Three Wise Men?
Several readers have expressed the opinion that the lifting of the travel ban by Australia signals a breakthrough in its relations with Fiji. I would like to think so also, because there can be no improvement in relations without dialogue and if the ban remains lifted, more capable people will apply for senior government positions -- and this can only be good for dialogue and democracy.
There are four reasons why I am less optimistic:
- First, the ban had to be lifted to allow Foreign Minister Ratu Inoke Kubuabola to meet with his Australian and NZ counterparts, Stephen Smith and Murray McCully in Canberra;
- Secondly, it is a qualified "case by case" lift, that can be revoked at any time, but this is probably the best that can be expected in the circumstances. It is a pity family exemptions were not explicitly mentioned but this may the next call.
- Thirdly, ABC interviewer Linda Mottram in the report seen by some readers says Ratu Inoke Kubuabola carries little weight with the Bainimarama government. She cites no sources, but given the Government's record of allowing different spokesmen to say different things only to have them "corrected" later by Bainimarama, her comment is at least credible. Kubuabola's mention of Parmesh Chand to McCully at their Nadi meeting and the subequent nomination of Neumi Leweni is a specific example.
- Fourthly, and most importantly, Smith signaled the action represented no change in their basic position: 1) Fiji must "return to democracy on a much shorter timetable than the interim government is currently indicating." 2) "There must be full and free and fair participation in the political process in Fiji which, in our view, is not occurring," 3) "We (Australia and NZ) propose to let our views about the current arrangements in Fiji continue to be known to our neighbours and friends in the Pacific and in the Commonwealth." Link to Joint Press Conference.
Middle Ground
One can only hope this a mix of principle and expediency with a large pinch of face-saving. The South Pacific's "superpowers" can't -- and won't -- give in to Bainimara, and for the same mix of reasons Bainimarama can't -- and won't-- give in to them.
There is, of course (because there must be) a middle ground that would revolve around multi-lateral, one-step-after-the-other, concessions to speed up the process: Speed is at the centre of the issue. Speed fast enough to satisfy AusNZ, and convince Fiji citizens that real progress is being made, but not so fast Bainimarama has insufficient time to at least embed, if not fully achieve, the changes he desires
What steps can be taken?
Fiji could accept some members of the old political parties into the citizen dialogue process (and later constititional and electoral dialogues) on the understanding that they publically accept the priniciples of the People's Charter and the need for electoral reform, including the abolition of race-based parties. Once the Media Decree is in place the PERS emergency could be lifted, and some reasonable accommodation sought with the Methodist Chuch in exchange for their
oath to permanently refrain from party politicking, and desist from misinforming world-wide Methodism about the causes for their present position.
In return, AustNZ could offer legal, technical and financial help to speed up investigations into corruption, and assist with legal reform, media reform, civil service reform, land reform and land use, and other items of the Roadmap.
Of symbolic but no less important, AustNZ would send out really good vibes to Fiji if it asked the Commonwealth (which acted in the first place on their prompting) to readmit Fiji into the Commonwealth Games because "progress" was being made. One sanction less will not ease the pressure on Fiji but this one could well be the "test of sincerity" Fiji says it wants.
Further concessions should see AustNZ actively encouraging Fiji's participation in all the regional institutions and processes from which it has restricted access or been totally excluded. At some stage the Commonwealth and the EU could also be persuaded to resume their aid and othe assistance to Fiji. We could also reduce pressure on the UN on Fiji peacekeepers.
If most or many of these steps could be taken, Fiji should be able to bring elections forward to 2013 or even 2012.
Before then, each positive step taken by Fiji should be taken as "progress" by AustNZ leading to further steps and, with each step taken, Fiji will see we really are their friends in need and deed. Once a firm election date is set, all sanctions should be lifted with Fiji returned to its rightful place in the community of nations.
Other Players, the First Move, a Special Committee?
There are, of course, other important players, in Fiji and overseas. In Fiji, the most influential include the media, the Methodist Church, the more moderate politicians, chiefs, trade unions, and non-government organizations. If they are seen to be supporting the steps forward, success is assured and the more extreme elements will become irrelevant to Fiji's future. The AustNZ media, that for the most part has made the situation worse, also need to be better informed and more supportive of positive change.
Who makes the first move? AustNZ with the Commonwealth Games, Pacer Plus, the regional organizations mentioned by Richard Herr? Or Fiji by lifting PERS, being more inclusive and tolerant of constructive debate and criticism, by retracting its latest restrictions on the Methodist Church, by revoking no further pensions, and improving its PR and speaking with one voice. One stray public remark could seriously set the process back.
A Special Diplomatic Committee?
The ball is probably already rolling behind the scenes, but until more senior diplomats are installed in Suva, Wellington and Canberra, a special diplomatic committee representing the three countries, housed at the Forum headquarters in Suva, with hot lines to their respective ministers, could help push things forward and, just as important, ratchet up each step and stop it sliding back.
Update: That the Ministers have reported some progress and have agreed to meet again may seem an anti-climax but we may be assured discussions will continue at different levels. This "feels" more like the end of the beginning than the beginning of the end.