Dear Editor, I am writing as a Cook Islander to express my disappointment with the New Zealand Government, and in particular their Ministry of Foreign Affairs and its Minister, for the bellicose statements coming from the Beehive recently in relation to the Cook Islands.

I would also note their heavy-handed approach has not been limited to the Cook Islands but also Kiribati, where they have threatened to review their aid programme to one of the poorest nations in the Pacific because of a mix up with the timing and level of a visit by the NZ Deputy Prime Minister. It is common knowledge that these kinds of bullying threats quite often achieve the opposite effect of what they are trying to do, so it is highly regrettable that we are seeing this coming from New Zealand.

I think all Cook Islanders (and any interested New Zealanders) should take a good look at the 2001 Joint Centenary Declaration (available off the NZ MFAT website (https://www.mfat.govt.nz/assets/Countries-and-Regions/Pacific/Cook-Islands/Cook-Islands-2001-Joint-Centenary-Declaration-signed.pdf ), since it has been widely misquoted by New Zealand media lately with respect to a state visit to China by our Prime Minister, Mark Brown. The Joint Centenary Declaration is very important because it clarifies how the Constitutional linkages between the two countries are to be interpreted.

Specifically on the duty to consult with NZ and the alleged breach of the Declaration, I will say that on my reading of it I do not believe under the terms of that Declaration that the Cook Islands had any kind of responsibility to share the full contents of any strategic agreement between the Cook Islands and China with New Zealand.

For clarity, the Declaration says this in Clause 2:

“2. In all matters affecting the Realm of New Zealand, of which the Cook Islands and New Zealand are part, there be close consultation between the Signatories.”

So right at the outset it very clearly recognises that both the Cook Islands and New Zealand are constituent parts of the “Realm of New Zealand” and thus are equal parties of it. It is important to understand this because it frames the rest of the Declaration, and the main thrust of my letter here.

It is worthwhile repeating in full the all-important Clause 4 of the Declaration dealing with “Foreign Affairs” as follows:

“1. In the conduct of its foreign affairs, the Cook Islands interacts with the international community as a sovereign and independent state. Responsibility at international law rests with the Cook Islands in terms of its actions and the exercise of its international rights and fulfilment of its international obligations.”

“2. Any action taken by New Zealand in respect of its constitutional responsibilities for the foreign affairs of the Cook Islands will be taken on the delegated authority, and as an agent or facilitator at the specific request of, the Cook Islands. Section 5 Of the Cook Islands Constitution Act 1964 thus records a responsibility to assist the Cook Islands and not a qualification of Cook Islands’ statehood.”

“3. Without impairing the right of either Signatory to formulate and implement its own foreign policies, the Signatories undertake to:

         a. consult regularly on foreign affairs matters with a view to formulating common policies on important foreign affairs issues;

         b. cooperate in the pursuit of common foreign relations objectives; and

         c. advise each other when a proposed foreign policy initiative may affect the rights, obligations and interests of the other Signatory.”

(Note: very similar language is repeated again in Clause 7 dealing with Defense and Security)

So it would appear that the New Zealand Government is contending that the Cook Islands is in breach of Section 3 (c) and possibly (a) of Clause 4 of the Declaration. It is my understanding from comments made by our Prime Minister that there is nothing in this strategic agreement with China that would affect the ‘rights, obligations and interests’ of the other signatory. In fact, he has assured New Zealand that there will be no security aspects in the agreement. I would add that there is little other detail contained in Clause 4 that specifically outlines to what level of detail either party needs to advise or consult with the other on, so maybe this is something which needs to be further elaborated upon in future to avoid such misunderstandings.

If such a discussion were to take place however, it ought to be reiterated that responsibilities and obligations under the Declaration cut both ways, because unfortunately the New Zealand Government seems to be under the impression that only one side needs to do the ‘consulting’. Indeed, the comments coming from the Beehive makes me think that they consider the Declaration agreement to be a more paternalistic one rather than one between equals – where they get to tell the Cook Islands what to do, and criticise our foreign policy through a compliant NZ media whenever it suits.

The question might reasonably be asked, how much consultation did New Zealand undertake with the Cook Islands when it concluded its Free Trade Agreement with China in 2008, or its 12^th Annual Strategic Defense Dialogue with China held last year, or the New Zealand–United States Strategic Dialogue in Auckland, also held last year which in turn was related to the Joint Declaration by United States Secretary of State and New Zealand Minister of Foreign Affairs signed earlier in 2024; or any of its recent discussions with Australia, the US and the UK on joining the AUKUS strategic alliance; or anything whatsoever to do with its membership of the secretive 5 Eyes Alliance. And here I recall the allegations that New Zealand was spying indiscriminately on its allies in the Pacific region and sharing the information with the US and the other “Five Eyes” alliance states, according to the documents from the whistleblower Edward Snowden and subsequently published by the New Zealand Herald. It has never been clear whether this spying included its Realm Partner the Cook Islands, but in any case, these examples I have cited above show that some in New Zealand have somewhat short memories when it comes to the kind of things it is presently accusing the Cook Islands of.

New Zealand ought to be gently reminded that the Cook Islands engages with the international community ‘as a sovereign state’, its treaty making powers are fully recognised by the United Nations, and it has well established formal diplomatic relations with China. If the duty to consult has fallen short of any obligations under the Declaration, then both parties bear responsibility for that, not just the Cook Islands, and there is absolutely no need for the heavy handed and undiplomatic language we are hearing out of Wellington through the media. Here’s hoping that cooler heads will prevail in the coming weeks and months so we can continue to move forward positively together, and acknowledging that while as whanau we will sometimes disagree on things - we will always keep foremost in our minds the need to cherish and protect the close cultural, social and economic bonds we share between our two countries.

Meitaki,

An Interested Observer

(Name and address supplied)