Hindi-speaking, sky-blue passport-carrying, former Fiji-resident. An 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
Gloom Cascades: The Delainabua Mutiny
Bainimarama once believed himself to be the defender of democracy. And I was one who saw the rationale of what he was doing.I don’t know how his views have changed since 2003, but I don’t think I am alone in questioning his judgement and the wisdom of some of his actions since.
It is important to understand why this naval officer, so despised by his land-based peers when they were passed over for promotion to the position of Commander, Fiji Military Forces, took the extraordinary steps he did on December 2006.
Bainimarama never forgot the events of November 2, 2000. You wouldn’t either if there was an elite group of soldiers intent on assassinating you.
The mutiny at the Queen Elizabeth Barracks in Delai Nabua reverberated in the capital Suva but its effects shook the very foundation of what Fijians held sacrosanct – the relationships and traditional ties that bound them to one another. These had begun fraying after the 2000 coup, when members of the military found themselves standing on opposite sides of the fence at Parliament House.
Although Fijians had threatened to shed the blood of other Fijians after the takeover of Parliament in May, and there were deaths, the mutiny was different in that there was a plan, a resolve by Fijians to kill other Fijians. Death would not be the by-product of a confrontation that escalated out of control. It was the objective.
The main target was Bainimarama and anyone else who dared defend him. In the ensuing battle, five rebel soldiers and three loyalists died.
It was those three deaths that Bainimarama could not, would never, forget. The effect on him was such that he would become visibly emotional, far more than usual, whenever he spoke about the mutiny.
11 comments:
What is suspicious about the Nov 2 mutiny at QEB was the public announcement by the NZ Foreign Minister Phil Goff three days after the killings.
He went to the media stating that Tarakinikini, the RFMF's official spokesperson, was behind the mutiny. All this happened within three days of the mutiny, even before the dust had begun to settle.
Whether Tarakinikini was involved remains to be seen. He was never brought to trial having fled Fiji soon after, conveniently for a position with the UN. But what was strange was the swiftness of the NZ Foreign Minister's accusation which was totally unprompted.
Was he a sacrificial lamb who was duly removed from the scene? Was the NZ Foreign Minister trying to protect the real culprit by throwing the spotlight on Tarakinikini? Did the NZ government have any involvement in these events?
All too strange...
@Qanibulu
I think you are right about NZ govt. Interesting that Ratu Inoke was a player at the QEB mutiny and later we come to know that arms for the asassination plot were to come from NZ. The case is still in progress, so cant say much about it now, but we can read between the lines. Interesting times ahead.
@ Joe...
Yes, the diplomatic thing to do in matters of national importance is to go to the proper authorities, not the media. But Goff went straight to the media.
One wonders whether he had to bring Tarakinikini under international scrutiny to save his life and protect those involved behind the scenes. The mutiny had failed and Frank would have gotten to him and the truth eventually.
Tarakinikini may have been the big fish who could spilt the beans.
I am always amazed at the naivity behind these so often asked questions; GCSB was listening to Tarakinikini's cellphone. As simple as that. It was, more or less, revealed in the Joe Nata treason trial.
Not, THE Michael Field, is it? I thought you were dead. I keep going to your website and find nothing new so I assumed you'd "passed on", as the Fiji Times insists on calling it. I hope it IS you and not some impostor. Regrettably, this site is full of them. You remind me of the British MP, John Stonehouse, who left his sandals on a beach in the early 1970s and vanished. A year later, he was found living in Australia, having staged his own disappearance. I assume this is what you have done yourself, having dropped off the radar for so long. Much as I don't share your views on many things, as Christians were must all celebrate the return of one of our flock, however wayward. So welcome back to the fold. As the heroic Victor Laszlo famously says to the wayward Rick in my favourite movie Casablanca - "now I know we're going to win".
Way too much expectation - but been away writing a book for the last six months. Don't expect to see it in Suva book shops...!
@ Lilies of the *****
You make me laugh so loud I woke my 5 month old daughter up....fotflmao
@ Lilies...
Why should Michael Field make comments on this blog. CW has opened this up for all sensible comments, your expectation that only like-minded peopel should make comments or show up in discussions are silly. One sided views don't help anyone.Michael, i for one look forward to seeing more of you in these blog discussions. What say CW?
Apologies for the typo in my previous comment. It should read "why shouldn't Michael Field..."
Is this the same MJ Field who wrote that Justice Scutt's house had been burnt down when it wasn't? An ethical inbalance there? And who was tapping Tarakinikini's cellphone without a court order? Surely not the oh so law abiding New Zealanders? Oh my.
Michael Field is so patronising when he suggests we are naiive about Tarakinikini. What is so superior about covert eavesdropping Michael? Or are we already in Gestapo neo-colonial Kiwi land? When will you give your next false broadcast on Radio New Zealand ? Or is it time to return to the ashram?
Post a Comment