The European Union's 2009 Sugar Allocation for Fiji, worth €24 million (F$70m) has been cancelled. Commissioner Louis Michel said the cancellation was due to the "absence of any indications that a legitimate government will be in place in 2009."
The announcement came as PM Bainimarama, unaware of the announcement, left to attend a ACP (Asia-Caribbean-Pacific) ministerial conference on Sugar in Guyana, South America. Before leaving, the PM said he knows Australia and NZ are pushing hard to ensure Fiji is not assisted by the EU, the United Nations, the Commonwealth and the Asian Development Bank.
Australia, NZ and the US are reported to be talking about "targeted sanctions." Nearly one person in three in Fiji is involved in some way in the sugar industry. It is hoped the Australian, NZ and US aim will be more accurate than the Europeans -- or there will be no one left to aim at. I doubt any of them would try the same tactics on China.
1 comment:
A comment on two postings - "EU cancelled sugar allocation" and "More sanctions? Think of Cuba!"
It is true that, despite sanctions, Cuba's political elite has remained in power without changing its philosophy. However, it is also true that for other countries, such as South Africa pre-1994, sanctions have had a profound effect changing the status quo
In SA's case, sanctions that targeted the citizenry (through sporting and cultural boycotts) were effective in eventually causing the Nationalist government to change its policy. This is ironic, since NZ and Australia seem to prefer 'targeted sanctions' which (supposedly) avoid hurting the general population.
People adapt to slow deterioration in their living conditions. However rapid deterioration is often the cause of great discontent which can manifest itself in public anger against those in political power. In a world where quick, visible, 'positive' results (regardless of their long term consequences) garner immediate kudos for politicians and diplomats, sanctions that ‘inadvertently’ target the general population might be the quickest solution to antagonistic countries’ averred aim of seeing the military government disbanded.
The EU probably isn't cynical enough to adopt the truism that people who are hungry can be easily incited to revolt. However it’s apparent strategy of targeting a large proportion of the general population might turn out to be the most effective way of causing the present regime to be removed.
Whether or not its removal would prove to be the same as restoring democracy would remain to be seen.
Post a Comment