Altruism and the imperative of having a peaceful neighbourhood apart, the two countries must also be under growing pressure from business interests—what with Fiji being a major trading partner and a destination that has billions of dollars of investment i


Last month’s meeting of Pacific Islands Forum countries’ foreign ministers in Vanuatu may well prove to be the single most significant turning point in Fiji’s future since the events of December 5.

Pronouncements of the Australian and New Zealand foreign ministers on the outcome of the meeting have clearly signalled a very welcome thawing in the relationships between the two countries and Fiji that had all but frozen stiff after the military regime took over the reins of the government late last year.

The outcome has also given the rest of the Pacific islands countries a better perspective of their own relationships with Fiji in the context of their collective position under the Pacific Islands Forum umbrella, as well as the stand taken by the international community. A proposed joint working group under the aegis of the Forum proposes to engage with Fiji: the first meeting to work out the modalities with the interim administration has already taken place late last month.

As the ministers went in to discuss the report and recommendations of the Eminent Persons Group (EPG) that had earlier visited Fiji and met with a cross section of people, the region waited eagerly for the outcome.
Fiji’s interim administration, for one, had already expressed grave misgivings about the EPG’s ‘attitude’ when the group came to Fiji to look at things first hand.

A Western member of the EPG had ingenuously—if not tactlessly—likened Fiji to Zimbabwe. The interim Prime Minister has gone on record expressing his disappointment on that comment. To the administration, it had seemed the meeting would have been another exercise in browbeating, condemning and chastising it while perhaps using the threat of more sanctions as bargaining chips.

To its relief nothing of the sort happened at the Port Vila meeting, but for token condemnation for the removal of a democratic government. In fact both Australia’s Alexander Downer and New Zealand’s Winston Peters spoke positively of the meeting’s outcomes. The European Union, which had held some of its aid and assistance programmes in abeyance while waiting for the outcomes of the meeting, also expressed satisfaction as did a number of other Western governments.

The two Pacific majors were quite obviously well prepared for the meeting, having exchanged notes and ideas between themselves and planning a joint strategy. But it is hard to believe that a change of heart and approach could have been contemplated in the course of a mere one-day meeting. And the strategy was simple: end the isolationist tack they had been relentlessly following since the events of December 5 and engage meaningfully with Fiji.

They seemed to have realised that continued isolation would cause the regime to withdraw further inward while groping for solutions to the problems it claims it is committed to resolve. The best way forward was to show a positive attitude, acknowledge the reality on the ground and extend a helping hand. Isolation, as history will tell us, has never worked well unlike engagement and dialogue. 

Close on the heels of the roadmap to democracy presented by the interim administration in February in which elections were indicated in 2010, there were indications that elections may in fact take longer than that because electoral boundaries had to be redrawn and the rolls recompiled—daunting tasks for the resource-starved administration.

Australia and New Zealand had continually refused any cooperation even when this was requested by the interim administration in the early weeks after the takeover. The only condition then was a return to democracy.

That uncompromising attitude had left the administration to fend for itself using its own meagre resources and know-how to do what it had set out to do. Working in a vacuum would undoubtedly have led to excuses—perhaps even legitimately—for delaying the promised return to democracy.

The big thaw after Port Vila promises to change all that. Australia and New Zealand both have the wherewithal to assist Fiji financially and technologically in such tasks as redrawing electoral boundaries and recompiling electoral rolls.

There is no reason why with such assistance should take as long as 2010 to hold the next election.

If the two neighbours indeed mean business, this is one area they should chip in to help the interim administration without delay since that is probably the most daunting task ahead of them in their path to restoring democracy.

Both nations have plans for this sort of engagement in all probability. For the two ministers clearly said that there is no reason why Fiji would have to wait until 2010 for the next election.

Fiji on its part has not contested these statements at least publicly. Though it took more than three months for Australia and New Zealand to realise that the politics of isolation and sanction driven arm-twisting would not cut ice with the interim administration, it is better late than never.

Since December 5, all the two countries did was posturing and threatening dire consequences through media channels.

The Port Vila outcome amply demonstrates that policymakers and key politicians of the two countries have finally shown the maturity to acknowledge the ground reality in Fiji.

It shows a very pragmatic realisation that engaging with the interim administration, understanding its agenda and working with it to achieve its stated goals has a far better probability of ushering in a democratically elected government than posturing and grandstanding.

Equally importantly, it is also an acknowledgement of the interim government’s stated intentions—a far cry from the position of complete rejection and a state of denial that was reflected in earlier official statements of the two countries.

There is now a discernible change in Downer’s and Peters’ tone: there is conciliation. As well as hinting that the two countries would work with Fiji to sort out electoral logistics, Downer has gone on record saying that boosting Fiji’s economy would hasten the return to democracy—an early hint of a softening stance.

Altruism and the imperative of having a peaceful neighbourhood apart, the two countries must also be under growing pressure from business interests—what with Fiji being a major trading partner and a destination that has billions of dollars of investment in real estate from both countries.

By acknowledging the reality on the ground and throwing their weight behind the interim administration, Australia, New Zealand and the Forum have made the biggest single move in what can only turn the situation in Fiji for the better.