I originally wrote this in early 2018 but placed it in the dead end file when other things came up and it did not
seem like enough for a post BUT after speaking to a certain third party on the
matter last week (thank you D) I have decided to “reactive” it.
Don’t you just hate
reading through a document released under the OIA (official Information Act) when
sections of it have been removed?
For example how
about the recent report from REDACTED
which talks about the REDACTED
REDACTED to New Zealand but won’t
tell what one of those REDACTED
is.
Yes for those
people who took the time to visit the NZSIS website after the change of
government last year would have found a copy of the Briefing to the Incoming Minister (BIM) for the NZSIS and GCSB on
file for their perusal.
And if you have
ever read a BIM you will know that each government department will use its BIM
to paint itself and its situation in the best possible light while minimising
any issues that may have arose in the last 12 months.
BIMs highlight the
who and what of each department and promote the various areas and programs that
are being undertaken and its common for every Tom, Dick and Harriet department
head to try and cram in as much “good news” as possible into their allotted word
limit that a reader could be forgiven for thinking that it’s was all plain
sailing for the public service with nary a cloud on the horizon.
Of course that
would be wrong.
BIMs can be useful
documents for new ministers to read as they try to get their heads around whatever
portfolio (or portfolios) they now handle and a good BIM will contain just
enough information for the minister to understand the situation and feel like
they know what’s going on but not enough so that they know everything or don’t need
to rely on their various advisors, secretaries or departmental heads for advice
and instruction (such is the bureaucratic arts) as they go about their duties
as minister.
Of course a good BIM
will also be tailored to the ministers intellectual capabilities and I have
heard of more than one (and read a few as well) BIMs that had been “simplified”
due to the minister “not reading so good” or because in one instance because
the minister was REDACTED REDACTED REDACTED.
However the BIM for
the incoming Minister for the GCSB and NZSIS (Andrew Little) is not a case of
Little “not reading so good” and more a case of REDACTED.
So as I browsed my
way through the document, noting the odd redaction of information here and
there, and knowing that once we got to the juicy details later on I could
expect whole pages of blank spaces, I was somewhat surprised when there on page
8 in the introductory section called New Zealand’s
Threatscape* there was a strange redaction in the second sentence which
read as follows:
It outlines four core national security
threat areas (cyber, violent extremism, REDACTED
and espionage) which together provide an overview of New Zealand’s threatscape.
Thus, according to
our intelligence services there are four
core threats to New Zealand but the public are only allowed to know three of them.
The three known
areas (cyber, violent extremism and espionage) are pretty common in security
documentation and I have been seen at least two of them (violent extremism and
espionage) cropping up in the reports to parliament's Intelligence and Security Committee
over the years while the third (cyber which relates to cyber weapons and
cyber-espionage etc) has been a known and growing concern for some time now with
the creation of CERT NZ (New Zealand’s Computer Emergency Response Team) and the
GCSBs own CORTEX program being formed to deal with this area of risk in the
digital age.
But that still
leaves the fourth area, what could it be? What kind of threat to NZ would need
to be REDACTED from a BIM so
that the public does not know?
So I scoured the
rest of the BIM and all the other documentation on the NZSIS and GSCBs websites
but to no avail**.
I did however find
the following:
·
The 2017 BIM to the minister did list a section
called “regional stability in the South Pacific” in the same areas as
the other three areas were outlined but this area was completely REDACTED except for the title.
·
The 2017 Annual report for the GCSB which came
out after the election notes three
areas in its section titled “strategic operating environment” on page 15 which
are “Cyber Security, Foreign Interference and Violent Extremism”.
·
The 2017 Annual report for the NZSIS which also
came out after the election notes two
areas in its section titled the same as above and those are “Violent Extremism
and Espionage and Foreign Interference Activity”
This means that the
2017 BIM to Andrew Little listed four
threat areas as part of the threatscape to NZ BUT both the end of year GCSB and NZSIS reports (both public
documents) list only three and two threat areas respectively.
This leaves us with
a few questions:
·
Is regional stability in the South Pacific the missing fourth area of threat to
NZ?
·
If it is why is the title redacted in the text
of the BIM but the actual title itself remains in the BIM with just the content
REDACTED? (just an error?)
·
If regional stability in the South Pacific
is the fourth threat why would this need to be kept secret? (as it does not show up in their public end of year reports)
·
If it’s not the fourth threat then why was it
included in the threatscape section AND what is the fourth threat?
Thus we are left
with a few more questions which boil down to one of the following:
·
Stability in the south pacific is one of the
threat areas important to New Zealand’s security services (possible but seems
unlikely in and of itself).
·
There was an error in the redactions on page 8
of the original BIM (I’m not believing that just yet).
·
There is another threat to New Zealand which the
government does not want the public to know about (this is where my money is because - hey its ME!).
So what is the
secret fourth threat to New Zealand? A threat so terrifying that it had to be REDACTED out of a report to the
Minister before it could be released to the public.
It could be that regional stability in the South pacific is the fourth area but I am guessing that with all the REDACTED its more than just a case of our Pacific neighbors being a threat, could it have something to do with the recent surge of Chinese soft power in the region?
But because its REDACTED we are free to speculate on what it actually is because at this point if China is the big secret threat to NZ its probably not wise to advertise this publicly when the secret threat is also our major trading partner***. Perhaps its time to diversify.
It could be that regional stability in the South pacific is the fourth area but I am guessing that with all the REDACTED its more than just a case of our Pacific neighbors being a threat, could it have something to do with the recent surge of Chinese soft power in the region?
But because its REDACTED we are free to speculate on what it actually is because at this point if China is the big secret threat to NZ its probably not wise to advertise this publicly when the secret threat is also our major trading partner***. Perhaps its time to diversify.
So in lieu of actually knowing what it is lets take a few wild guesses.
In no particular order the possible secret threats to New Zealand that I can come up with are: Aliens walking among us (see the movie They Live), a (not so) secret Chinese conspiracy to take over New Zealand (no, it can’t be that because the Chinese infiltration of the National party is already well known), a secret cabal of bankers working together to steal all our money, an super intelligent AI takeover, invasion by the mole people, a penguin army invading from Antarctica or even Great Cuthulu finally awakening from his slumber?
In no particular order the possible secret threats to New Zealand that I can come up with are: Aliens walking among us (see the movie They Live), a (not so) secret Chinese conspiracy to take over New Zealand (no, it can’t be that because the Chinese infiltration of the National party is already well known), a secret cabal of bankers working together to steal all our money, an super intelligent AI takeover, invasion by the mole people, a penguin army invading from Antarctica or even Great Cuthulu finally awakening from his slumber?
However after some time and consideration I managed to figure out the answer to this mysterious fourth threat to New Zealand and its clearly REDACTED REDACTED REDACTED.
*-this seems to be
one of the new buzz words in intel circles these days
**-although it is
possible that I did miss something
***-Given how China has been behaving as of late its might be time to start thinking about the value of doing bulk business with a non democratic, human rights abusing police state - #justsaying.
***-Given how China has been behaving as of late its might be time to start thinking about the value of doing bulk business with a non democratic, human rights abusing police state - #justsaying.
Is this post supposed to be humorous? I don't get it
ReplyDeleteAs the saying goes with humor; if I have to explain it it kills the joke. Sorry.
ReplyDeleteThey also say, if you have to explain a joke... it's probably a really good joke
ReplyDeleteYour website is very beautiful or Articles. I love it thank you for sharing for everyone. Cyber Security NZ
ReplyDelete