The New Zealand troops left unannounced, with no fanfare, their identities concealed, media kept out of the loop.
The departure was not unexpected, of course, although it was controversial. A two-year commitment of NZ troops for a role training Iraqi security forces in the fight against Islamic State had been announced in February last year - to mixed reaction. The stealthy exit (in stark contrast to the public farewell for the Australian contingent) raised further eyebrows.
Now there are more accusations of stealth, of ‘‘military creep'' even, following this week's announcement by the Government the Defence Force deployment will be extended by 18 months to November 2018. It has also been revealed the New Zealand troops will now have to leave their Camp Taji stronghold and travel between it and another military base, renewing security concerns, particularly in the wake of recent attacks outside the base.
So why the U-turn after the two-year assurance?Prime Minister John Key says, over time, he has ‘‘been persuaded by the arguments'' to stay, and the New Zealand troops are making a difference. Defence Minister Gerry Brownlee says ‘‘New Zealand is not immune'' to IS-inspired attacks such as the recent Orlando mass shooting, and ‘‘this is as much our war as it is anybody else's''.
It is unclear, however, whether the Iraqi soldiers trained by the NZ forces are those involved in reclaiming Iraqi towns and cities from IS or whether that progress is a coincidence.
Cashing in on the Orlando fear factor - which has other issues not relevant to the NZ situation - might be acceptable for a reactionary such as Donald Trump. Is it really what New Zealanders expect of their leaders?
And do New Zealanders actually understand we are ‘‘at war''? Have we bought into this - or have we been bought? Our role in the Global War on Terrorism has been carefully stage-managed as a peacekeeping or reconstruction one - by both Mr Key's National-led Government and Helen Clark's previous Labour-led government. The public has been assured the Iraq military training deployment was non-combat, ‘‘behind the wire'' - and finite. It is right to be uneasy about the shifting goalposts. After all, there is still great unease over our supposed SAS ‘‘mentoring'' role in Afghanistan. The slippery slope is very real.
Of course it is a fine balance, and Mr Key may be banking on public complacency and/or cannily choosing the better of two options: the devil we know. Our allies expect support, as we would in return. It is likely only to be with the benefit of hindsight we will know whether we are safer for being ‘‘in the club'' or not. But, given the Government's recently announced big boost to defence spending, the possible return of a US navy ship to NZ waters for our 75th navy celebrations, the extended deployment and the changing role, New Zealanders are right to question the Government's intentions. In trying to balance our obligations with our values, we walk a fine line, and we must be mindful of who might be pulling our strings.
