New Zealand Leaders Distance from Luxon’s Netanyahu Remarks

New Zealand’s political landscape shifted this week as Deputy Prime Minister David Seymour and Foreign Affairs Minister Winston Peters publicly distanced themselves from comments made by Prime Minister Christopher Luxon. Luxon faced backlash after describing Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu as having “lost the plot” amidst the ongoing conflict in Gaza.

Seymour expressed his belief that it is often wiser to refrain from making public comments about international leaders. In an interview with the New Zealand Herald, he stated, “It’s better just to keep your thoughts to yourself.” Peters echoed this sentiment, indicating his preference for more measured language, saying, “It’s not language I use.” Both politicians opted to withhold immediate commentary last week while seeking to verify Luxon’s remarks and better understand their context.

Luxon’s controversial statement was made following a question from the Herald regarding remarks by Labour leader Chris Hipkins, who claimed an “unfolding genocide” was occurring in Gaza. This comment has intensified debates over the humanitarian crisis and New Zealand’s position on international conflicts.

In response to Luxon’s comments, Israeli Deputy Foreign Affairs Minister Sharren Haskel criticized the Prime Minister, suggesting he lacked the understanding necessary to grasp the complexities of dealing with Hamas. Haskel further remarked that New Zealand’s most pressing threats were more domestic in nature, quipping that “the most deadly enemy is a possum or a cat.”

The exchange highlights the delicate nature of international diplomacy, especially concerning the ongoing conflict in Gaza, which has drawn widespread attention and condemnation globally. As tensions escalate, leaders are increasingly scrutinized for their statements and positions on foreign affairs.

The incident underscores the challenges faced by New Zealand’s government as it navigates its foreign policy while addressing domestic concerns. The response from Seymour and Peters reflects a cautious approach to international relations, emphasizing the importance of context and thoughtfulness in political discourse.