The S. Pacific begins to face up to its loss of innocence

Press, 24 September 1988, Page 24

The S. Pacific begins to face up to its loss of innocence

IT was suggested by Geoffrey Palmer at the conclusion of the ninteenth South Pacific Forum in Tonga that this regional meeting of nations has a developing maturity. As with all grown-ups, the Forum has sadly had to leave behind some rather nice aspects of childhood.

The years prior to the May, 1987, military coup in Fiji may become those most fondly remembered.

By acting in the way he did, Rabuka has brought into question "the Pacific way.” New Zealand and Australia have repeatedly condemned Fiji’s new rulers in every forum but that of their own region.

Their determination not to split the Tonga meeting by formally discussing Fiji was such that they imposed strains on their own credibility’; Geoffrey Palmer continued to question the credentials of Jone Dakuvula as the representative of Fiji’s ousted government, while the Tongan police harassed him.

New Zealand, which was the only Government to have warmly welcomed a visit by Dr Bavadra after he was deposed, wanted nothing to do with his official representative. Instead, it sought to meet the “treacherous” — as David Lange described him — Ratu Sir Kamisese Mara.

Mr Lange’s suggestion that Ratu Mara was implicated in the May, 1987, coup would appear

Brendon Boras,

in Tonga, analyses the results

of the latest South Pacific Forum meetin

central to the question of why he did not personally attend the Tonga meeting of the Forum. It does not appear logical that he can safely spend 12 hours on an aircraft this week-end flying to the United States, but is unable, for health reasons, to go to the Forum.

Mr Palmer did meet Ratu Mara, Mr Lange may have been refused. Mr Palmer sternly put New Zealand’s requirements before relations could improve.

These centre on the abandonment of the draft constitution which is judged not to give fair representation to Indians. Any military involvement in Government, as proposed under the draft, is also firmly opposed. Mr Palmer may have gone so far as to insist that Brigadier Rabuka should not have any future role in decision-making.

Mr Hawke also dressed down Ratu Mara in a private meeting.

And while the Forum collectively refused to discuss events in Fiji since the coup, sources attending the meeting suggest there were tacit messages given to Ratu Mara from other nations.

Measures proposed by New Zealand and Australia — such as a regional response to terrorism and proposals to monitor the “greenhouse effect” — were all

given hearty support, even when Ratu Mara raised minor points of qualification. This' was interpreted as tacit support for the stand taken by the two countries against the coup and its consequences. Certainly, Ratu Mara has lost his position as elder statesman of the South Pacific. Father Walter Lini, of Vanuatu, although a much younger man, is now seen as having this status. Perhaps this loss of mana by Ratu Mara is the South Pacific’s way of expressing its opposition to all that has happened in the last year and a half. The age of innocence in the region was left behind by the May, 1987, coup. It forced New Zealand and Australia to take a stand against the loss of democracy. But democracy has never truly existed throughout the South Pacific. Tonga is a feudal kingdom, its Cabinet chosen by the Monarch and only about a third of members of Parliament elected by common franchise. Western Samoa has the matai system which vests power in village chiefs. In Papua New Guinea, the former Foreign Minister, Ted Diro, admitted taking about SNZ2OO,OOO from Indonesia for

his party, but brought down his own Government when it acted to make this public.

If New Zealand or Australia were to criticise any of these countries, or Fiji, within the Forum, it would quickly end their involvement in the annual regional meeting. Already there are pressures for separatist groups, the Melanesians having already formed their “spearhead,” and pressure for a Polynesian collective voice.

The two “palangi” nations want to retain the Forum as the sole regional representative, even if they have to bite their tongues on issues such as Fiji. It is a unique and cost-effec-tive instrument. Geoffrey Palmer and Russell Marshall had talks with virtually every South Pacific nation State during the course of their four days in Tonga. A regional grouping means that there is a more powerful lobby group when the South Pacific collectively puts its case to the Northern Hemisphere. It also allows linkages with other regions. The South Pacific Nuclear Free Zone Treaty covers a vast tract of the globe. The Tongan meeting approved the idea of

that treaty being connected to a similar pact shared by Latin American countries. Japan now has all Forum countries, including its significant trading partners, New Zealand and Australia, demanding that it conclude a fishing treaty with island nations. Such an agreement could provide funds desperately needed for the development of the economies and the social structures of the island States. Even in Fiji, the wealthiest of island nations, there are slums inhabited by people as poor as anywhere else in the Third World. A benign climate ensures that no-one starves, but there is deep, grinding, poverty throughout the South Pacific. The relative lack of hunger and the influence of the churches has helped to suppress any uprising against comfortably insulated ruling cliques. Warning signs are emerging, however. For instance, in Papua New Guinea where some commentators suggest that unrest, as represented by robberies and violence, is not far from the point of being out of control. Sitiveni Rabuka showed how easily a military coup can be effected, and an Indian ground controller gave the region its first hijacking. The South Pacific indeed has a developing maturity; it is becoming too much like the rest of the world.