Wednesday, 16 September 2009
(o+) Is the Tide Turning in Fiji's Favour?
Commonwealth may help but Australia and New Zealand seem to have lost the plot
Rajendra Prasad* writing in IndianNewsLink questions the Commonwealth's suspension of Fiji ("when many of its members are fake democracies where the elites throttle the freedom and rights of their people with reckless disregard for upholding the democratic ideals") but he thinks the Commonwealth has the resources and expertise to help Fiji in restructuring its democracy but first it must more fully understand the situation. The process must not be rushed, as it is vital that people clearly understand the intents and motives for the changes.
Second, it must work on the premise that a new Constitution needs to be formulated and, in so doing, it must accept that a new approach is needed because the previous Constitutions had basic flaws that contributed to Fiji's ongoing political instability.
Fiji, Australia, New Zealand and China
While the Commonwealth seems to be playing a vigorous role, Australia and New Zealand are sitting on their hands as the Chinese are beginning to consolidate in the Pacific. The Pacific will soon be the bastion of Chinese interests and by the time the West comes out of its slumber, China will have the Pacific in its fold.
Read more...
Indeed, historical relations between New Zealand and Australia, going back over a century need to be strengthened. On the present count, Fiji craves for understanding of its dominant neighbours. However, the myopic view taken by leaders of New Zealand and Australia is deeply regretted.
Fiji was an ailing democracy and it was terminal. Revolt against it could not come from its greatest victims – the Indo-Fijians because the odds against them were massive. Even the Army that eventually revolted against its own government were against them.
Surely, New Zealand and Australia could not be so naïve as to be unaware of the vicious campaign of discrimination and marginalisation that had been going on for decades against Indo-Fijians. The fact that it was methodically done under the cover of democracy did not mean that the impiety against Indo-Fijians was justified in anyway.
Neville Gibson, the editor-in-chief of the National Business Review, alluding to Indian Newslink coverage of Fiji (September 1) emphatically said that Fiji would not be the first country to function well without a democratically elected government and called for patience. It seems the tide is gradually turning in Fiji’s favour.
New Zealand and Australia can ignore these signs but at their own peril. -- Based on a story in www.pacmediawatch.aut.ac.nz
* Rajendra Prasad is an Indian Newslink columnist and author of Tears in Paradise. He lives in Auckland. Email: rajendra@tearsinparadise.co.nz
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
One thing not referred to by Prasad is the type od inter-personal relationships between Australian officials (including the New Zealanders who seem content to toe the Australian line) and Fijians. Patronising, patronising, patronising.Time lines, ultimatums, referring to Fiji as an errant child(Keys'bonne motte)and punitive sanctions. Please. Any sanctions against the non-democratic China? The US for serious human rights violations? Pakistan under Musharaf? The Fijians are treated by Australia like a bunch of backward wogs. The term neo-colonial paternalism comes to mind. Australia needs to wake up to the lasting bitterness created against it as a result of its policies. Rudd has neither the insight nor the stature to acknowledge the wrongs, nor to apologise. He needs to learn from President Obama
I fully concur with Siti, the Ethnocentric policies on Fiji will create a barrier in future relations. They say, leopards don't change their colour or spots, similarly, the racism that had been prevalent in Australia all along is oozing out of Rudd's policies on Fiji. It is time the white men need to realise that the world is fast browning.
As far as Rudd learning from Obama, you need to be a black, Asian, Brown or an underclass to appreciate and realise being discriminated against. That is where the understanding and appreciation that Obama has will forever be missing from the likes of Rudd and Key
Let us assume as Peter Thomson has postulated the following logic in interstate relations between Fiji, Australia and New Zealand.
1. The (continued) Perils of Non-Cooperation
Fiji (maintains status quo) -- Australia and New Zealand (retaliates).
Result: Political isolation, socioeconomic deterioration, continued instability.
Fiji (retaliates) -- Australia and New Zealand (retaliates)
Result: Political isolation, socioeconomic deterioration, continued instability.
Fiji (cooperates within circumscribed limits) – Australia and New Zealand (dissatisfied, retaliates)
Result: Political isolation, socioeconomic deterioration, continued instability.
Fiji (complete acquiescence) – Australia and New Zealand (dictates policy)
Result: Fijian loss of sovereignty, political instability, socioeconomic deterioration.
Fiji (policy implementation problematic post acquiescence) – Australia and New Zealand (retaliates).
Result: Loss of sovereignty, political instability, socioeconomic deterioration.
Conclusion: It is apparent that the message transmitted to Suva by Wellington and Canberra is that the default position will be preponderantly retaliatory, unless Suva is willing to acquiesce completely at the risk of political suicide to their demands. Unfortunately, as Peter Thomson has articulated quite well, this is neither a prudent nor a sophisticated approach to a complex problem facing an ally within the region.
Some possible scenarios that could be possible in the unlikely event that cooler (and cooperative) heads prevail as we approach the fourth year of the political crisis in Fiji.
2. Cooperation
Australia and New Zealand (removes punitive measures) – Fiji (cooperates)
Result: All parties able to negotiate the way forward.
Australia and New Zealand (removes punitive measures) – Fiji (retains restrictions)
Result: Fiji exposes its anti-democratic intentions, deserves retaliation.
Australia and New Zealand (cooperates without conditions) – Fiji (full cooperation expected)
Result: Reciprocity, compromise, negotiation and results.
Australia and New Zealand (cooperation while retaining conditions) – Fiji (cooperation with awareness that conditions will have to be addressed)
Result: Some disagreements with reciprocity, compromise, negotiation and results.
Conclusion: Both condition one and four can be met without serious injury to the political objectives of all the parties in the standoff. The belligerent posture adopted by the respective states currently has serious regional implications as well as inflicting permanent damage to fundamental institutions in Fiji, which are crucial to its development as a viable and flourishing state within the region. The alternative to cooperation as Peter Thomson intimates would be tragic and too dismal to imagine, not only for Fiji but for the region as well.
Surely, there is a great opportunity for President Obama and his administration now? But we are being told that in lieu of grasping this, further sanctions are to be put in place because of human rights violations. There have been human rights violations in Fiji since 1874 and beyond then into "time immemorial". A start must be made sometime. It should be a rational, comprehending start. Who is going to be first?
If any country can help to create a lasting and participatory democracy in Fiji, it is the US. The challenge for the US is whether they will be allowed to enter into dialogue with Fiji by Australia.We will watch and see how valuable democracy is to the US.More valuable than its relationship with Iraq invasion partner Australia? Hmm.
Post a Comment