■ Cogito, ergo sum. I think, therefore I am. (René Descartes, mathematician and philosopher,1599-1650)
Friday, 1 January 2010
Write LETTERS TO THE EDITOR HERE, and post-specific COMMENTS at the end of posts.
13 comments:
Croz
said...
The existing Comments feature encourages readers to comment on individual posts. The new feature Letters to the Editor encourages you to write on anything, including what Fiji media editors may self-censor. Each Letters to the Editor posted will run for two weeks. A new Letters to the Editor feature will be posted each Monday. These are the rules: 1. All letters must be signed, even if only with a pseudonym 2. Letters must address issues and treat others with respect 3. All letters must be in English but well known vernacular words may be used. 4. Letters that are personal, use foul language, or do not meet normal standards will be deleted. Please save me the time of deleting such comments. All you have to do is ask how you would think, feel and react if you were the recipient of the barbs you think so "brilliant and devasting", and modify your words accordingly. 5. All letters should start with a heading indicating the subject or topic.
Dear Prime Minister
In some weeks I may suggest a "theme". Writers can write on anything, but to start the ball rolling, the theme for this week is "Dear Prime Minister." Especially welcome are letters on your fears and hopes and "feedback " on what you think he is doing right or wrong, how he can improve government's performance, and letters that seek a "way forward."
Have no doubt, if he does not read it himself, someone will pass on all helpful ideas!
Anonymous, I have deleted your letter because you appear not to have noticed the requirement that all letters must be signed, either with your own name or a pseudonym. Please re-post, or if you have not kept a copy of the letter, let me know (with your name or pseudonym) and I will repost on your behalf. Croz
The IMF (International Manipulation of Funds) Loan
Recently in Australia we had bungled stimulii packages that were ill conceived and poorly implemented. Why did we have these programs? Because the IMF told us to.
At the time of the Global Financial Crisis (GFC), an IMF report (cited in Australian parliament) to all governments (who owe the World Bank Money) told us (AUS) to immediately spend between 2 and 5% of GDP on stimulii. When these bills were passed in parliament (the handouts etc..), in the middle of the pile was a bill that was to increase Australia's "credit card" limit.
The IMF raised Australia's credit card limit(foreign debt limit) by billions. They did this to ensure we can borrow to service our debt in light of the new billions in stimulii that they told us to implement.
Fiji wants to borrow $1B from the IMF. Then - the IMF will be running Fiji, just as it does Australia.
What are the terms of the "loan" from the IMF? I cannot believe that no one is alarmed by this. Everyone comments on a heap of red herrings. This is a major issue for Fiji and there is deafening silence.
The PM will not be remembered for his reforms. He will be remembered as the PM who maxed out the credit card and sold off Fiji's sovereignty.
This is the way Fiji "could be". Debt riddled and unable to service its loans. If China sneezes, Australia will catch a terminal cold. Some of Australia's politicians are concerned with our increasing debt and the cost of servicing the existing debt. They get shouted down. Their concerns are genuine.
It is common sense. You can't keep borrowing to pay off your loans. It has to end sometime. Fiji, don't make the same mistakes we have made. However, you have no choice. There are no political processes in place to debate the merits of this proposal.
Mr Walsh ,whilst I support a lot of the reforms and the road-map itself, the absence of proper parliamentary processes to research and debate major descisions such as this may lead to Fiji's future downfall.
This is why democracy, as cumbersome and slow as it may seem to be, is desireable for any nation.
I would be interested in your opinion on this IMF loan issue , Mr Walsh.
There are so many red herrings in your letter you could start your own fish shop.
Firstly Australia is a creditor to the IMF. It has recently contributed $76m into the fund. The last time I checked it has not conceded its sovereignty to the IMF for whatever reason. Australia has not borrowed from the fund since 1984 so I don't know where you are getting the idea that it has sold its soul to the devil on account of its loans. Economically it is strong having ridden on the back of the Chinese boom with its commodity exports in the last few years.
The stimulii packages achieved what the government intended it to do - cushion the effects of the GFC preventing collapse in the retail, property and bsnking sectors. It saved a lot of small companies going bust and people losing jobs. It was a boost that was needed to inject confidence, the timing was critical.
Yes, if it was true that China sneezed at the height of the GFC and Australia copped a cold, but this was short lived. China like Australia, released their pursestrings to get factories up and running again in a matter of months and Australia now is now back on track.
I agree the $1b IMF loan to Fiji needs to be looked at critically but your demonisation of the IMF and scattering of red herrings did not do your argument any good.
The 76$m contribution you refer to was not optional/ It was foreign aid to be distributed as the IMF saw fit.
You can play down the significance of "credit", the IMF do no stand alone. References refer to the World Bank et al, who are in a "loose afffiliation".
Your opinion and input are valued. The need to look at things critically is correct. That will be difficult with the lack of democratic processes in place.
Who is going to make this descision?
Our economy, like so many others, is on a precipice. Your claim that the stimulii packages kept our economy affloat is difficult to gauge. I see it as putting a band aid on a wound that needs stiches. It is out of sight for the moment but it will not heal.
Australia once had a diversity of exports. Now, we are pinned so close to the Chinese economy that any economic rationalisation by China will have serious repercussions on Aus. They must continue to rabidly consume our minerals or we are in trouble. We recently sold a mine in North Queensland to the Chinese Government. Sovereignty as we once understood ot is a porous concept at best or a complete misnoma.
I concede that there are times when one needs to borrow. The idea is to borrow what you need and no more. Is part of the $1B loan going to be used to make interest repayments on the loan itself?
Why did Aus have the stimulii packages? Why were they rushed?
Q, check the IMF Report cited in Aus Parliament. We had no choice.
What about the $76 M "contribution you refer to. Do you think that was optional? Can't Aus decide how they would spend that money? No.
Please understand when you owe vast amounts of money, you are beholdent to those who loaned it to you.
The machinations of the IMF are not simple. Neither you or I know the full truth.
Yes, I am taking a strong stand on one extreme. You talk about this 76$M as a contribution, that is a half truth. It was a "compulsory donation".
I do not necessarily say that the stimulii packages in Aus were a bad idea. My comments were that they were rushed and ill conceived. The IMF siad "jump" and Aus tripped over its shoe laces.
Tell the families of the 4 dead men and the dozens whose homes caught fire that the economy was saved.
Your half truths do no justice for the position you are taking.
Lets reveiew our common ground. The loan needs to be looked at critically. On that we both agree. I thank you for your response to my comments and I sincerely hope that such a course can and will be pursued.
As I said, I may not agree with some of your claims, but I value them all the same. Lets try and expand the common ground.
The actual truth is that it is the army and not the politicians that has wrecked this country. Bainimarama needs to come to grips with reality. Four coups and they were all staged by the security forces. George Speight only posed as the frontman. He had no clout on his own. So Mr Commander if you really want to stop any further coups and damage to our beloved nation, then obviously the threat posed by the army has to be addressed. It is the biggest destabilisation factor in national politics. comsens
Wow, wow. wow. Now the Fiji Times want to get into the good book of government. I say, get outta here.
Government must never entertain partnering with deceivers like the Fiji Times who are currently using their proxy in their other sister companies overseas to destroy Fiji abroad.
I'm sure the Ministry of Health can get transportation help from other avenues.
Hey PS Health and PS PM's office, please refuse the offer from the Fiji Times and wring their neck with decreees and legislation to drive them into irrelevancy and bankruptcy.
Nesian's claim is probably true. No one cares about the average Fijian. Aus makes more from its relationship with Fiji than what Fiji does.
The South Pacific bully was more concerned with trade and economic factors (and strategic factors)- China's tentacles)than it was for the person in the street, post Dec 2006.
Does anyone really think the IMF want to "help" Fiji. They are constantly seeking ways to make money for their affiliates.
The bullying tactics are blatant. Despite what the Aus immigration says about the Sri Lankan judicial officers being denied transit visas, the applications which take 48 hours to process, took days and days without response.
Yes, technically Aus Immig never "denied" the transit visas, but they failed to process the applications in the ordinary fashion and gave the transients no alternative but to proceed via Korea. An "implied" denial as opposed to an express denial.
Aus knew that to deny the application would be seen as an interference with Sri Lanka. So they "denied" the applications by failure to follow regular time frames, so no one could accuse them of outright denial.
The sanctions against Fiji were designed to pressure the IG. Now after a period of time, the most conservative observer, has to at least partially concede, that Fiji is being better governed that at any time in the last 23 years.
That makes the bully feel powerless. Australia had the opportunity to open dialogue and assist back in Dec 2006. They could have offered diplomatic solutions, i.e trained investigators/ lawyers to assist with reviewing the ousted government (before the shredders got fired up) electoral experts, and $$$ to assist.
Instead the bully took the bully approach and tried to intimidate and pressure.
After the Court of Appeal overturned the honourable Justice Gates decision, in Q v B, they did not grant a stay.
Had a stay been granted then it would have presented an ideal opportunity for Aus to get involved and inject funds and experts to clean up the baggage and get to the polls. It would have given the interin Prime Minister options.
The decision could have gone either way and a stay would have been justified at law. Instead the Commander had no options. The C of App played the bluff game and it backfired.
The IG have got a lot of things wrong but has also got a lot of things right. AND they have done it without anyone's help. Fiji is standing on her own two feet and the patronising bullies have been rendered powerless.
Anyone who thinks that the Separation of Powers is under threat in Fiji should come to NSW. We have had a government in for 15 YEARS. All arms of government are polluted. The Gov departments and agencies are all stocked out with the supporters of the Gov.
The Supreme Court appears to be guided by political will to increase criminal penalties. The independence of the major oversight agency is now questionable. The former head of the NSW Crime Commission is in prison.
If thats democracy, then God help us. If you truely want democracy, allow a government two terms maximum and then vote for whoever is not in power. Flush the cronies before the Sep of Powers doctrine ceases to have any relevant meaning
There was an attempt at diplomacy back in 2006 - at the barrel of a gun.
The Howard government never forgave Fiji for their botched gunboat diplomacy in the Pacific where tragically two helicopter pilots perished at sea off Kadavu with one very expensive Blackhawk. This show of force though classified as a "military exercise" was clearly meant to intimidate. Bainimarama responded with his own counter strike by conducting exercises along Suva's foreshore. It was a disastrous mission. Intelligence got it all wrong.
This one incident had a huge bearing on Australian foreign policy under two differnt administrations. Relations between the two countries fell to an all time low after this. When Rudd came into power in 2007, the wounds were still raw. There still was no room for dialogue or a diplomatic solution.
If Australia wants to be a leader in the region, it must be strong enough to admit that mistakes have been made, that the ghosts of the past need to be put to rest, that the future can be shaped with positive attitudes and actions.
Rudd went on national TV to apologise for a blunder by one of his ministers - he accepted full responsibility for the stuff up.
Fiji is not expecting an apology - just acknowledgement of its right of self-determination and a place in the sun.
Justice Madigan has stated that “…it was quite apparent that their [CRW soldiers’] social and cultural skills were totally neglected...” while passing judgement in the conspiracy case.
Brigadier Driti has responded by saying that “The military has its own customs and traditions and these customs and traditions are shared to blend into society. Military personnel will always respect it. The customs and traditions of the military will always override the general customs and traditions of society…” Refer to http://www.radiofiji.com.fj/fullstory.php?id=26278
Brigadier Driti’s assertion seems to be the nub of all that is problematic with the Fiji Military Forces’ thinking.
Any country’s military exists to serve civil society. It has no other function whether in war or peacetime. Even when it carries out a coup (be it against a democratically elected government or against a tyrant) its rationale is (usually) that such a coup is in civil society’s interest.
If, for the purpose of this polemic, ‘society’ is not confused with ‘politician’ then we can take for granted that corruption, cronyism and so forth are not central tenets of society’s general customs and traditions.
A democratic civil society’s moral compass may, due to the blandishments of politicians or propaganda in the media, sometimes become a little awry. However that civil society has to set things straight through its own system of checks and balances.
Mr Driti evidently sees the FMF separate from Fiji civil society, since he has said “…the customs and traditions of the military will always override the general customs and traditions of society…”
In the same way that it is wrong for the Euro-centric countries to dictate to Fiji, it is wrong for a military that sees itself separate from the society it serves to consider it has the moral high ground that should allow it to dictate the terms under which that society must function.
In its present manifestation, the FMF appears to be comfortable with the concept of people power only as long as it doesn’t accidentally lead to actual civilians having actual power.
The Marist Rugby 7s is a great tournament, touted as "the world biggest 7s tournament". And through all the media reports, I note that one Napolioni Naulia, a solider featured prominently for the 'Army Green' (very imaginative name) side. However, everyoen seems to have forgetten (or forced to forget) that this is the same Napolioni Naulia charged with manslaughter for the killing of the Nadi teenager in 2007, along with other soldiers and a cop. These men were sentenced by crrent High Court Judge D. Goundar on manslaugher charges (and later quickly set free by the regime that Croz and co blatantly support).
So, let's (for arguments sake only) look past the fact that the "killing was for the greater good" as many of coup-supporters say. After all, what's one 19-year old's life anyway, right?
But setting them free, and letting them play rugby tournaments in the army team? Does the military have no shame. Or is it as Jon so aptly points out, they consider themselves as "above the society" and the rules don't apply to them?
Of all the coup apologists and regime supporters (dear Croz, this includes you) I have yet to hear of someone successfully justifiying to me the reason for setting these people free. Nor have they (sigh, yes Croz, this includes you, again!) condemned the setting free of these "manslaughter-ers". And now they're running around playing rugby.
Military Legalises Homosexuality and Outlaws Heterosexuality
Suva – Friday 12 March In a surprise move this morning, the Fiji Military Forces token Indian, Brigadier General Aziz sacked several officers for having heterosexual sex with colleagues. Colonel Aziz referred to the recent Legalisation of Homosexuality decree and advised that should any more FMF personnel be found discharging dishonourably into female members of the opposite sex, they would be dishonourably discharged from the FMF.
“The military put the Homosexual decree in place for a reason and we are honour bound to adhere to it,” Colonel Aziz continued, “Colonel Driti spelt it out the other day when he said that the military and civil society march to the sound of a different drum.”
Staying on message, this afternoon Commodore Bainimarama declared himself Queen of Fiji and carried out his longstanding threat to suspend the United Kingdom’s membership of the Commonwealth of the Fiji Islands. Bainimarama took the dramatic step of removing Elizabeth Windsor’s portrait from his office wall in order to make room for another photo of himself dressed in a smart pinstripe suit addressing several sleeping delegates at the United Nations.
When interviewed, Mr Bainimarama stated, “She wasn’t elected into power. Nepotism got her the throne. And she’s got the bloody cheek to sit there and lecture me on democracy and one man, one vote? The bloody hypocrite.”
Mrs Windsor replied that she didn’t find it very funny. “Great granny gave me that speck of pelican dropping in the middle of the ocean. What? Oh, Nauru, is it? Sorry. Still, I find it a bit rich that this chap comes along just as we find oil there and tries to… What’s that? The Falklands? Oh, how interesting. You can’t blame me though, he does dress like Galtieri, doesn’t he? Why doesn’t he start wearing a skirt again? Sulu, you say? H’mmm.”
13 comments:
The existing Comments feature encourages readers to comment on individual posts. The new feature Letters to the Editor encourages you to write on anything, including what Fiji media editors may self-censor.
Each Letters to the Editor posted will run for two weeks. A new Letters to the Editor feature will be posted each Monday.
These are the rules:
1. All letters must be signed, even if only with a pseudonym
2. Letters must address issues and treat others with respect
3. All letters must be in English but well known vernacular words may be used.
4. Letters that are personal, use foul language, or do not meet normal standards will be deleted. Please save me the time of deleting such comments. All you have to do is ask how you would think, feel and react if you were the recipient of the barbs you think so "brilliant and devasting", and modify your words accordingly.
5. All letters should start with a heading indicating the subject or topic.
Dear Prime Minister
In some weeks I may suggest a "theme". Writers can write on anything, but to start the ball rolling, the theme for this week is "Dear Prime Minister." Especially welcome are letters on your fears and hopes and "feedback " on what you think he is doing right or wrong, how he can improve government's performance, and letters that seek a "way forward."
Have no doubt, if he does not read it himself, someone will pass on all helpful ideas!
Anonymous, I have deleted your letter because you appear not to have noticed the requirement that all letters must be signed, either with your own name or a pseudonym. Please re-post, or if you have not kept a copy of the letter, let me know (with your name or pseudonym) and I will repost on your behalf. Croz
Dear Ed,
The IMF (International Manipulation of Funds) Loan
Recently in Australia we had bungled stimulii packages that were ill conceived and poorly implemented. Why did we have these programs? Because the IMF told us to.
At the time of the Global Financial Crisis (GFC), an IMF report (cited in Australian parliament) to all governments (who owe the World Bank Money) told us (AUS) to immediately spend between 2 and 5% of GDP on stimulii. When these bills were passed in parliament (the handouts etc..), in the middle of the pile was a bill that was to increase Australia's "credit card" limit.
The IMF raised Australia's credit card limit(foreign debt limit) by billions. They did this to ensure we can borrow to service our debt in light of the new billions in stimulii that they told us to implement.
Fiji wants to borrow $1B from the IMF. Then - the IMF will be running Fiji, just as it does Australia.
What are the terms of the "loan" from the IMF? I cannot believe that no one is alarmed by this. Everyone comments on a heap of red herrings. This is a major issue for Fiji and there is deafening silence.
The PM will not be remembered for his reforms. He will be remembered as the PM who maxed out the credit card and sold off Fiji's sovereignty.
This is the way Fiji "could be". Debt riddled and unable to service its loans. If China sneezes, Australia will catch a terminal cold. Some of Australia's politicians are concerned with our increasing debt and the cost of servicing the existing debt. They get shouted down. Their concerns are genuine.
It is common sense. You can't keep borrowing to pay off your loans. It has to end sometime. Fiji, don't make the same mistakes we have made. However, you have no choice. There are no political processes in place to debate the merits of this proposal.
Mr Walsh ,whilst I support a lot of the reforms and the road-map itself, the absence of proper parliamentary processes to research and debate major descisions such as this may lead to Fiji's future downfall.
This is why democracy, as cumbersome and slow as it may seem to be, is desireable for any nation.
I would be interested in your opinion on this IMF loan issue , Mr Walsh.
Habakuk
@ Habakuk ..
There are so many red herrings in your letter you could start your own fish shop.
Firstly Australia is a creditor to the IMF. It has recently contributed $76m into the fund. The last time I checked it has not conceded its sovereignty to the IMF for whatever reason. Australia has not borrowed from the fund since 1984 so I don't know where you are getting the idea that it has sold its soul to the devil on account of its loans. Economically it is strong having ridden on the back of the Chinese boom with its commodity exports in the last few years.
The stimulii packages achieved what the government intended it to do - cushion the effects of the GFC preventing collapse in the retail, property and bsnking sectors. It saved a lot of small companies going bust and people losing jobs. It was a boost that was needed to inject confidence, the timing was critical.
Yes, if it was true that China sneezed at the height of the GFC and Australia copped a cold, but this was short lived. China like Australia, released their pursestrings to get factories up and running again in a matter of months and Australia now is now back on track.
I agree the $1b IMF loan to Fiji needs to be looked at critically but your demonisation of the IMF and scattering of red herrings did not do your argument any good.
Taki.
@ Qanibulu
The 76$m contribution you refer to was not optional/ It was foreign aid to be distributed as the IMF saw fit.
You can play down the significance of "credit", the IMF do no stand alone. References refer to the World Bank et al, who are in a "loose afffiliation".
Your opinion and input are valued. The need to look at things critically is correct. That will be difficult with the lack of democratic processes in place.
Who is going to make this descision?
Our economy, like so many others, is on a precipice. Your claim that the stimulii packages kept our economy affloat is difficult to gauge. I see it as putting a band aid on a wound that needs stiches. It is out of sight for the moment but it will not heal.
Australia once had a diversity of exports. Now, we are pinned so close to the Chinese economy that any economic rationalisation by China will have serious repercussions on Aus. They must continue to rabidly consume our minerals or we are in trouble. We recently sold a mine in North Queensland to the Chinese Government. Sovereignty as we once understood ot is a porous concept at best or a complete misnoma.
I concede that there are times when one needs to borrow. The idea is to borrow what you need and no more. Is part of the $1B loan going to be used to make interest repayments on the loan itself?
Why did Aus have the stimulii packages? Why were they rushed?
Q, check the IMF Report cited in Aus Parliament. We had no choice.
What about the $76 M "contribution you refer to. Do you think that was optional? Can't Aus decide how they would spend that money? No.
Please understand when you owe vast amounts of money, you are beholdent to those who loaned it to you.
The machinations of the IMF are not simple. Neither you or I know the full truth.
Yes, I am taking a strong stand on one extreme. You talk about this 76$M as a contribution, that is a half truth. It was a "compulsory donation".
I do not necessarily say that the stimulii packages in Aus were a bad idea. My comments were that they were rushed and ill conceived. The IMF siad "jump" and Aus tripped over its shoe laces.
Tell the families of the 4 dead men and the dozens whose homes caught fire that the economy was saved.
Your half truths do no justice for the position you are taking.
Lets reveiew our common ground. The loan needs to be looked at critically. On that we both agree. I thank you for your response to my comments and I sincerely hope that such a course can and will be pursued.
As I said, I may not agree with some of your claims, but I value them all the same. Lets try and expand the common ground.
Bainimarama's stand on no politicians
The actual truth is that it is the army and not the politicians that has wrecked this country. Bainimarama needs to come to grips with reality. Four coups and they were all staged by the security forces. George Speight only posed as the frontman. He had no clout on his own. So Mr Commander if you really want to stop any further coups and damage to our beloved nation, then obviously the threat posed by the army has to be addressed. It is the biggest destabilisation factor in national politics.
comsens
http://www.fijitimes.com.fj/story.spx?id=141473
Wow, wow. wow. Now the Fiji Times want to get into the good book of government. I say, get outta here.
Government must never entertain partnering with deceivers like the Fiji Times who are currently using their proxy in their other sister companies overseas to destroy Fiji abroad.
I'm sure the Ministry of Health can get transportation help from other avenues.
Hey PS Health and PS PM's office, please refuse the offer from the Fiji Times and wring their neck with decreees and legislation to drive them into irrelevancy and bankruptcy.
Goodbye Fiji Times.
Nesian's claim is probably true. No one cares about the average Fijian. Aus makes more from its relationship with Fiji than what Fiji does.
The South Pacific bully was more concerned with trade and economic factors (and strategic factors)- China's tentacles)than it was for the person in the street, post Dec 2006.
Does anyone really think the IMF want to "help" Fiji. They are constantly seeking ways to make money for their affiliates.
The bullying tactics are blatant. Despite what the Aus immigration says about the Sri Lankan judicial officers being denied transit visas, the applications which take 48 hours to process, took days and days without response.
Yes, technically Aus Immig never "denied" the transit visas, but they failed to process the applications in the ordinary fashion and gave the transients no alternative but to proceed via Korea. An "implied" denial as opposed to an express denial.
Aus knew that to deny the application would be seen as an interference with Sri Lanka. So they "denied" the applications by failure to follow regular time frames, so no one could accuse them of outright denial.
The sanctions against Fiji were designed to pressure the IG. Now after a period of time, the most conservative observer, has to at least partially concede, that Fiji is being better governed that at any time in the last 23 years.
That makes the bully feel powerless. Australia had the opportunity to open dialogue and assist back in Dec 2006. They could have offered diplomatic solutions, i.e trained investigators/ lawyers to assist with reviewing the ousted government (before the shredders got fired up) electoral experts, and $$$ to assist.
Instead the bully took the bully approach and tried to intimidate and pressure.
After the Court of Appeal overturned the honourable Justice Gates decision, in Q v B, they did not grant a stay.
Had a stay been granted then it would have presented an ideal opportunity for Aus to get involved and inject funds and experts to clean up the baggage and get to the polls. It would have given the interin Prime Minister options.
The decision could have gone either way and a stay would have been justified at law. Instead the Commander had no options. The C of App played the bluff game and it backfired.
The IG have got a lot of things wrong but has also got a lot of things right. AND they have done it without anyone's help. Fiji is standing on her own two feet and the patronising bullies have been rendered powerless.
Anyone who thinks that the Separation of Powers is under threat in Fiji should come to NSW. We have had a government in for 15 YEARS. All arms of government are polluted. The Gov departments and agencies are all stocked out with the supporters of the Gov.
The Supreme Court appears to be guided by political will to increase criminal penalties. The independence of the major oversight agency is now questionable. The former head of the NSW Crime Commission is in prison.
If thats democracy, then God help us. If you truely want democracy, allow a government two terms maximum and then vote for whoever is not in power. Flush the cronies before the Sep of Powers doctrine ceases to have any relevant meaning
@ Habakuk ..
There was an attempt at diplomacy back in 2006 - at the barrel of a gun.
The Howard government never forgave Fiji for their botched gunboat diplomacy in the Pacific where tragically two helicopter pilots perished at sea off Kadavu with one very expensive Blackhawk. This show of force though classified as a "military exercise" was clearly meant to intimidate. Bainimarama responded with his own counter strike by conducting exercises along Suva's foreshore. It was a disastrous mission. Intelligence got it all wrong.
This one incident had a huge bearing on Australian foreign policy under two differnt administrations. Relations between the two countries fell to an all time low after this. When Rudd came into power in 2007, the wounds were still raw. There still was no room for dialogue or a diplomatic solution.
If Australia wants to be a leader in the region, it must be strong enough to admit that mistakes have been made, that the ghosts of the past need to be put to rest, that the future can be shaped with positive attitudes and actions.
Rudd went on national TV to apologise for a blunder by one of his ministers - he accepted full responsibility for the stuff up.
Fiji is not expecting an apology - just acknowledgement of its right of self-determination and a place in the sun.
Justice Madigan has stated that “…it was quite apparent that their [CRW soldiers’] social and cultural skills were totally neglected...” while passing judgement in the conspiracy case.
Brigadier Driti has responded by saying that
“The military has its own customs and traditions and these customs and traditions are shared to blend into society. Military personnel will always respect it. The customs and traditions of the military will always override the general customs and traditions of society…”
Refer to http://www.radiofiji.com.fj/fullstory.php?id=26278
Brigadier Driti’s assertion seems to be the nub of all that is problematic with the Fiji Military Forces’ thinking.
Any country’s military exists to serve civil society. It has no other function whether in war or peacetime. Even when it carries out a coup (be it against a democratically elected government or against a tyrant) its rationale is (usually) that such a coup is in civil society’s interest.
If, for the purpose of this polemic, ‘society’ is not confused with ‘politician’ then we can take for granted that corruption, cronyism and so forth are not central tenets of society’s general customs and traditions.
A democratic civil society’s moral compass may, due to the blandishments of politicians or propaganda in the media, sometimes become a little awry. However that civil society has to set things straight through its own system of checks and balances.
Mr Driti evidently sees the FMF separate from Fiji civil society, since he has said “…the customs and traditions of the military will always override the general customs and traditions of society…”
In the same way that it is wrong for the Euro-centric countries to dictate to Fiji, it is wrong for a military that sees itself separate from the society it serves to consider it has the moral high ground that should allow it to dictate the terms under which that society must function.
In its present manifestation, the FMF appears to be comfortable with the concept of people power only as long as it doesn’t accidentally lead to actual civilians having actual power.
Jon - good one. Please let me add to your piece.
The Marist Rugby 7s is a great tournament, touted as "the world biggest 7s tournament". And through all the media reports, I note that one Napolioni Naulia, a solider featured prominently for the 'Army Green' (very imaginative name) side. However, everyoen seems to have forgetten (or forced to forget) that this is the same Napolioni Naulia charged with manslaughter for the killing of the Nadi teenager in 2007, along with other soldiers and a cop. These men were sentenced by crrent High Court Judge D. Goundar on manslaugher charges (and later quickly set free by the regime that Croz and co blatantly support).
So, let's (for arguments sake only) look past the fact that the "killing was for the greater good" as many of coup-supporters say. After all, what's one 19-year old's life anyway, right?
But setting them free, and letting them play rugby tournaments in the army team? Does the military have no shame. Or is it as Jon so aptly points out, they consider themselves as "above the society" and the rules don't apply to them?
Of all the coup apologists and regime supporters (dear Croz, this includes you) I have yet to hear of someone successfully justifiying to me the reason for setting these people free. Nor have they (sigh, yes Croz, this includes you, again!) condemned the setting free of these "manslaughter-ers". And now they're running around playing rugby.
Boy, am I glad Im not in Fiji anymore!
Military Legalises Homosexuality and Outlaws Heterosexuality
Suva – Friday 12 March
In a surprise move this morning, the Fiji Military Forces token Indian, Brigadier General Aziz sacked several officers for having heterosexual sex with colleagues. Colonel Aziz referred to the recent Legalisation of Homosexuality decree and advised that should any more FMF personnel be found discharging dishonourably into female members of the opposite sex, they would be dishonourably discharged from the FMF.
“The military put the Homosexual decree in place for a reason and we are honour bound to adhere to it,” Colonel Aziz continued, “Colonel Driti spelt it out the other day when he said that the military and civil society march to the sound of a different drum.”
Staying on message, this afternoon Commodore Bainimarama declared himself Queen of Fiji and carried out his longstanding threat to suspend the United Kingdom’s membership of the Commonwealth of the Fiji Islands. Bainimarama took the dramatic step of removing Elizabeth Windsor’s portrait from his office wall in order to make room for another photo of himself dressed in a smart pinstripe suit addressing several sleeping delegates at the United Nations.
When interviewed, Mr Bainimarama stated, “She wasn’t elected into power. Nepotism got her the throne. And she’s got the bloody cheek to sit there and lecture me on democracy and one man, one vote? The bloody hypocrite.”
Mrs Windsor replied that she didn’t find it very funny. “Great granny gave me that speck of pelican dropping in the middle of the ocean. What? Oh, Nauru, is it? Sorry. Still, I find it a bit rich that this chap comes along just as we find oil there and tries to… What’s that? The Falklands? Oh, how interesting. You can’t blame me though, he does dress like Galtieri, doesn’t he? Why doesn’t he start wearing a skirt again? Sulu, you say? H’mmm.”
Post a Comment