Make no mistake, Winston Peters’ email release embarrassing PM was not a mistake at all

Thursday, 30 April 2026

ANALYSIS: It suddenly makes a lot more sense why Christopher Luxon fumbled and stumbled over New Zealand’s official position on the joint US-Israel strikes on Iran.

It’s been revealed moves were being made in the background to push back on the Prime Minister’s “preference for more explicit public support” of the US actions.

On Sunday, March 1, following the strikes, the New Zealand Government took the position that “we acknowledge that the actions taken overnight by the US and Israel were designed to prevent Iran from continuing to threaten international peace and security.”

This differed from Canada and Australia which both used stronger language with their prime ministers issuing near identical statements saying they “support” the US actions.

When questioned on this on Morning Report the next day, Luxon struggled to explain New Zealand’s position and whether or not we explicitly “support” the actions.

Now, emails sent over the next few hours show the prime minister wanted to state explicitly that New Zealand supported the actions, but the foreign minister said no.

Two emails from staff in Winston Peters’ office go out of their way to state that the minister of foreign affairs isn’t budging.

“I’ve discussed with MFA (Minister of Foreign Affairs) the PM’s preference for more explicit support fof the US action,” senior foreign affairs adviser Michael Appleton writes.

“MFA does *not* wish for NZ to move towards explicit support, like Australia / Canada have expressed.”

A second staffer - presumably from Peters’ office - weighs in.

“This is a time to closely observe what unfolds over the next week or two,” they write.

“We should hold our nerve and exhibit prudence here, not panic. This is MFA’s position.”

Tellingly, the last line from Appleton, a senior and respected foreign affairs advisor, gives the game away.

“I think we’re going to need to try and come up with a drafting solution - which gives the PM clearer lines to use but which do not substantively (change) our position.”

My translation: Luxon needed an easier line to remember.

PM forced to correct himself

Later that day it became more apparent why. The prime minister was forced to correct himself after what he called a misspeak that New Zealand would support “any action” to prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon on Monday.

It was an uncomfortable watch for many seeing the prime minister struggle to articulate the country’s position.

Peters has outplayed Luxon in releasing this embarrassing two-email chain. Do not believe for a moment it was a “mistake”.

Governments and agencies have, for years, sought to minimise public risk to politicians through the redaction of official information.

Stuff has obtained a copy of both the request and release of information.

All correspondence between the offices of the Minister of Foreign Affairs, the Prime Minister’s office and the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet relating to New Zealand’s position on the US and Israel’s campaign in Iran were requested - specifically between the dates of 1-3 March 2026.

The obvious section of the Official Information Act through which information could be redacted or withheld is section 6a: “to avoid prejudicing the security or defence of New Zealand or the international relations of the New Zealand Government”.

It defies belief that these were the only two emails sent between offices on those dates which did not meet the test of prejudicing the security, defence of international relations of New Zealand.

So, clearly, the Office of the foreign minister knows how to withhold information under this part of the Act.

Secondly, while not all releases of information need to be flagged with the ninth floor, the idea that this step was forgotten does not pass muster.

Red risk flag

The release of inarguably the most sensitive information that’s been made public this term definitely raises the red risk flag.

Peters says this was a mistake. That he assumed the Prime Minister’s office was doing the same thing. It’s inconceivable that no one thought to check.

And today, in answer to questions in Parliament about why the prime minister’s position was not taken, Peters basically told everyone he’s the boss.

“The person in charge of foreign policy is the Foreign Minister. That’s me, not the Prime Minister,” he said.

All in all, it points to a political master taking a calculated action that looks designed to embarrass the prime minister.

In the best case scenario, the prime minister wanted to toughen our stance of support for the US - an action a majority of New Zealanders do not back. Peters has exposed Luxon for being on the wrong side of public opinion.

In the worse case scenario, the prime minister needed a simpler position to communicate. Peters has exposed Luxon for not being able to communicate or perhaps comprehend the nuances of foreign policy.

And if the second scenario is the case, that the problem was Luxon couldn’t comprehend or communicate, then Peters is right to dig in. The correct course of action for a matter of such significance should not be to change position but to learn the position.

The prime minister’s office has released a statement saying the emails mischaracterise his position.

He’s refusing to be interviewed so we can’t ask how. Nicola Willis has yet again been drafted in to fight his battles for him. She says she believes the release was intentional. It’s hard to disagree.

The PM’s statement throws the strongest barb he has yet at Peters, accusing him of “putting politics ahead of the national interest.”

That is a very serious allegation to make against one’s own coalition partner.

It also says Luxon met with Peters last night (in Peters’ office) and the Foreign Minister had acknowledged he made a mistake. Peters has clarified his mistake was not releasing the information - but not kicking it upstairs first.

But make no mistake; the damage has been done and it looks mighty intentional.