mission's success in setting a better tone for
diplomatic relations with the U.S. Peters had declared when
he became Foreign Minister that he would place a priority on
improved US-NZ ties. Goff's Washington success robs Peters of
credit for that achievement.


4. (U) Goff emerged from the Washington talks as the sort of
Labour politician the U.S. can do business with, Trotter
says. Goff's conservative credentials were further enhanced
when he mused publicly about inviting an American warship
into New Zealand waters. Trotter argues that Labor's Left --
including Mallard -- by contrast presents a major barrier to
restoration of full military and intelligence co-operation
with the U.S. The anti-nuclear policy is one of the Left's
few genuine political accomplishments and in many ways is the
glue that binds Labour's competing factions. Healing the
rift with the U.S would "spell disaster for Labour party
unity" by unleashing an internal ideological struggle.


5. (U) Trotter criticizes Mallard (and Labour) for once
again rehashing anti-American sentiment just when Goff had
finally succeeded in rehabilitating New Zealand in the eyes
of the U.S. after last year's anti-American election campaign
accusations. Trotter believes that Mallard and his left wing
colleagues do not want Goff, the leader of Labour's Right, to
be the one credited with this rehabilitation. He believes
that by weakening Goff, Mallard's chances of succeeding Clark
as party leader could be enhanced.

Comment
--------------


6. (SBU) As a left-wing commentator, Trotter's criticism of
the Labour Party's anti-American rhetoric is striking. A
pragmatist, he is clearly worried about the effects of
anti-Americanism on his party as well as his country.
Trotter views foreign policy as mainly a bipartisan issue,
and he is therefore uncomfortable with the ideological bent
of Mallard and his cronies.


7. (C) Trotter is also by implication criticizing PM Clark,
as Mallard is probably her closest Ministerial associate.
This tracks with the views of close Embassy contact, former
MFAT official, and US-NZ Partnership Forum participant
Charles Finny, who says Peters' recent outburst was done at
the behest of the Prime Minister. Clark tried to sandbag
Goff's selection as Mount Roskill's Labour candidate in his
first electoral campaign. She certainly does not want Goff
to be her successor, Finny says, and is therefore out to
undermine the US-NZ Partnership that is now associated with
him. National Party Foreign Affairs spokesman Murray
McCully, another Forum participant, agrees. He says that the
PM declined a request by Forum organizers to contribute a
pamphlet to the Forum congratulating the participants and
wishing them well. Both Clark and Mallard are relatively
anti-American, so taking the legs out of the partnership
satisfies them for substantive as well as political reasons,
Finny and McCully say.
McCormick