CSIS
Pacific Partners Outlook , Washington - 9 Aug 12
BRINGING FIJI BACK INTO THE FOLD: A U.S.
PERSPECTIVE
By Elke Larsen, Research Assistant, Pacific
Partners Initiative, CSIS.
Australia and New Zealand normalized relations
with Fiji July 30 by agreeing to exchange high commissioners. Yet despite the
Australian and New Zealand governments' claims in the press that the
normalization is the result of successful steps toward democracy, in reality it
is more an admission of the failure of their previous hard-line policies.
Isolation had long proved ineffective in securing their goal of pressing Fiji's
military regime to reinstate democracy, and a softer approach to Fiji has become
the best route available to influence change.
On December 5, 2006, a coup
lead by Commodore Voreqe Bainimarama toppled Fiji's democratically elected
government only to receive resounding condemnation from the international
community. Fiji's bilateral relations with Australia <http://CSIS.informz.net/z/cjUucD9taT0yNTUzMzU4JnA9MSZ1PTEwMTkzOTY0NzkmbGk9MTI4MDAxMzQ/index.html>
and New Zealand <http://CSIS.informz.net/z/cjUucD9taT0yNTUzMzU4JnA9MSZ1PTEwMTkzOTY0NzkmbGk9MTI4MDAxMzU/index.html>
soured rapidly with the implementation of targeted sanctions against the
military regime, including a travel ban against the regime's officials,
suspension of seasonal worker schemes, a ban on munitions trade, and the
cessation of military-to-military interaction. Regional isolation intensified in
2009 after Bainimarama failed to hold the elections he had promised or, indeed,
to open any discussion about the return to democracy. In response, the Pacific
Islands Forum (PIF) and the Commonwealth suspended Fiji. Fiji expelled
Australia's high commissioner in November 2009 and New Zealand's high
commissioner in 2010, cutting diplomatic communications to the bare
minimum.
The regional credibility and reputation of Australia and New
Zealand have been damaged by the fact that Fiji's military rulers did not give
in to their pressure but, rather, successfully pushed back. Three aspects of
this push back are noteworthy. First, the key reason for the regime's survival
has been internal stability. Despite the isolation tactics of Fiji's neighbors
and the bleak economic situation caused by the global financial crisis, the
Bainimarama regime has a high approval rating of 66 percent among Fijians, who
believe that he has done either a good or a very good job in running the
country. Some reasons for this include Bainimarama's policies to help the poor,
a reduction in the ethnic conflict that was prevalent under Fiji's democracy,
and the fact that the military is a respected institution that looms large in
Fiji and touches the lives of most Fijian families.
Second, Fiji was able
to break its isolation by seeking new powerful friends to help replace the loss
of traditional support. Fiji undertook a "look north" policy with China becoming
an important aid donor, Russia strengthening its ties through visiting
officials, and, most recently, the opening of Fiji's new embassy in South Korea
in July 2012. The strengthening of these relationships, particularly with China,
has undeniably been hastened by Fiji having nowhere else to
turn.
Finally, Fiji broke its regional isolation from the PIF by
strengthening the Melanesian Spearhead Group (MSG), whose exclusive membership
is made up of the most populous and resource-rich islands in Oceania. Since
Fiji's suspension by the PIF, the MSG has taken the PIF's place in facilitating
trade between Fiji and other Pacific Islands, firmly establishing itself as a
competing intergovernmental organization. This development has damaged the
prestige and effectiveness of the PIF. Fiji has always acted as an economic and
logistical hub for the PIF countries, and therefore negotiating trade agreements
such as PACER plus, an Australian-led push for regional economic integration
without Fiji will be ineffective. Given that Australia and New Zealand are not
welcome as members of the MSG, not only has Fiji broken its isolation, but it
has also turned the tables on its two largest neighbors.
Still, despite
Fiji's military regime not budging under Australian and New Zealand pressure,
there are some hopeful internal signs that democracy could reemerge close to the
2014 deadline for Fijian elections. As was highlighted in a 2011 Lowy Institute
poll <http://CSIS.informz.net/z/cjUucD9taT0yNTUzMzU4JnA9MSZ1PTEwMTkzOTY0NzkmbGk9MTI4MDAxMzc/index.html>
, the Fijian belief in the importance of fundamental human rights is
particularly strong and should contribute to internal concern about the success
of the constitutional consultation, ending racial inequality in politics, and
the coup culture.
With the normalization of diplomatic relations,
Australia and New Zealand will likely be able to once again add their voices
during Fiji's democratic transition. This is important because, for the Fijian
population, Australia and New Zealand still hold considerable sway. Fijian
public perceptions of Australia and New Zealand remain good despite the
political differences over the past few years. According to the Lowy poll,
Australia is viewed warmly by the people of Fiji, receiving an average of 74 out
of 100 on a 100-point scale, the highest rating of any foreign country with
which Fiji has ties. New Zealand is perceived almost as warmly, receiving 72 out
of 100. It is also probable that Australia and New Zealand will ease their
sanctions against Fiji. In particular, reinstituting military-to-military
contact would expose a new generation of Fijian military officers to Australian
and New Zealand values and promote future cooperation, which is particularly
vital considering the prominence of the military in Fijian society
From
the viewpoint of the United States, the normalization of relations is a step in
the right direction. It is in the United States' interests to promote stability
and prosperity in the Pacific, and Fiji's lackluster economy and its isolation
from its regional partners are not in line with those goals. It may be argued
that welcoming Fiji back into the fold flies in the face of the United States'
interest in human rights; freedom and democratization under the Bainimarama
regime remains questionable, particularly in light of the August 3 jailing of
ousted prime minister and political opponent Laisenia Qarase. However, with the
apparent failure of their hard-line approach and by keeping communications
open,, Australia and New Zealand now have a better chance to affect the quality
of the Fijian regime that will emerge in 2014.
CSIS Center for
Strategic and International Studies
1800 K Street, NW
Washington, DC
20006
Tel: 202-887-0200 Fax: 202-775-3199
2 comments:
Croz
Most of this is old news. The only comment worth noting from the aticle is: "freedom and democratization under the Bainimarama regime remains questionable, particularly in light of the August 3 jailing of ousted prime minister and political opponent Laisenia Qarase." Absolutely agree.
As for engagement between Australian and Fiji military. Yes very much needed to expose the new generation of Fiji military to the real role of military in a democracy and to professionalism (currently sadly lacking). However this cannot occur until the current poor leadership of the military is replaced. Thank you.
Croz
One hopes the last line of this viewpoint of wanting Aust and NZ to further engage with the military regime will lead to a "better chance to affect the quality of the Fijian regime that will emerge in 2014" is a faux pas? Or has it already been decided somewhere that a 'regime' will continue? Fiji does not need a regime(whatever the so called quality) - it needs urgently to return to a democratic government elected by the people.
Post a Comment