New Weekly Feature.
Insider's View from the Outside will be published every Sunday at 9:00am NZ time for the next several weeks.
Nesian is a pseudonym for a moderate, Fiji-born, part-Fijian, Hindi-speaking, sky-blue passport-carrying, former Fiji-resident. Insider's View From the Outside is the result of years spent thinking about all that has happened since the 2000 coup.
Insider's View from the Outside will be published every Sunday at 9:00am NZ time for the next several weeks.
Nesian is a pseudonym for a moderate, Fiji-born, part-Fijian, Hindi-speaking, sky-blue passport-carrying, former Fiji-resident. Insider's View From the Outside is the result of years spent thinking about all that has happened since the 2000 coup.
Photo: Earth from Space. Oakfieldmedia.com
The Forces Coalesce
This post is predominantly about post-1999 Fiji. It is my attempt to understand why the 2000 coup took place and how, years later, Fiji is still feeling the effects of that event. Some readers will argue that we will need to go back to May 14, 1987 for the source of the country’s coup culture. I won’t dispute that but I was just a kid when Sitiveni Rabuka overthrew the Bavadra Government. I wasn’t even on the mainland and was thus mostly immune to its effects.
But I was very aware of events in Fiji leading up to and since the introduction of the 1997 Constitution:
But I was very aware of events in Fiji leading up to and since the introduction of the 1997 Constitution:
- The contrast in campaign styles of Rabuka’s SVT/NFP/GVP coalition and Mahendra Chaudhry’s for the 1999 general election. Rabuka and Jai Ram Reddy tended to focus on the 1997 Constitution and how it was going to create a multi-cultural nirvana and be a beacon of hope to the rest of the world.
Chaudhry astutely focused his attention on reducing the cost of living, improving infrastructure, cutting tax – bread-and-butter issues that occupied the thoughts of most people.
It wasn’t as if Rabuka and co did not also make similar promises. It was just that theirs were overshadowed by the lofty opportunities the new Constitution would present and that is what the media latched on to;
- The effect the preferential voting system had on the results. Prior to the ‘99 elections, Fiji had utilised a ”first past the post” system, ie: the person with the most votes won.
Victory under the new system was yours only if you had 50 per cent + 1 votes. It was complicated system that confused most voters. Successful candidates would not know their fate until several rounds of laborious manual counting.
Again FLP saw an opportunity where its main opponents did not: It swapped preferences with every other party except the SVT, National Federation Party and General Voters.
The fact that there was also a comparative glut of Fijian parties did the SVT no favours. This effectively rendered the Fijian vote ineffective because it broke it into so many fragments;
- The behind-the-scenes machinations by ministers in the outgoing Soqosoqo ni Vakavulewa ni Taukei for Chaudhry’s removal. The seeds were sown during their farewell morning tea. One of these ministers (because there were several) allegedly said: “We can’t let this bastard rule for a year. We have to get him out before then. If he stays longer than that, we won’t be able to get rid of him”;
- Once Chaudhry took power, his arrogance and disrespect for everyone in general and Fijians in particular, came to the fore.
While Adi Kuini Speed and the rest of the Fijian Association Party were waiting for him on the outskirts of Suva to discuss the make-up of the new Cabinet, Chaudhry was at Government House being sworn in as Prime Minister.
What riled Fijians most was that a chief of Adi Kuini’s stature had suffered the indignity of finding out what was happening over the radio.
Yes, Chaudhry did reduce the cost of living but the public was easily distracted by his actions.
Perhaps he forgot about the power of television. Every condescending smirk in response to even perfectly reasonable questions was duly recorded and broadcast on the 6pm news;
- Neither were Fijians impressed by the pedestal on which he was being placed as Prime Minister. On a visit to a Fijian village soon after he was appointed PM, Chaudhry had been transported off a boat on the shoulders of Fijian warriors so he wouldn’t wet his feet. This is veneration normally reserved for chiefs, ”not for commoners and certainly not for an Indian”;
- Failed politicians from the National Federation Party who attempted to sow seeds of racial disharmony by paying former (Fijian) criminals to burn down Indian schools. One of them owned a shop on Grantham Road;
- How Chaudhry’s tax crackdown risked netting well-known businessmen who owed millions of dollars in business taxes dating back 30 years. The name of one of these businessmen has cropped up a few times, once for allegedly providing funds to bribe senior army officer and 2000 coup opponent Viliame Seruvakula;
- Jostling for position and prominence between chiefly families. On the one hand, the Cakobaus whose forebear was the self-styled Tui Viti who ceded Fiji to Great Britain. In the other corner, the Maras, who began to dominate Fiji’s affairs post-independence.
It went even further, rearing its head in the form of rivalry between the old boys’ networks of Ratu Kadavulevu and Queen Victoria schools versus that of Marist Brothers High School that the male descendants of Ratu Sir Kamisese Mara attended.
The flames were further fanned when Ratu Mara’s daughter Adi Koila Nailatikau joined Chaudhry’s government;
- The involvement of criminal businessmen like Iliesa Duvuloco who saw financial benefits;
- Finally, members of the elite Counter Revolutionary Warfare unit who carried out the coup. How could a clique of well-educated and intelligent young men be so brainwashed and turned into puppets for such a illegal, dangerous and devastating episode in Fiji’s history?
15 comments:
Anonymous. We always use real or pseudonyms now. Please copy and paste this post with a real or pseudonym. I will leave it a few hours for you do do so, and then delete.
@ Croz Walsh
This was posted with a pseudonym: S.O.E. used when speaking of terror and the ubiquitous role it has played in Fiji's failed democracy.
S.O.E.
When speaking of the role played in Fiji by acts of terrorism, we need to be mindful of how Northern Ireland is yet once more falling prey to old minsets. Will they have the political will to steer themselves out of this again? Professor Noriel Roubini of New York University is predicting another economic downturn in the second half of 2010. Surely, this warning must not fall upon deaf ears? He predicted the Global Downturn with some confidence well ahead of actuality. No one much was listening. Why would Fiji allow itself to be 'fiddling while Rome burns' if businesses again are threatened? Small to medium-sized businesses will need special consideration again in 2010 to stay afloat. Advocating for dissension within the nation state will do nothing to deliver: Justice and Jobs. That is what counts!
Apologies, S.O.E. Croz
S.O.E.
@ Nesian
The CRW Soldiers who were turned into 'disloyal puppets' are not an unknown phenomenon. But their 'turning' should be a lesson for all of us. Did Australia and New Zealand collude deliberately to undermine our sovereign rights in Fiji? After more than nine years, this question has to be asked. Was this cynical opportunism exerted to deprive us all of our rights in our own country? Because it appears so and the curious conduct of former Police Commissioner Hughes reinforces this suspicion. THe SDL Mad Hatter Machine was thus a vehicle to purportedly undermine and deprive ordinary Fiji citizens and investors of their sovereignty and their constitutional rights. Now what should that be termed? Any why should any of us expect anything different from these seemingly perfidious nations now? Taxpayers paid two governments and their political proxies to systematically undermine their rights in the aftermath of a terrorist uprising. Overseas taxpayers' money was used through non-government organisations and other vehicles to reinforce this position. No wonder we are all in such a mess. Does this appear far-fetched? It is time to call their bluff! A double dip economic downturn will offer them yet another 'go' at us. So why would anyone choose to undermine the present government? It is a suicidal exercise defying survival and common sense.
@ Anonymous..
This is grog bowl stuff - full on speculation, low on substance.
It is one thing winning the war, but winning the peace is a different ball game altogether.
I would doubt very much if the two countries would tempt the war gods into fracturing the military, unleashing bloody civil war. The aussies saw what happened in E Timor and the difficulties encountered in rebuilding a shattered nation.
Fracturing the military and creating a political vacuum would be disastrous and serves no real purpose.
Taki...
Kemudou, when it comes to weirdo conspiracy theories, this one takes the cake - the notion of Australia and NZ somehow pulling the strings behind the scenes in Fiji. Even if they'd wanted to, the evidence shows that they've been singularly hopeless in achieving their aims, with practically every event going against them. Australia even lost one of its helicopters in tragic circumstances during its one show of force off Fiji at the height of the 2006 tensions. Andrew Hughes didn't even come to Fiji until 2003 and took the job of police commissioner by invitation after the disastrous tenure of the loathsome Isikia Savua. He did a lot of good things before leaving with his tail between his legs in 2006 as the local political situation unravelled and he fell out with Frank. So where's the evidence of Australia and NZ as puppet masters, S.O.E? All I can say is that your acronym must stand for "Seriously Out there and Exaggerated".
Nesian, couldn't agree with you more about the blame Mahen Chaudhry shoulders for arousing indigenous fears about his rule and rule by any Indo-Fijian for that matter. He was the epitome of arrogance as PM and I recall thinking at the time that his eventual removal was inevitable, though no one could have possibly conceived of the nightmare of George Speight. Jai Ram Reddy had shown the best way for Indians to deal with the sensitivities of Fijians with his landmark address to the Great Council of Chiefs. By acknowledging the need to address them vakaturaga, he earned their respect and goodwill. If only Chaudhry had been wise enough to follow Reddy's example. Instead, he and his miserable son, Rajen, behaved as if he was accountable to no-one and respected no-one. The way he invariably seemed to be in India during the most challenging events of his rule sent entirely the wrong message to the whole country. I'd hoped that the dignified way he handled his 56 day ordeal at the parliament might pave the way to self realisation and redemption. No such luck. Suing the Fiji Times for a ridiculous amount over a quite legitimate investigation on its part reinforced the general suspicion that he was beyond help. And so it proved to be, with even Frank eventually coming to realise that Mahen was always only for Mahen and those around him. And then we found out about all that Indian money slushing around in his bank accounts. If Indo-Fijians want to know why their position has been so parlous for so long they need look no further than Chaudhry. A small minded, half person with a full blown ego who enters history not as the leader who laid to rest the racial bogey in Fiji but as someone who etched the lines of division more strongly. A miserable failure whose brooding presence and divisive role in national life has mercifully come to an end.
One of the great challenges of 2014 will be to find candidates of any race with the mana and vision to put themselves before the entire nation in a non-racial, one man one vote election. Perhaps, Croz, you could start canvassing this issue now by inviting your contributors to nominate outstanding individuals with the potential to take a democratic Fiji forward. I realise this kind of thing could be the kiss of death for these individuals. But it's bound to be a great subject for the dinner table, kava bowl and water cooler in the months and years ahead.
Here's some on my list.
1/ Manoa Kamikamica, the head of Pacific Sun whose father Jo was one of the pillars of government in Fiji through the 70s and 80s until his untimely death. A successful Fijian business leader from a family of impeccable integrity and community service.
2/ Richard Naidu, now a partner at Munro Leys and probably sick of politics after his run-ins with the regime, not to mention being threatened with the lovo when he was Dr Bavadra's press secretary in 1987. Nevertheless a person of great intelligence and integrity.
3/ Frank Bainimarama, IF. in the meantime, he can deliver on his multiracial agenda and bust the cycle of corruption and self interest that has plagued Fiji since independence. He might be loathed in many quarters now but there are plenty of examples of coup leaders like him eventually winning democratic elections when they've cleaned up their countries.
Anyway, these are just off the top of my head and let's hope there are a host of other possibilities for national leadership, including outstanding women, when the time eventually comes. I'd be very interested to hear other names from other people. It may seem ridiculously early to think along these lines but the clock is ticking and it's time to identify those individuals capable of giving us hope for the future.
Good analysis - spot on on Chaudhary. He has done as much harm to Fiji as SDL by creating divisions for self benefit.
Rumour has it that his pension is also gone.
So, from what I have read on these posts, Chaudhary was supposed to behave like the second class citizen that the Nationalists believe all Indians should be. He was the PM and worked hard and proved himself to get there. He is criticized for having the audacity to be treated like a chief, who gets his position just by being lucky enough to be born to the correct parents. The comment - This veneration is normally reserved for chiefs, ”not for commoners and certainly not for an Indian” – I find repulsive, the cause of much of Fiji’s problems and what Frank is trying to change. While kowtowing to indigenous fears may have kept him in power longer, I can't blame him for not wanting to and instead standing up like a man. I can not believe that many are blaming this behavior for the coup and not the racist hate filled views of the Nationalists (not forgetting the financial greed also involved). No one has listed a single action that his government did that was not in the interest of the country and would have made Fiji a better place (unlike the Qarase government). You are only commenting on his personal style. This may have been a reason that he might have been voted out at the next election, but could never come close to justifying a coup.
MJ - look at history and not an idealistic commentary on how things should have been. The Fijians feared Chaudhary as PM - they feared he was changing too many things that were important to them. Politicians and thugs played on these fears but Chaudhary was too confrontational - a true leader brings all the people on the journey with them. Otherwise even though it is illegal there is a risk of a mutiny, violence or other forms of backlash.
The 2000 Fiji Coup was not completed by Speight and his thugs as the Military stepped in and took power.
It is not about kowtowing to people as you call it but respect and togetherness. Being right is one thing but unless people are with you major change will always be difficult.
@ MJ..
About Mahen Chaudhary - he may have worked hard to win the elections. But what is the first thing he did when he got into power - he appointed his son Rajendra, an arrogant %$%^#% his personal secretary.
Good governance was flushed down the toilet with that one move. He showed his leadership style and true intentions then.
Say no more. This joker is no nation builder.
I do get troubled when people talk about "equality" in the Fiji context without acknowledging that this is not as simple as "you are the same as me". The comments made on carrying Chaudhry "like a Fijian chief" clearly show that we fail to understand, let alone appreciate, that the chiefly system and all that it entails is strictly Fijian. It goes to the core of being Fijian. And it was in recognition of this that the 2 accepted constitutions had "entrenched safeguards" on Fijian lands, customs, etc. That has never been negotiable.
Now on the issue of Chaudhry, he had it in his powers to refuse that "chiefly ride". Was it ego at work or had the faculties failed momentarily? I leave it for speculation.
Post a Comment