Since 1999, when the expression “deputy sheriff” was first heard for the , it seems – with variations – that it continues to be valid until today.
And yes, in the defense sector this relationship can be argued to be valid, even upgraded, due to AUKUS (that is, the tripartite agreement between Australia, the USA and the United Kingdom, thanks to which the Australians procure nuclear submarines), but the “Trump era” seems to put limits on the breadth of this relationship, especially in its commercial and economic prospects.
Similar are the concerns in the “neighborhood” (on a… Pacific scale) and correspondingly Anglo-Saxon state, New Zealand. Both countries, in real economic terms, have no primary trade relationship with the US.
For Australia, the US is the third largest trading partner (after China and Japan), while exports of Australian products to the US range from 4%-5% of the total, so the tariffs imposed by the president Trump (10% in general and 25%-50% in steel and aluminium) have limited direct effect.
For New Zealand, the percentage of total exports is also similar, with the bulk of its exports going to China, followed by Japan and the EU. However, the Trump administration has “charged” it with 15% tariffs, causing public dismay in the country’s political world and media.
The financial agreements
Both countries are indisputably included in what the Canadian prime minister Mark Carney he called in Davos “middle powers”, as they are distinguished for their economic stability and dynamics. Australia is one of the few countries that maintains the highest “perfect AAA trifecta” rating, from the three largest houses (S&P, Moody’s and Fitch), while closely followed by New Zealand, which is rated with either three or two A (indicatively, the American economy is rated by the same houses with two AA+ and one, downgraded, Aa1).
Australia and New Zealand have extensive diplomatic relations, not only with Europe, the US and Canada, but also with Pacific Rim countries, China and India, and both participate in multilateral alliances, such as the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP), which promotes free trade between 12 countries, including the United Kingdom, Canada, Japan and others representing about 14% of the world’s GDP.
In addition, they participate in proposals such as CANZUK (from the initials of Canada, Australia, New Zealand and the United Kingdom) which aims for closer cooperation between these “middle powers”, although to date it remains an “expression of desire”, to expand cooperation and not an existing or negotiated agreement.
Both Australia and New Zealand have signed “Free Trade Agreements” (FTAs) with China, the EU, Japan, India, the United Arab Emirates and are negotiating even more, especially under pressure from aggressive US policies, a climate proportionately “heavier” than its quantitative nature.
Carney’s visit to Australia
The leading word in the financial analyzes of the most serious newspapers in Australia is “diversification”. Decoding the “false” (in relation to the more harmonious past) policies of the distant “sheriff” of the USA, the proposal made by the Canadian Prime Minister from the Davos podium, last month (which called on the middle powers to unite, to face the economic blackmail from the great powers), was evaluated positively by the economic staffs of the two “medium”, but powerful powers of the Southern Hemisphere and Carney’s planned spring visit to Australia is expected to be more than symbolic.
“My friend Mark Carney will visit Australia and address Parliament in March,” said this week Australian Prime Minister ADonnie Albanese. He added that he agreed with Carney’s speech in Davos, which called on the world to accept that the world order as we know it has come to an end and held up Canada as an example of how “middle powers” could work together to stop being victims of American hegemony. “I agree with him,” said Albanese, who signed an agreement with Carney last October that promotes cooperation and trade in critical minerals between the two countries.
New Zealand’s reaction
In the media of New Zealand there is a great discussion by analysts and columnists, about how the country should “respond” to the proposal of the Canadian Prime Minister. Strong reactions were also caused by Donald Trump’s comment, this week, that the US allies who sent troops to Afghanistan, to fight alongside the Americans, “they stayed in the rear.”
The New Zealand Prime Minister Christopher Lacson characterized the statements of the American president “extremely impious and wrong”noting that his country has sent 3,500 troops to Afghanistan and suffered 10 battlefield casualties, making it, proportionally, one of the countries that contributed the most blood to the US “war on terror.”
Australian, New Zealand and Canadian staffs are now in “standing meeting”, to give the visit of the Canadian Prime Minister, in March, exactly the content that will make it essential. In the spirit of Davos 2026.
