Mr Hensley began his presentation by stating that New Zealand's security will remain very closely, indeed “inextricably” linked to the security of Southeast Asia. He pointed out that New Zealand's first links with Southeast Asia were its defence ties and that it is from this that other ties binding the two actors have followed. While these defence ties are “half buried” now and have been overlaid by important ties of trade, investment and tourism, Hensley emphasized that all these ties are undergirded by a common interest in the security of the region.

Hensley went on to explain how New Zealand came to realize the importance of Southeast Asia as a factor impacting its own security. He argued that a number of developments since the 1930s — the problematic dependence on the forces of the British Empire, the fall of Malaya and Singapore in 1942 and the rise of communist insurgencies thereafter — had brought about this realization. Further, the role that New Zealand played in dealing with such developments, particularly through its defence roles and investments have played a “modest part” in shaping the current security structure of the region.

Hensley suggested that an important legacy of security initiatives in the past decades, and of New Zealand's role in them, is the “Five Power Arrangements”, in particular the FPDA which continues to have a role in the contemporary context. He argued that the arrangement flourishes as a way of “building familiarity and interoperability” among the armies of the five member countries. This, he argued, has had its benefits in terms of maintaining professional skills and in supporting peacekeeping, such as in the case of East Timor where Singapore and New Zealand troops were grouped under the same command.

Hensley pointed out that despite the absence of “external threats” the region could still be vulnerable to future risks, the most serious of them being terrorism. Hensley suggested that the rise and potency of terrorism in the region had much to do with its alliance with “two partners”: religion and globalization.