‘Both countries (China and Taiwan) have continually flown Pacific islands journalists for training programmes over the past few years (some journalists from Samoa and Tonga are reported to be in China on three to five-year internships). But none of this m


A new episode in the great China-Taiwan sparring over hegemony in the Pacific islands region cast its long, ominous shadow on unlikely turf last month: the region’s independent media.

China loudly voiced concern when Taiwan doled out US$65,000 to the Media Association of the Solomon Islands (MASI) at its request to help it host the Pacific Islands News Association’s (PINA) two-yearly convention and annual general meeting in Honiara in May. Taiwan also announced that it wanted to attend the convention.

Significantly, the Solomon Islands is one of five Pacific islands nations that maintains diplomatic ties with Taiwan. The PINA board quickly clarified that MASI had approached Taiwan for funding without consultations with the board and had acted pretty much on its own. In a media statement it said, “PINA is not and will not be involved in the controversy nor will it allow its May 2007 conference to be hijacked by any particular point of view on the China/Taiwan issue. No government official should expect to receive special treatment at the conference.”

MASI has by no means set a precedent having approached Taiwan for funding. The 2003 convention hosted by the Journalists Association of Western Samoa (JAWS) in Apia was reportedly funded by the Chinese embassy in Samoa. China has also funded a couple of other PINA meets over the years. On its part, MASI has cited these instances in a bid to justify their having approached Taiwan for funding. Also, it sought to smooth ruffled Chinese feathers by thanking both China and Taiwan for their continued interest in the region’s media. “MASI is greatly encouraged by such a strong support demonstrated over the years in a tangible way by both China and Taiwan. It is a pleasing development and one that makes for a strong and vibrant partnership in the years ahead,” it said in a media statement.

It is small wonder that the two see their involvement with media as an important part of their respective strategies in the region. Any regime, no matter of what hue and shade is its political ideology, needs the channels of the media in propagating its ideas and interests in the larger world. For years, both China and Taiwan have been organising fully paid junkets for Pacific islands journalists to visit their considerably advanced media facilities and other infrastructure for those journalists to write home about. And there is nothing special about that. Most countries and businesshouses do the same. At its best it is called Public Relations and at worst, propaganda.

But few organisations—or even countries for that matter—expect to polarise the media along political or ideological lines or to encourage planting slanted stories against their rivals. Not that this is likely to happen here. But, PINA in its statement makes a strong reference to this possibility when it says it will not brook polarisation along either country’s point of view in the cherished spirit of media independence. But that may not be as easy as it sounds. For one, the Pacific islands states are already sharply polarised with five nations recognising Taiwan’s sovereignty and having diplomatic relations with them. More importantly, PINA itself has long had its own deep schisms within its members and even successive boards over the years. Just a few months ago, the May conference was under a cloud when some members of the board wanted to hold the conference at its scheduled date in November against hosts MASI who wanted it in May to coincide with the Silver Jubilee celebrations of one of its most respected media outlets.

After some deliberations a compromise has been arrived at, with the present board set to continue its tenure until November while the meeting would be advanced to May. It has since been reported that the president would not be available for the May meeting because of prior commitment, making this the first ever PINA AGM without a president in attendance.

In such a fractious scenario, it would be commendable if the media were to stand strongly united in support of its own independence and not fall prey to the pulls and pressures of the Asian economic powers. If that is indeed to be the case, the statements released by both PINA and MASI do not clearly reflect that.

In its statement, PINA said, “It came as no surprise that the People’s Republic of China has expressed its concern about the involvement of Taiwan in the May conference,” while distancing itself from MASI’s approach to Taiwan. On its part, MASI sought to defend Taiwan by referring to its better media freedom record in contrast to China’s. According to a PACNEWS report, “MASI said allowing Taiwan’s participation to be suppressed as suggested would be contrary to everything PINA stands for, given Taiwan’s media freedom record.” It also quoted the media freedom monitoring organisation Freedom House’s comments commending Taiwan.While it is understandable that both MASI and PINA would not like to rub either country on the wrong side, it is hard not to see that these extracts from both parties’ statements raise questions about the ability and commitment of the regional media to stand united for its independence and non-polarity. The regional media has much to gain from their association with the two countries in terms of technical know-how and the intricacies of the new media. Both countries have continually flown Pacific islands journalists for training programmes over the past few years (some journalists from Samoa and Tonga are reported to be in China on three to five-year internships).

But none of this must influence the regional media’s resolve to stand tall, independent and non-aligned. The fraternity cannot let itself or its constituents become yet another victim of the geopolitical machinations of extra-regional powers.