{"id":6979,"date":"2022-02-24T08:36:38","date_gmt":"2022-02-23T19:36:38","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/israelinstitute.nz\/?p=6979"},"modified":"2022-06-14T15:31:35","modified_gmt":"2022-06-14T03:31:35","slug":"new-zealand-foreign-ministry-briefing-misinforms","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/israelinstitute.nz\/2022\/02\/new-zealand-foreign-ministry-briefing-misinforms\/","title":{"rendered":"New Zealand Foreign Ministry briefing misinforms"},"content":{"rendered":"

New Zealand claims to have a balanced and evenhanded approach to the Israel Palestinian conflict. However, New Zealand’s voting record at the UN does not support this view<\/a> and we are increasingly out of step with traditional allies<\/a>.<\/p>\n

In order to understand the thinking of the officials who brief New Zealand’s foreign minister, IINZ undertook a Official Information Act Request.<\/p>\n

The results showed not only significant gaps in the advice Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade (MFAT) officials give to the Minister of Foreign Affairs, but also the omission of some vital pieces of information.<\/p>\n

The November 2021 MFAT ministerial briefing<\/a> on “New Zealand’s approach to votes on Middle East-related issues” was authored by the Unit Managers for the United Nations, Human Rights and Commonwealth Division (there is no divisional manager at this time<\/a>) and Middle East and Africa Division, (headed by Daniel Mellsop<\/a>).<\/p>\n

In previous years, MFAT have advised Ministers<\/a> to vote for most of the disproportionate number of resolutions that target Israel. These recommendations used to come with paragraphs of explanation and context. The briefing to Minister Mahuta, however, simply gives the voting position of 2020 and recommends the same for 2021. It is curious as to why there is no explanation of the resolutions, which one would expect to be a minimum requirement, particularly given this is a new foreign minister.<\/p>\n

MFAT officials have previously failed to brief Ministers on grave concerns to do with foreign aid<\/a>, so perhaps it is not a surprise that they have omitted important information from this briefing. One point in the briefing refers to the initiation of the International Criminal Court (ICC) investigation<\/a>. MFAT officials write that “The investigation’s announcement was criticised by Israel and the US, and praised by Palestine and civil society.”<\/p>\n

Leaving aside the point that New Zealand does not recognise Palestine as a country (because it is not), and debate around exactly what “civil society” might mean, there are glaring omissions. A year before the initiation, Germany, Austria, Czechia, and Hungary, as well as Uganda, and Brazil all raised concerns about the jurisdiction of the ICC in this matter<\/a>.
\nFurthermore, Australia submitted a report to the ICC in March 2020<\/a> clearly stating:<\/p>\n