The Relevance of Singapore's Foreign Policy: A Contemporary Analysis

By Nishali Ranasinghe

Upon gaining Independence from Malaysia in 1965, Singapore became a sovereign state, showcasing a rapid economic development under then Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew. As a multi-racial, multi-ethnic, multi-lingual, and multi-religious nation with no natural resources, Singapore’s future had to be reliant on the connections of other states. Thus, necessitating a clear foreign policy. A foreign policy of a nation has the ability to construct an image of that particular nation and identify its characteristics. Laura (2008, as cited in Bojang, 2018) states that George Modelski defines foreign policy as “the system of activities evolved by communities for changing the behavior of other states and for adjusting their activities to the international environment". Likewise, foreign policy must illuminate the ways states attempt to change, and succeed in changing, the behavior of other nations. 

Currently, Singapore is a rising power among the world's small states and holds a uniquely influential position in the Southeast Asian region and beyond. The question arises as to how Singapore became a rising power despite the challenges presented by fluctuating global and regional affairs. It must also be noted that Singapore's foreign policy has remained relevant to the changing world and regional contexts, assisting the country in navigating these rapid changes. Thus, this foreign policy should be analyzed in different categories, offering valuable lessons to other states whether small, medium, or large on how to navigate transformations and reach their objectives and fullest potential. 

 

An analysis of the relevance of foreign policy under varied factors

Notwithstanding the rapid changes in the regional and global landscapes, Singapore has attained its current standings. The primary reason for this success could be the consistent relevance of its foreign policy, which has effectively adapted to the evolving landscapes. Consequently, the foreign policy of Singapore will be analyzed through several perspectives, including fundamental aspirations, changing geopolitical landscapes, economic landscapes, and technology landscapes. 

1. Analyzing the Relevance of Fundamentals

Like any other country, Singapore’s foreign policy is grounded in fundamentals and principles. These core fundamentals articulate the nation's aspirations, which serve as a bedrock, robust, foreign policy.

 

Note: Adapted and organized by Ranasinghe based on information from Singapore Government, Our fundamentals, SG101, 2023

The graph above illustrates the fundamentals that have laid the groundwork for the creation of Singapore’s foreign policy. An analysis of these fundamentals reveals two primary aspects: the external, encompassing regional and global considerations, and the internal, reflecting local factors. Regarding regional and global aspects, these fundamentals articulate the underlying principles that Singapore respects, which inform its decision-making. Additionally, the principles to which it adheres are internationally recognized, enhancing the value of its foreign policy. Moreover, Singapore has emphasized regional collaboration and advocated for ASEAN, demonstrating its interest and mutual respect for its neighboring countries. This suggests a preference for more regional collaboration over-reliance on larger powers.

 Additionally, Singapore has demonstrated a commitment to mobilizing its citizens in support of its foreign policy, as the government reflects the people’s voice. This underscores the rule of law and transparency within the country and illustrates its efforts to inform the masses about evolving global dynamics. These efforts not only cultivate an informed Singaporean but also, consequently, enable the government to respond swiftly to changing geopolitical landscapes with public backing. As a result, the risk of internal instability, such as uprisings, terrorism, and excessive nationalism, is mitigated. Furthermore, maintaining an independent military signals a commitment to self-reliance and highlights the understanding that, in a volatile world, small states cannot solely depend on external actors. This provides a valuable lesson for small states globally. 

Similarly, the fundamentals have been structured to clearly reflect Singapore's national character. This provides a distinct advantage for Singapore in its interactions with both external and internal actors, as they gain a clear understanding of Singapore's principles and intentions. This strengthens Singapore's trust and credibility among all actors, contributing to its current standing in the global arena. Speaking at the University of Singapore Society in July 1966, the then-Minister for Foreign Affairs, S. Rajaratnam highlighted the challenges that Singapore faced then and would encounter in the future.

“In a nutshell, our problem is how to make sure that a small island with a teaming population and no natural resources to speak of, can maintain, even increase, its living standards and also enjoy peace and security in a region marked by mutual jealousies, internal violence, economic disintegration and great power conflicts." (SG101, 2023). 

                       

His words effectively articulate the challenges faced by a small state. A review of the fundamentals reveals that Singapore has directly addressed these challenges by highlighting its national interests and aspirations. The clarity, simplicity, and precision of these fundamentals emphasize the consistency and relevance of Singapore's foreign policy. Moreover, Singapore's forward-looking approach is evident in its foreign policy. Singapore has mastered the art of achieving its national interests by navigating these challenges through a strong, coherent foreign policy, which has been instrumental to its success. 

2. Analyzing the relevance of adaptation to evolving geopolitical landscapes

In the contemporary world, the geopolitical landscape has become increasingly tense and volatile through various situations. The rise of new actors, shifting power dynamics, globalization, technological and Artificial Intelligence (AI) advancements, and weaponry developments are some of the reasons for a rapidly changing geopolitical landscape. This applies to both regional and global spheres. However, changing geopolitical landscapes are inevitable, and it is the responsibility of all countries to adapt accordingly.

Globally, the Russian-Ukrainian war is ongoing, and tensions in the USA-China relationship, as well as those within Europe, have escalated since the appointment of US President Donald Trump. Although tensions between China and Taiwan are currently dormant, they have the potential to escalate into a full-scale conflict. These tensions will undoubtedly affect the harmony of the Southeast Asian region and ASEAN. Additionally, internal challenges in some countries, such as the humanitarian crisis in Myanmar, will further pressure regional unity. To navigate these turbulent times, Singapore, a rising small state committed to cooperation, mutual respect, and adherence to the principles of International Law, has focused on balancing these tensions. The Minister for Foreign Affairs, Dr Vivian Balakrishnan, provided commentary regarding the ongoing Russian-Ukrainian war to articulate Singapore's thoughts and stance in such situations. 

“We do not choose sides, we uphold principles. Small countries must avoid becoming sacrificial pawns, vassal states or “cat’s paws” to be used by one side against the other” (SG101, 2023).

“Standing up for our national interests may come with some cost. Safeguarding one’s sovereignty and national interests often requires some sacrifice and pain” (SG101, 2023).

These two statements by Dr. Balakrishnan are significant in several ways. Firstly, he affirms that Singapore is a country that operates by respecting and adhering to principles such as non-violence and the non-use of force, which are enshrined as fundamentals of its foreign policy. It is also evident that Singapore prioritizes its aspirations and national interests over alignment with any particular camp, thereby avoiding labels that could have drastic consequences. In this context, the statement also reinforces Singapore’s credibility amidst various challenges.

Additionally, the latter statement demonstrates Singapore's resolve to address any challenge in order to protect its national interests and sovereignty. This underscores that Singapore should not be underestimated, despite being a small state, and that it is prepared to commit to protecting its sovereignty, territorial integrity, political independence, and national interests at all costs. Given that Singapore is not the only state facing instability, it has also taken the initiative to build capacity and cooperation among other Southeast Asian states. This is because the failure of one state could create a ripple effect across the entire region. Singapore has identified that open, exclusive, rules-based collaboration and cooperation within ASEAN is vital, and therefore, has integrated it as a key fundamental in its foreign policy.

Beyond traditional security threats, non-traditional security threats have surged in the 21st century. To combat these, Singapore has proactively engaged with other states globally, fostering open and inclusive ties. In this context, Singapore's foreign policy assists the country in engaging with states outside the region by articulating its core principles and providing a clear understanding of its national character.

The co-founding of The Forum of Small States (FOSS) symbolizes Singapore's position in the global arena, particularly among small states. According to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs Singapore (n.d.), Singapore established FOSS in 1992 as an informal and non-ideological grouping of small states in New York, and has since served as its Chair. FOSS now comprises 108 countries across all geographical regions and development levels, meeting several times a year to discuss issues of concern to small states. This forum is built on mutual trust, capacity building, strengthened connections, knowledge and experience sharing, and mutual understanding. As a result, it facilitates the resolution of common issues such as climate change, domestic violence, and the negative consequences of artificial intelligence, and so many contemporary issues.

Singapore's active participation and commitment to understanding each member country is commendable. In 2015, Singapore launched the FOSS Fellowship Programme to foster better understanding and closer cooperation among FOSS states. Under the Fellowship Programme, Ambassadors based in cities where FOSS Chapters exist are invited to Singapore for study visits, where they can exchange views on development challenges with Singapore’s leaders and policymakers. As of 2020, Singapore has hosted 88 Ambassadors from 62 countries under the Fellowship Programme (Ministry of Foreign Affairs Singapore, n.d.).

Beyond FOSS, Singapore is also a part of the Small Island Developing States (SIDS). According to the United Nations (n.d.), SIDS are concerned with Sustainable Development Goals such as zero hunger, gender equality, clean water and sanitation, affordable and clean energy, responsible consumption and production, climate action, life below water, life on land, and partnerships for the goals. According to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs Singapore (n.d.), Singapore has offered special technical assistance packages for SIDS since 1999. By finding common ground and assisting one another, Singapore has established itself as a highly trusted partner. This can also be considered as a step to demonstrate that Singapore is more interested in collaborating on non-traditional issues that hinder human development, human security, and human rights, rather than being politically aligned with any particular camp or party. Collaborating on common issues and non-traditional security threats is a perfect way to demonstrate that Singapore is not a threat to rising powers and can be a good friend to all. Balancing super, medium, and small powers reduces potential threats to Singapore and fosters positive relations with all states.

3. Analyzing the relevance of adaptation to economic landscapes

The relevance of a country's foreign policy can also be measured through its adaptation to the regional and global economic landscape. Adapting to evolving economic landscapes is crucial for any nation. Nonetheless, economic factors are dominant and intertwined with other elements such as politics, social dynamics, digital advancements, and environmental concerns. In the current global context, the economic landscape is highly volatile for numerous reasons. Firstly, a new wave of trade wars emerged during the presidential term of Donald Trump, creating a fragile global economic landscape. Although China, Europe, Canada, India, and Mexico were significantly impacted, the effects were felt regionally as well. This is primarily due to the globalization of trade and the interconnectedness of economies, and that no country can operate in isolation. Secondly, the digitalization of the economy and the rise of cryptocurrencies also impact the global economy. While cryptocurrencies are considered economic innovations, they carry negative consequences such as economic instability, effects on national currencies and trade regulators, and an increase in illicit activities like money laundering. Regionally, in Southeast Asia, the rise of innovations, manufacturing, and tourism has significantly impacted the economy. However, the growth and impact of these sectors are contingent on rapidly changing global affairs, as the Southeast Asian region is connected to major markets like the USA and China. Cushman & Wakefield (2024) notes that in the Southeast Asian region, the influence of Chinese investments is increasingly felt due to evolving economic landscapes and the shifting dynamics of its real estate market.

Singapore recognizes the unsteady nature of the global economic landscape. It has prioritized identifying new areas for cooperation and adapting to evolving scenarios. This emphasis is reflected in its fundamental principles. Despite its size and lack of natural resources, Singapore is an economically strong state with one of the world's highest economies. After rapid industrialization in the 1960s lifted the island nation’s development trajectory, manufacturing became the main driver of growth. In the early 1970s, Singapore reached full employment and joined the ranks of Hong Kong SAR, the Republic of Korea, and Taiwan, China, a decade later as Asia’s newly industrializing economies. The manufacturing and services sectors remain the twin pillars of Singapore’s high value-added economy (World Bank, 2024)

To achieve this status in the region and globally, Singapore has prioritized several factors. For example, Singapore's Financial Services Industry Transformation Map (ITM) aims to strengthen its position as a leading international financial center in Asia (Monetary Authority of Singapore, 2017). The map highlights an overall vision that includes becoming a top global financial center in Asia, connecting global markets, supporting Asia’s development, and serving Singapore’s economy. The importance of this vision underpins the fundamentals of Singapore's foreign policy. It also underscores their commitment to building economies not only in the Southeast Asian region but across all of Asia. Singapore's clear ambition to link regional markets with global markets indicates that it is not dismissing or ignoring major players in this field, suggesting a willingness to collaborate with them in the long run. 

Apart from the above, another initiative that distinguishes Singapore from the rest of the small states is the Singapore Cooperation Programme (SCP). The SCP was established to offer various training programs to share Singapore’s development experiences with other developing nations. It has worked with more than 50 local and international partners, nearly 150,000 government officials from 180 countries, territories, and intergovernmental organizations. The specialty of the SCP is that it helps Singapore to find new other partners, which makes them less reliant on the big powers. It also allows Singapore to make good connections not just with states, but also with INGOs, NGOs and other international actors. Another instance is that Singapore works hand in hand with the World Trade Organization.

As a small and open economy with a high reliance on trade, Singapore is a strong supporter of an open and rules-based multilateral trading system that is embodied by the World Trade Organisation (WTO) (Ministry of Trade and Industry, n.d.). This underscores the primary fundamentals of Singapore's foreign policy. It is important to note that these initiatives are all guided by the country's national interests. As these national interests are clearly articulated in their foreign policy, it can be concluded that Singapore's foreign policy is relevant to the evolving economic landscape, both regionally and globally.

4. Analyzing the relevance of adaptation to technological landscapes

Singapore, as a rising state, aspires to become a ‘Smart Nation’ and has been working towards this goal since the 1980s. However, the technological landscape can be viewed as relatively recent compared to other landscapes. This does not diminish its importance. In fact, the technological landscape is one of the most rapidly evolving and plays a pivotal role in all the aforementioned factors. In the present context, numerous challenges have increased over time. For instance, the current technological competition among superpowers can cause issues for the Southeast Asian region, as it comprises sub-players in this field and is likely to be caught in potential conflicts. This will impact their supply chains and manufacturers of semiconductors, electronics, computer devices, etc.

Furthermore, the rise of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and its negative impacts are increasing daily. From spreading misinformation and disinformation to exacerbating climate change, these impacts take a toll on people indiscriminately, thus becoming a non-traditional security threat. Another challenge is posed by Digital Sovereignty. According to Svantesson, (2019, as cited in CTIC, 2023, p. 28), nation-states with different visions are seeking to increase their control over the Internet, primarily by using national tools rather than transnational cooperation and coordination. The rise of Digital Sovereignty can be extremely challenging for a small country like Singapore. In the same report, the challenges it poses to Singapore are described as follows.

‘The pursuit of digital sovereignty by different states poses numerous challenges for Singapore. It has drastically escalated the likelihood of an impending “splinternet” — the situation where, rather than a singular, unified global Internet, governments isolate the Internet in national or regional networks with separate infrastructure that cannot interact with one another. However, as a regional hub that is highly connected with the rest of the world, such fragmentation would threaten Singapore’s economy, connectivity and cybersecurity, amongst many other impacts. Hence, it is critical that Singapore actively monitors and responds to this development’ (CTIC, 2023, p.28).

Given the aforementioned challenges, Singapore's journey to become a ‘Smart Nation’ has been complex. According to the Smart Nation and Digital Government Office (n.d.), Singapore has undertaken numerous innovative initiatives, such as the launch of the Singapore ONE (Online Network Exchange) network in 1997 and the implementation of a nationwide broadband network. Since then, Singapore has worked to maintain its regional leadership. The launch of National AI Strategy 1.0 (NAIS 1.0) established the technological and AI ecosystem in Singapore, and the recent development, National AI Strategy 2.0 (NAIS 2.0), is targeted to expand beyond the region and engage in collaboration with international players in the field. Singapore's ascent as a global tech powerhouse is anchored on the pillars of innovation, business networks, and robust tech infrastructure. By actively fostering collaboration with local and international entities, the government solidifies the nation's position as a preferred destination for tech companies seeking growth (Singapore Economic Development Board, 2023). 

All the aforementioned achievements and initiatives would not have been successful without a strong and adaptive foreign policy capable of withstanding change. Especially in this landscape, where technology changes and innovates rapidly, countries can struggle to keep pace. Recognizing this challenge, Singapore has taken progressive steps since the 1980s, and has now established its position regionally and globally. The commitment of the government, as well as the acceptance and willingness of Singaporeans, should be acknowledged, as they have played a vital role in transforming Singapore into a ‘Tech Hub’. To garner support from internal and external parties, Singapore ensured a clear foreign policy that adheres to international rules and policies, facilitating collaboration with regional and global actors. Prioritizing ASEAN countries before engaging with global players was a strategic move in safeguarding close connections with neighboring countries and international partners in this landscape.

Conclusion

Singapore's foreign policy is designed to facilitate the achievement of its targets and goals. This includes maintaining sovereignty, territorial integrity, political independence, supporting multilateralism, and building open, exclusive connections with various actors in the international system. The relevance of Singapore's foreign policy was analyzed through four interconnected layers. The discussion began by examining the significance of the fundamentals and principles of foreign policy, followed by an analysis of its relevance amidst geopolitical tensions, economic changes, and technological advancements. It became evident that being a small nation, Singapore has advanced significantly compared to other small states globally. The balancing act of achieving national aspirations, cultivating connections with international actors, and maintaining a clear stance is challenging. However, Singapore has managed to remain in the spotlight without appearing threatening to other nations and stakeholders. Therefore, Singapore's foreign policy can be seen as relevant and has helped the country maintain its status while maximizing benefits from both regional and global actors and institutions. 

 

References 

Balakrishnan, V. (2025, March 3). Speech by Minister for Foreign Affairs Dr. Vivian Balakrishnan during the Committee of Supply Debate. https://www.mfa.gov.sg/Newsroom/Press-Statements-Transcripts-and-Photos/2024/02/FM-COS-2025-Speech

Bojang, A. S. (2018). The Study of Foreign Policy in International Relations. Journal of Political Science & Public Affairs, 6(4). https://doi.org/10.4172/2332-0761.1000337

CTIC. (2023). CTIC-WP-04(2023). National University of Singapore. https://ctic.nus.edu.sg/resources/CTIC-WP-04(2023).pdf

Cushman & Wakefield. (2024, May 13). Navigating Southeast Asia's economic growth. https://www.cushmanwakefield.com/en/singapore/insights/navigating-southeast-asias-economic-growth

GIS Reports Online. (2024, May 9). Singapore foreign policy. https://www.gisreportsonline.com/r/singapore-foreign-policy/#:~:text=In%20a%20nutshell&Future%20foreign%20policy%20will%20likely,continuity%2C%20and%20leverage%20existing%20partnerships

Ministry of Foreign Affairs Singapore. (n.d.). Small States. Retrieved from https://www.mfa.gov.sg/SINGAPORES-FOREIGN-POLICY/International-Issues/Small-States#:~:text=In%201992%2C%20Singapore%20established%20an,served%20as%20Chair%20of%20FOSS.

Ministry of Foreign Affairs. (n.d.). Foreign Policy. Retrieved from https://www.mfa.gov.sg/Overseas-Mission/Bangkok/About-Singapore/Foreign-Policyhttps://www.mfa.gov.sg/Overseas-Mission/Bangkok/About-Singapore/Foreign-Policy

Ministry of Trade and Industry. (n.d.). World Trade Organization (WTO). https://www.mti.gov.sg/Trade/Multilateral-and-Regional-Forums/World-Trade-Organization-WTO

Monetary Authority of Singapore. (2017). MAS Financial Services ITM infographic. https://www.mas.gov.sg/-/media/mas/resource/news_room/press_releases/2017/mas_financial-services-itm-infographic.pdf

SG101. (2023, July 17). The Geopolitical Space. https://www.sg101.gov.sg/foreign-policy/expand-our-international-space/geopoliticalspace/

Singapore Cooperation Programme, (2024). About Us. https://scp.gov.sg/startpublic/aboutUs

Singapore Economic Development Board. (2023, November 28). How Singapore has become a leading force in tech innovation.https://www.edb.gov.sg/en/business-insights/insights/how-singapore-has-become-a-leading-force-in-tech-innovation.html

Singapore Government. (n.d.). Our fundamentals. SG101. https://www.sg101.gov.sg/foreign-policy/ourfundamentals/

United Nations. (n.d.). Small Island Developing States. Retrieved from https://sdgs.un.org/topics/small-island-developing-states

World Bank. (2024, July). Singapore Overview: Development news, research, data. https://www.worldbank.org/en/country/singapore/overview

 

 

New Zealand’s Defense Diplomacy and Its Role in the Indo-Pacific

By Githmi Silva

In the discourse of International Relations, the Indo-Pacific has drawn plenty of attention for inevitable reasons. From its strategic location to thriving economies, the region holds significance in numerous ways. However, discussions about the Indo-Pacific often revolve around a handful of major players, such as India, China, Japan, and the United States. While these states undoubtedly shape the region’s political, economic and security landscapes, their dominance in the common narrative tends to overshadow the role of middle powers. New Zealand is one such middle power in the Indo-Pacific; a country despite its relatively small size, playing an active role in shaping regional politics. New Zealand’s commitment to security cooperation may not always be the focal point of regional security dialogues; still, it plays a crucial role in influencing the security outlook for smaller Indo-Pacific states. This article aims to explore how New Zealand’s defense diplomacy contributes to regional stability and influences the security dynamics of smaller nations in the region.

New Zealand’s Defense Policy

National security today is multifaceted. It goes beyond conventional threats and encompasses various non-traditional challenges, including climate change, mass migrations, pandemics, and counterterrorism. These issues not only directly impact national security but also create ripple effects that influence the broader region. In response, a country’s defense policy is shaped to tackle these evolving challenges, ultimately safeguarding both the state and its people while taking the broader picture into consideration.

Since gaining legal independence in 1947, New Zealand’s defense and security interests have expanded significantly, leading to ongoing adaptations and developments in its defense policy. According to the New Zealand Ministry of Defense (2023), New Zealand’s new defense strategy emphasizes three mutually reinforcing themes: understand, partner, and act. Defense Policy and Strategy Statement issued by the New Zealand Government in 2023, comprehensively taps the above themes; articulating how the country’s defense strategy is built on New Zealand defense’s professionalism as well as New Zealand’s relationship with the world.

In order to understand New Zealand’s approach to defense diplomacy, it is first necessary to decode the term itself. Although relatively new, defense diplomacy has become a pivotal tool for states in pursuing their security interests. There is no universally accepted definition of the term; however, it emerged in the post-Cold War era as a response to the political need to define the expanding roles of institutions under national defense ministries and to clarify their objectives in a newly "demilitarized" international environment. Thus, its origins lie in politics rather than academia; broadly serving as a means to support the implementation of national interests and to advance foreign and security policy objectives (Security and Defense Quarterly).

The term defense is often associated with military strength and rigid strategies, but the core of defense diplomacy is nonviolent. It serves as a form of soft power, allowing governments to advance their security interests through cooperation rather than coercion. In International Relations, the concept of power is generally classified into three categories: hard power, which relies on force and coercion to achieve national interests, soft power, in contrast, which uses diplomacy, culture, and partnerships to influence others, and smart power, a combination of both, leveraging military capabilities alongside diplomatic and other noncoercive strategies.

New Zealand is known for its rules-based order and modest stance in foreign relations. The New Zealand Defense Force plays a key role in peacekeeping, logistics, maritime security, and humanitarian efforts, demonstrating a strong soft power approach (Espia, 2024). However, New Zealand also employs more sophisticated strategies that go beyond traditional soft power. Despite not having a large military, New Zealand is part of strategic alliances with major global powers. This allows the country to contribute to international security while maintaining an independent foreign policy. New Zealand’s defense diplomacy is not just about maintaining peace but also about using strategic engagement and preventive measures to uphold stability in the region and beyond. Therefore in New Zealand’s case, defense diplomacy reflects characteristics of smart power; a balanced strategy that integrates persuasion with strategic military engagement.

New Zealand’s Role in Regional Security Frameworks

Although New Zealand maintains a modest and independent approach to foreign relations, it remains actively engaged in several major regional and global security frameworks. While the country is directly involved in certain security and military alliances, it also participates indirectly in others, even without formal membership.

●        New Zealand and ANZUS

Entered into force in 1952, ANZUS is a security treaty signed between Australia, New Zealand, and the United States. In a turbulent geopolitical atmosphere during the Cold War, the ANZUS treaty was signed to strengthen regional security, particularly to avoid Japan’s resurgence and the spread of communism in the region. Signatories of the treaty believed that an armed attack in the Pacific area on one member would endanger the peace and safety of the others; thus, the parties agreed to sustain and expand their military forces to counter threats and to consult each other if their security in the Pacific was threatened (New Zealand History, 1952).

This tripartite security alliance contributed to stabilizing the Pacific's security during the Cold War period and strengthening defense capabilities; however, ANZUS took a detour towards the 1980s with New Zealand’s adherence to anti-nuclear policies. When New Zealand’s Labour Party came to power in 1984, the Government was committed to making New Zealand a nuclear-free country. As per New Zealand’s nuclear-free policy, the U.S. Navy could only visit New Zealand if it provided the New Zealand government with a clear assurance that its ships were nuclear-free, and this requirement conflicted with the U.S. Navy’s longstanding policy of neither confirming nor denying the presence of nuclear weapons aboard its vessels (Catalina, 2010). The contradictions, gradually made New Zealand withdraw from the ANZUS treaty, which makes a compelling case, considering it is the small and less powerful member of the treaty.

However, New Zealand’s move is not purely moral, it is also political and strategic. New Zealand's abandoning ANZUS did spark some tensions between the signatories; one could evidently argue it strained New Zealand - USA relations and reduced New Zealand’s influence in global security. Nevertheless given New Zealand’s geographical; and historical proximity with its neighbor Australia, geographic separation from the regions of potential conflict between the great powers, and its lack of any apparent direct threat to its territory prove that New Zealand did not make a wrong choice parting from ANZUS, but a strategic one (Jamieson, 1991). As a whole ANZUS did not evolve into a large-scale military alliance like NATO; regardless of pulling back from the treaty, up to date, Wellington does maintain security ties with both Canberra and Washington while not compromising its commitment to a nuclear-free Pacific.

●        New Zealand and Five Eyes Intelligence

Five Eyes Intelligence is a security alliance formed in 1946, between the United States, the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand. For New Zealand, a nation with comparatively limited military power, being part of such a formidable intelligence network carries significant stakes. New Zealand’s role in Five Eyes up to date remains controversial. Its role has not been deeply analyzed in the academic discourse, nevertheless, debatable. New Zealand in some researchers' perspectives is the “phantom eye” of the group; its presence may not be as noticeable as the counterparts, yet it is there. Its relevance become much more crucial given its proximity to Australia and Southeast Asia, and New Zealand’s role in the group has made an impact on other parties.

For instance, during the 1987 Fiji coups, New Zealand failed to provide intelligence on the coup's likelihood or its aftermath, marking a significant setback for the alliance. Over the next two decades, New Zealand’s absence deprived Five Eyes of crucial intelligence in Southeast Asia, leaving gaps that the remaining members had to compensate for (Batter and Balls, 2023). New Zealand’s location in the South Pacific continues to be important for intelligence gathering; especially given the nature of contemporary security threats ranging from counter-terrorism to cyber threats. On the other hand, membership in Five Eyes is essential for New Zealand due to access to high intelligence, geopolitical leverage, and maintaining strong ties with Western allies to ensure regional stability.

●        New Zealand and ASEAN Regional Forum

ASEAN Regional Forum is a multilateral security dialogue in the Asia Pacific Region. This initiative was established in 1994 and it encompasses ASEAN Member states and 17 non-ASEAN members. The main objectives of the ASEAN Regional Forum (2023) include fostering constructive dialogue and consultation on political and security issues of common interest and concern; and making significant contributions to efforts towards confidence-building and preventive diplomacy in the Asia-Pacific region; considering these objectives New Zealand’s involvement once again is pivotal. Being part of the ASEAN Regional Forum, New Zealand contributes in sustaining ASEAN security centrality while providing humanitarian assistance, disaster relief, and nonproliferation and arms control mechanisms among others. The Foreign Policy standing of Wellington is different from ASEAN’s; nevertheless, given the complexity and importance of the Asia Pacific region, it is a must for Wellington to maintain a solid relationship with ASEAN. Under these circumstances, New Zealand continues to engage with ASEAN in the security pillar for mutual benefits.

How can New Zealand’s Defense Policy impact small Indo-Pacific States?

Determining whether New Zealand is a small power or a big power is certainly not straightforward. It can be understood and explained from various angles. In comparison to conventional major powers such as the USA, the UK, and China, New Zealand lacks key attributes to compete globally.  In terms of military and defense, it does not possess a strong military force and faces no direct security threats. However, it plays a crucial role in regional security by closely collaborating with larger states. This brings up the question: What distinguishes New Zealand, and what implications does this have for other small states in the region?

As mentioned earlier, New Zealand’s Defense Policy is carefully crafted to cater to the country’s national interest while also addressing broader regional interests. Despite not facing direct military threats, New Zealand is located in a region marked by political tensions, such as the South China Sea disputes. While New Zealand maintains an independent approach to foreign policy, it must also be prepared to navigate evolving security challenges in an increasingly uncertain world. New Zealand’s current defense policy acknowledges these unprecedented foreign policy challenges and implements a comprehensive, holistic approach to address them.

The Indo-Pacific region remains a battleground for Power competition among states, with China and India steadily expanding their influence while Western powers including the USA counterbalancing the power competition. Against this backdrop, Wellington attempts to play their game safe but at the same time, smart, following a nuanced approach with the USA, China, India, and its neighbour Australia; this mechanism allows New Zealand to strengthen their security ties with the Pacific neighbours ultimately. How exactly? This can be explained in several ways. As explained New Zealand is a part of many regional and international security alliances. Although New Zealand’s role in them can be controversial at certain points, involvement does leverage the country's geopolitical importance and contribute to strengthening regional security cooperation.

With the support of major powers, New Zealand engages actively in defense collaborations, training programs, and joint military exercises. In this regard, the role of the New Zealand Defense Force (NZDF) should be emphasized since it functions as the main instrument of New Zealand’s defense diplomacy. The New Zealand Defense Force (NZDF) primarily conducts offshore operations, including humanitarian assistance and disaster relief (HADR), search and rescue (SAR), defense and diplomatic exercises, support for Antarctica, Building Partner Capacity (BPC) initiatives, surveillance and interception, counterpiracy efforts, and participation in UN peacekeeping missions (Espia, 2024). These actions have been effective in addressing both traditional and nontraditional security threats in the Indo-Pacific.

New Zealand's efforts in addressing non-traditional security threats have gained significant attention, particularly during the COVID-19 pandemic. The New Zealand Defense Force (NZDF) was initially called upon to deliver humanitarian aid to families in need but was soon drawn into their biggest active deployment since 1999 (Greener, 2022). While providing vaccinations and humanitarian assistance at home New Zealand also expanded humanitarian assistance to other Pacific states; for instance, Fiji’s 2021 COVID-19 Outbrake. In this case, New Zealand provided Fiji with medical personnel, 100,000 doses of the AstraZeneca vaccine, other essential equipment, and economic support of 10 million New Zealand Dollars (Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, n.d). Speaking of nontraditional security threats New Zealand’s defense diplomacy also plays an active role in climate security and disaster response as well as cyber security and digital resilience. By being part of alliances like Five Eyes New Zealand contributes to tackling cyber security and related threats in the region.

While New Zealand’s military presence is not extensive, it maintains strong relationships with military-capable nations to promote capacity-building initiatives. These partnerships help strengthen the capacities of smaller Pacific states. Pacific Security Cooperation Program (PSCP), defense Training and Exchange Programs such as Exercise Milan in India, and Sri Lanka, and the Maldives Coast Guard Training Program can be noted as a few examples. New Zealand also pays careful attention to humanitarian assistance when it comes to maintaining security in the home and the region. The Mutual Assistance Programme is one of the key elements of Aotearoa New Zealand's contribution to peace and security in the region, significantly helping to foster strong and enduring people-to-people links over many decades (NZDF, n.d).

New Zealand’s defense policy and its role in regional security are not widely debated topics. As a smaller power, it lacks the impulse to assert dominance and tends to uphold a neutral foreign policy stance. However, its strategic importance in the region necessitates action to contribute to regional security when required. New Zealand’s actions in this regard have been subtle, yet influential. As mentioned in the article New Zealand follows a sophisticated approach to security. It is a part of several security alliances both directly and indirectly, however, Wellington is mindful not to take their core values of foreign policy such as the rule-based order for granted. Overall New Zealand has been consistently contributing to regional security cooperation, most importantly maneuvering the situations and acknowledging the geopolitical complexity in the region.

References

Batter, J., & Balls, M. (2023). The role of New Zealand in Five Eyes intelligence operations. Security Studies Journal. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/02684527.2023.2212557#d1e200

Catalina, P. (2010). Nuclear-free New Zealand and ANZUS: Strategic implications in the Pacific. International Security Review, 15(3), 45-63. https://scholar.harvard.edu/files/amycatalinac/files/catalinac_fpa.pdf

Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade. (n.d.). New Zealand’s response to Fiji’s COVID-19 outbreak. Government of New Zealand. Retrieved from https://www.mfat.govt.nz/en/aid-and-development/humanitarian-action/support-for-fijis-2021-covid-19-outbreak

Espia, J. (2024). New Zealand’s defense strategy and the evolution of soft power in the Indo-Pacific. Strategic Affairs Quarterly, 29(1), 67-82. https://www.airuniversity.af.edu/JIPA/Display/Article/3971772/smart-power-or-strategic-apathy-the-new-zealand-defence-force-and-the-politics/

Greener, B. (2022). New Zealand’s humanitarian and defense operations during COVID-19: A case study of military response in a crisis. Global Security Review, 38(2), 102-118. https://www.thekcis.org/publications/insights/insight-22

Jamieson, S. (1991). New Zealand’s strategic withdrawal from ANZUS: Geopolitical consequences and regional security realignment. Pacific Affairs Review, 23(4), 87-109. https://www.files.ethz.ch/isn/23427/mcnair12.pdf

New Zealand History. (1952). The origins and development of ANZUS. Ministry for Culture and Heritage. Retrieved from https://nzhistory.govt.nz/anzus-comes-into-force

New Zealand Ministry of Defence. (2023). Defence policy and strategy statement. New Zealand Government. Retrieved from https://www.defence.govt.nz/our-work/plan-and-assess/defence-policy-review/defence-strategy/#:~:text=Our%20strategy,-New%20Zealand%27s%20new&text=Act%20%E2%80%93%20Defence%20is%20more%20ready,humanitarian%20assistance%20through%20to%20combat

NZDF (n.d.). New Zealand Defence Force regional security initiatives. Retrieved from Security and Defence Quarterly. (2023). The emergence of defense diplomacy as a strategic tool in international relations. Defence and Strategy Studies, 14(2), 123-137.