Three Temporarily Unwise Men

Fiji Report #6

Part III. The Prime Minister Commandore Voqere Bainimarama

By Crosbie Walsh

In other circumstances I would have been delighted to have had a 40-minute interview with Fiji's Prime Minister, especially as he talked most of the time, but as it turned out, I left feeling a little short-changed and so disorientated I forgot to ask for a photograph. Now my grandchildren will never believe I met a prime minister who will one day be argued about by Pacific historians giving their slant on his contribution to Fiji in the early part of the 21st century.

The interview started well. In a relaxed mood Voqere Bainimarama would make a pleasant companion. He is so full of life and vitality and he obviously enjoys a good joke. I could see why he's so popular with many ordinary people.

He asked how many blogs supported his government. I said two if he counted mine as one of them. He seemed pleasantly surprised and was not all surprised when I told him there were at least a dozen overseas blogs that opposed him.

I asked about the composition of the Constituent Assembly. He said the process and the appointments it would be something like the Charter when a wide range of people and organizations were invited to participate. Asked how, exactly, its members would be selected, he said he had not decided yet.

He then started to talk about the work of the Constitution Commission. Readers will recall I'd met them going out as I was about to go in, and they did not look at all pleased. It was about here that he pointed and said, "Put off that recorder." I am unsure what I can report on the unrecorded session that followed but I do not think I am breaking confidence by touching on the main issues covered, and I think it useful to report my impressions of the PM as a leader.

The reason the PM asked me to turn off the recorder was because he wanted to talk freely about the actions of the  Constitution Commissioners who had just left. There was a major disagreement about the appointment of Ratu Joni Madraiwiwi as a consultant to the Commission, and about the ongoing "educating" activities of the Commission. The PM thought they had acted illegally in appointing Ratu Joni and were exceeded their mandate in holding public education seminars on the draft constitution. Their job now, the PM said, is to draft the constitution and nothing else.

The PM was angry. There's no doubt about that. Reading between the lines (or, more accurately, between the pauses) I think relations between Ratu Joni and the PM have not been good for some time. He was dismissed as Vice-President because he opposed the coup. This should have caused no surprise. He is a lawyer and considered the coup illegal. But this does not mean, as the PM might think, that he wants Fiji to return to the situation between 2000 and December 2006.

I think both men loath racism and want a fairer Fiji. They would be an unassailable team if they could find a way to work together in pursuit of a better Fiji. Will it happen? I doubt it. The PM has his list of friends and enemies. No one is in between. And now, regrettably, Prof Yash Ghai could be seen to be in the wrong camp.

The NGOs, such as the Citizens' Constitution Forum, that share the PM's vision but have questioned government decrees that limit trade union and other activities, are already in the wrong camp. And they are not alone. The PM seems to have a penchant for misplacing his natural friends. Indeed, when I told him there were many he thought opposed to government who actually shared his vision his eyebrows told me he was most surprised. He thinks the word 'criticism' always means opposition when often it means suggested corrections.

Will he stand for elections? He has not yet decided whether to form his own party and stand in the 2014 election. For the moment he says all his attention in given to taking "development to the people" and he did not want to be distracted by vying for political office.

Many of those in the anti-Bainimarama camp have called him a puppet of Attorney-Gerenal Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum. They could not be more mistaken. Take one look into his eyes and listen carefully to what he's saying. Bainimarama is his own man. He knows where he is going and no one is going to stop him. He values Khaiyum's hard work, skills and support. They make a good team, despite Khaiyum's unpopularity among ardent Taukei nationalists. But there is no doubt who's in charge.

Does he have the support of ordinary Fijians? He thinks so, and he has certainly, as they would say in the old Star Trek TV programmes, gone where none have gone before. No other PM has ever said ring me on 01 if you have a complaint against a government authority. No other PM has made government departments so accessible, though roadside stalls, to the general public. No other PM has ridden horseback into the Namosi interior or tramped though ankle-deep mud in squatter settlements. No other PM has visited so many (or indeed, for some, any) remote rural villages, listened to villagers' woes, and checked on civil servants that their woes have been attended to.

Why then is he so fearful of a renewal of public debate over the draft constitution? Is this because the process could be hijacked by the old political parties and others vehemently opposed to Government? Or does he simply not wish to waste his time on them, for the present? Or are there two audiences: ordinary people, with whom is is relaxed and confidence, and the "others" whom he distrusts. Those well practised in using race and now, "human rights," to win support.

I have written of three temporarily unwise men, and Bainimarama is the third. I think he is unwise because he risks turning friends into enemies, and because he seems to trust no one except those in his inner circle. Readers have repeatedly told me, I'm wasting my time. Bainimarama is not listening. He will take no notice of you or any others who are not totally committed to his cause. One friend has even told me I've got to decide which side I'm on. Ultimately, of course, this is the only choice but for now I lean more towards Bainimarama than the alternatives. Why? Because I prefer his vision for Fiji over theirs, and because I am totally convinced he is genuine about the type of Fiji he says he wants.

His training has been different from mine. He makes a good military officer but he's not a good politician. Some would say he is a control freak. Others have said he is not to be trusted because he has broken his word too many times. I'd prefer to interpret these past events as changes in position as the situations changed. 2007 was too early to have an election, and he was left little option but to abrogate the 1997 constitution when the Australian judges found against him in the Qarase appeal case.

All three of the wise men made unwise decisions but all thought they were doing the best thing for Fiji. Yash Ghai should not have appointed Ratu Joni and Ratu Joni should not have accepted. But Bainimarama should have gone along with the appointment that was about to terminate, and he should be welcoming the Commission's further education programme on constitutional issues about which many in the public, and most especially ordinary Taukei, are still confused.

But should's and should not's take us nowhere. They cannot change what has happened. So where does this leave us? I think that ultimately we do have to make a choice between what the likes of the old political parties offer us and Bainimarama's vision. Nothing in the FLP and SDL submissions pointed to the future. They essentially wanted a return to the past. The many things I saw and heard about during my ten days in Fiji persuade me that many of the things government is doing are good for Fiji, and some could only probably be done, or done as quickly, under a dictatorship. Imagine, for example,  the old parliament debating land banks, land rental money being paid directly to the mataqali owners,  homosexuality or the Christian state. But the flip side of even a benevolent dictatorship is that it lacks checks and balances. 

It is likely  the ideologically-driven acts of the present government (such as the bypassing of trade unions and the downsizing of the state as seen in moves to outsource some state functions to the private sector) would also have been the policies of an SDL government, but there at least their pros and cons could have been debated in the media and in parliament.  A major weakness of the Bainimarama government is the limited number, experience and ideological breadth  of its advisers. The situation was made worse because of the Australian and New Zealand travel bans but that was not its only cause.  

There are other things I do not like as this blog has shown over the past four years. But Bainimarama will not give up power. He'll be there, central stage or in the wings, making sure the incoming government does not undo what his government has done.

Meanwhile, I'll keep on criticising and making suggestions. Dicky Bird tells me the PM only pretends not to read my blog.