Letters from readers

US regarded with suspicion

REGARDING APRIL'S EDITORIAL (U.S. REGARDED With Suspicion on page 7), it is important to note that human rights standards incorporated into our annual human rights reports are based on the principles laid down in the internationally-accepted Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and not on an arbitrary standard set forth by the United States, or any other country.

Publishing these human rights reports clearly leaves my government open to criticism of its own human rights record. I believe this is entirely appropriate as it adds to the atmosphere of openness and transparency in discussing global human rights.

In fact, when the 2004 Human Rights Reports were released in Washington in February, the State Department clearly acknowledged deficiencies in our own human rights record.

What is important about the United States in this regard is that our people have the advantage of living in a vibrant democracy with a strong free press, and a fully independent judiciary. As a result, we are confident that human rights abuses, large or small, will become public knowledge and will then be dealt with and corrected.

Your litany of other American sins was also without justification. For example, your reference to the Bush Administration being “gripped...by a variety of forms of fundamentalist religious mania” was puzzling.

President Bush has made frequent reference to his faith as a foundation of his Presidency, to be sure. He has also cited the Religious Freedom Statute, written by Thomas Jefferson and adopted by the state of Virginia in 1786, as a particular source of inspiration: “...We the General Assembly of Virginia do enact that no man shall be compelled to frequent or support any religious worship, place, or ministry, whatsoever...but that all men shall be free to profess and by argument maintain their opinions in matters of religion, and that the same shall in no way diminish, enlarge or affect their civil rights.”

This is hardly the stuff of “fundamentalist religious mania”. In fact, I believe most Pacific islanders would have a very hard time disagreeing with it.

-Ted Seay
First Secretary (Political/Economic)
United States Embassy Suva
FIJI

Mangroves assault

IN THE MARCH ISSUE YOU HAVE AN EDITORIAL piece under the heading “We Say: Mangroves”, which says, “The assault on the Pacific's mangroves has been heaviest probably in Fiji, where some areas were converted successfully to sugar plantation land, but others converted to what became failed aquaculture schemes”.

In contrast to your inference that there has been a heavy conversion rate of Fiji mangroves to fish or prawn farms, to my knowledge there has only been one area of former mangrove land used for aquaculture and that was the government prawn hatchery at Raviravi.

And even this was an experiment with land that had been reclaimed for other purposes, and which proved not very suitable for prawn farming.

In contrast to popular wisdom, reclaimed mangrove land does not provide good conditions for shrimp farming. It is only used for that purpose in South East Asia because it is the only land available for new enterprises.

In the Pacific Islands, by contrast, there has been a conscious attempt to learn from mistakes made elsewhere. If you look at the most highly developed shrimp farming area in this region, New Caledonia, the impact on mangroves has been minimal and far outweighed (as it is across the region) by reclamation for industry, resorts and habitation.

By the way, your editorial didn't mention that mangroves are only found naturally in the western and central parts of the Pacific Islands region, and are absent from eastern Polynesia. Think how additionally vulnerable that must make them. It also didn't mention that Fiji has had a Mangrove Management Plan in place for 20 years, which has been instrumental in guiding development into more sustainable channels. It hasn't preserved every single mangrove, but it has contributed to the relatively happy state of mangroves around much of the Fiji coastline. Not many countries actually have such plans, and the authors of this plan deserve to be congratulated.

-Tim Adams
Secretariat of the Pacific Community
Noumea
NEW CALEDONIA

FMF biscuit ban

I REFER TO TWO ARTICLES WHICH APPEARED on April 2, 2005 in Fiji dailies (Fiji Times and Daily Post) regarding the ban imposed on Flour Mills of Fiji by the Vanuatu Government, and Hari Punja's insistence that Vanuatu be called to order.

I recall the Fiji Prime Minister Laisenia Qarase complaining that the system promoted by the World Trade Organisation (WTO) is flawed if it will leave thousands of workers with no jobs.
The first fact is that Vanuatu is not a member of the WTO. They have actually backed away from being a member of WTO because, in a (coco) nut-shell, Vanuatu companies will have to compete against bigger and more profitable companies (like FMF) that are of the worst kind: Trans-National Corporations (TNC).

Only when it suits these companies do they call on the government to assist. Call did I say? No they insist that the Fiji Government takes up this matter in the “strongest possible terms”.

This system that is being promoted by WTO will lead sovereign states like Fiji to bend over backwards to the power of TNCs. Is it because Mr Punja has invested $20 million to $30 million in this project that the country has to oblige?

For WTO, it is a money-driven society and yes, in this system, Fiji will bend over backwards for the likes of Hari Punja.

In a WTO world, you and I are dollar figures. Even to Mr Punja, we are nothing but the cents and dollars he collects. So to end with a few affirmations: Yes Sir, Mr Qarase, the WTO system is flawed. We are shooting ourselves in the foot by complying with WTO regulations.

Not only are we shooting ourselves in the foot as a result of the likes of Mr Punja, we are also putting our ni-Vanuatu brothers and sisters under the axe because they banned our biscuits.
Mr Punja will survive without the $2 million because FMF biscuits are everywhere in the world.

I applaud the strong stance of the Vanuatu government in not complying with WTO requirements, contrary to some of our other Pacific islands countries. Fiji should learn from our wantoks on how “NOT” to fall into the bandwagon!

So much for the dreams of the Pacific Plan. Someone at the Pacific Islands Forum Secretariat should send Mr Punja a copy for his perusal.

-Feiloakitau Kaho Tevi
Suva
FIJI