NZ Chief of Army on Plan ANZAC and the future of land power

Earlier today, the New Zealand Chief of Army, Major General Rose King, was part of a historic milestone in our shared ANZAC story.

She signed the updated Plan ANZAC alongside the new Australian Chief of Army, Lieutenant General Susan Coyle, the first time this agreement has been signed by two female chiefs of army.

Major General King, welcome to the National Security Podcast.

Hey, thanks.

I really appreciate it.

There's been an understandable focus today on the fact that both Australia and New Zealand Chiefs of Army are now women, but beyond that headline sits something far more enduring for both of you.

You are two leaders shaped by deep experience in command, in decision-making, and the weight of institutional responsibility.

While history takes a pause, the reality of your command does not.

The pressures, the trade-offs, the expectations remain constant.

So let's lean into the core business that you carry.

How do you navigate the enduring tension between being ready to fight tonight and preparing your army for the future fight?

Hmm.

Hey, well, thanks for that question, and I think it'd be fair to say that every chief has had that same challenge that we face now, too, and it is a difficult one, right? For me, it's very much about how do we, or for, for myself, how do I ensure that the New Zealand Army with the equipment we have, with the people we have, they're the best led, the best prepared, and best trained, so if something happened today, the, the fight tonight, they will do the best they can, and I have prepared them the best I can to ensure that they can win on operations and also come home from operations? But there is that tension and balance of what do you resource today to enable success in the future, and where do you have to take compromise in today to ensure the future or vice versa? So it's a difficult one, but to be honest, I think every single chief around the world has the same, the same, uh, challenge in regard to that.

So, you know, uh, look, both of us use, use the term command.

Do you see yourself as commander or a steward of the institution?

Yeah, so for me, it's very much about being a kaitiaki, a guardianship, and how do I ensure that this organization is in a better place than when I received it? And that's, that's not to say that my predecessors left it in a, in a bad place.

They've really-- every time we have a chief, they take it to the next level and very much setting that North Star.

Where are we going to? Where do we need to concentrate on, and how do we take the whole organization forward? So that's fundamental to me.

So how then do you lead the institution through change, which is, you know, obvious and, and quite apparent across, I think, both of our armies, especially in a, a post-Afghanistan environment, without actually losing its core identity?

Hmm.

Well, it, it's an interesting thing.

Uh, for me personally, losing the core identity I don't think is a huge challenge for the land forces.

We are always about delivering lethal effects on the land wherever it is we go, and we are the only institution who has that authority, you know, from our, from our nation, so we must be able to deliver on that.

So that purpose to me has never changed.

I think for me it's very much around when you get asked to do different, deliver different effects for your government, you know, and we can case an example of COVID, response to COVID.