Paul Buchanan: Former US Government Intelligence Consultant on the findings of the NZSIS Security Threat Environment report

A security intelligence analyst says our SIS is becoming increasingly transparent.  

It's released its second annual Security Threat Environment report.  

It identifies a person acting alone as our biggest terrorist risk, and expresses concern about the amount of online extremist content that young people are being exposed to.  

Former Intelligence Consultant for the US Government Paul Buchanan says the report doesn't mince words.  

He says the document names Russia and China as hostile, illiberal states. 

Buchanan says the report will probably rile the diplomats and Ministry of Foreign Affairs as they’re not being sensitive in their language, but good on them for giving an honest assessment of who is trying to meddle with New Zealand. 

LISTEN ABOVE 

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:00):
We have our annual insight into the security threats we
currently face as a country. Sis tell us discruntled government employees,
well those in desperate need of extra kasher a key
concerned apparently foreign interferences there of course, our position in
the Pacific, and other lone wolf terror attack They're also listed.
Formula's Government Intelligent consultant, Paul buchananspect with us. Paul, very
good morning to you.

Speaker 2 (00:20):
Good morning, Mike. Nice to be here.

Speaker 1 (00:22):
Thank you. From what was said yesterday, do you get
a sense that we are in more or less trouble
or it's the status quo, or we don't know?

Speaker 2 (00:31):
No, Actually, we're getting drawn in too great power conflicts.
And although I've beaten this horse many times before, we
no longer live in a strategic, strategically benign environment, Dorothy.
We're right in the center of major geopolitical competition in
the Southwest Pacific, but we also have domestic issues and

(00:55):
the bottom line, and yesis says this. By the way,
this report is a a great step forward when it
comes to transparency of the SIS. It is clear, it's concise,
it's fairly comprehensive. It basically gives us a read of
how they look at the world and how they assess threats.

(01:16):
So I would urge it's a public document, it's free.
I would urge your listeners to read it because it's
very readable and it's only about forty pages total. Now,
having said that, we live in a globalized world, the
threats don't have to be physical. The threats can come online,
and in fact they have. And so our domestic threats

(01:39):
have what you might call intermestic connections. They're international, but
they're also domestic. And the sis makes that point when
it comes to violent extremism that their assessment is that
the most likely case of terrorism will be a white
supremacist lone wolf. I happen to disagree with their assessment

(02:02):
of the lone wolf, but we can leave that aside
for the moment. But radicalized online but from sources from abroad.
And then the second threat are Islamicists. So you know,
we're not sitting out in the middle Ocean, you know,
insulated from the world's you know, terrible events. And they

(02:22):
make that point, but let's be very clear. They prioritize
the threats, and the threats are in order of priority.
Foreign interference, espionage insider threat, which is an entirely new category,
and violent extremism and terrorism. So we focus on violent
extremism and terrorism, but that's the least of their worries.

(02:44):
They're mostly concerned about pernicious foreign influence in everything we do,
and then go on to talk about, you know, espionage
and this new category of insider threat, which are basically
people in positions of trust, both in the public as
well as the private sectors who willingly or unwillingly collude

(03:10):
with hotstile foreign actors in order to obtain and disseminate
sensitive information.

Speaker 1 (03:16):
The interference is that Chinese lead.

Speaker 2 (03:19):
Well, it's great that you mentioned the Chinese, because also
this document is incredibly blunt. It mentions the PRC by name,
It mentions the Russians by name, and says what they
are trying to do. It actually offers case studies. I
would call them anecdotes, because these are not full case studies,

(03:40):
but anecdotals, short stories about how the PRC as well
as the Russians have tried to infiltrate community groups, Chinese
language media in the case of the PRC, and a
host of things. The section of foreign interference is twelve
pages long, all the other sections are three pages, so

(04:02):
they're really focused in. But let's be very clear, it's
not just in the excuse me, not just the Chinese
and the Russians. Uh. There are indirect allusions to what
is clearly India. Uh. There are indirect allusions to other
countries because it's not just hostile states that may want

(04:24):
sensitive information from New Zealand. Even our allies do it
and we do it to them, you know, via five
eyes and whatnot. So it's not as if you know,
we wear white gloves and you know only the Chinese
and Russians wear black gloves. But YESIS sees them as
black clubs actors and they talk about it. This will
probably rile the diplomats and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs

(04:47):
because they're not being sensitive when it comes to their language.
But good honor them forgiven an homorous assessment. Who's trying,
who's trying to, you know, meddle with us?

Speaker 1 (04:56):
And thank you for your assessment as well appreciated as
always pull if you can from the US governmenttelligence consultant
and he's right, it is well worth reading. For more
from the mic Asking Breakfast listen live to news talks
at B from six am weekdays, or follow the podcast
on iHeartRadio