DESPITE the expanded involvement of a number of different powers in the South Pacific – exemplified by the European Union’s (EU) recently increased aid commitment – observers say that Australia remains the region’s dominant player.
The 38th Pacific Islands Forum (PIF) in the Tongan capital of Nuku’alofa last Oct 16-17, saw the EU pledge US$392 million worth of aid to Pacific island nations over 2008-13, which Sir Michael Somare described as “a massive increase” from previous years.
But while this “massive increase” in aid represents a greater role in the region for the EU, analysts argue that Australia – which has allocated some us$702 million for PNG and other island nations for this financial year alone – is still the main player in the South Pacific.
“Australia is still the dominant military, economic (and) political power in the South Pacific, but certainly its policy in the region is complicated by the very active engagement there (of other powers) and also because Pacific Island countries are seeking to diversify their aid, trade and political links,” Nic Maclellan, a former senior policy adviser on the Pacific for Oxfam International, now working as a freelance journalist and researcher on the region, said.
China, Japan and Taiwan are also heavily engaged in the Pacific, but “none of these countries yet has anything like the involvement of Australia and New Zealand,” Benjamin Reilly, director of the Centre for Democratic Institutions at the Australian National University, said.
He said most of Japan’s aid was linked to commercial interests such as fisheries, while Taiwan is using financial incentives to gain diplomatic recognition.
Of the 24 nations which maintain formal diplomatic ties with Taiwan, six – Kiribati, Nauru, Palau, Solomon Islands, Marshall Islands and Tuvalu – are Pacific island states.
China, which competes with Taiwan for recognition via chequebook diplomacy, sees the South Pacific as part of its “neighbourhood”, argues Reilly. Possibly more important for China, however, are the region’s natural resources.
“China’s increasing involvement with Papua New Guinea, which has massive gas and mineral reserves, can be seen in this context,” Reilly said.
The engagement of these powers and other key players in the Pacific, including the US and multilateral agencies such as the World Bank and the Asian Development Bank, have, according to Maclellan, complicated Australia’s long-term strategic dominance of the region.
“A number of (Pacific island) countries have been willing to diversify their links – trade, aid, military, even – beyond their traditional reliance on Australia, New Zealand, the US and France,” he said.
In addition, Australia and other donors tend to attach substantial conditions to the aid they provide.
The EU’s representative at the PIF, European Commissioner for development and humanitarian aid, Louis Michel, called for a new approach.
Speaking to Australian television’s Dateline programme at the PIF, he said: “The new approach is that we have to change the model of development based, to my opinion, from a very archaic, maybe neo-colonialist approach of donor beneficiary to a pure political relationship.”
While Michel argues that donors should “trust” aid recipients to allocate the funds they receive, Maclellan says the EU is playing hardball regarding trade negotiations.
“In spite of Louis Michel’s fine words, I don’t think we should see the Europeans as acting out of altruism when it comes to this,” Maclellan said, adding that the EU, like others, has strategic interests in the region.
“The EU is running a pretty tough bargain with the Pacific over issues like fisheries, labour mobility and other areas of great concern for the Pacific.”
But the expanding engagement of other players is not the only factor threatening Australia’s position in its “sphere of influence”.
“The other problem with that is that under the Howard government relations between Australia and key Pacific countries have soured,” Maclellan said.
Australia has testy relations with Solomon Islands’ prime minister Manasseh Sogavare, who has been critical of the Australian-led Regional Assistance Mission to the Solomon Islands (Ramsi) for “having more to do with Australian interests in the region than that of Solomon Islands itself”.
In addition, Australia has taken a tough stance on Fiji. It applies sanctions to the government-led by interim prime minister Frank Bainimarama, who came to power in a coup last December.
Also, Australian relations with the government of PNG remain shaky over the Julian Moti affair to the extent that Sir Michael was snubbed by Howard at September’s Apec forum in Sydney.
Despite the challenges facing Australia’s role in the Pacific, Australia is responding, Maclellan said.
He said that a substantial amount of the increase in Australia’s overseas development assistance programme – both the governing coalition and opposition Labor Party have pledged a significant expansion of aid ahead of tomorrow’s federal election – will be allocated to the Pacific.
According to Maclellan, this follows a pattern of renewed Australian involvement in the region since 2000, particularly after coups in both Fiji and the Solomons in that year.
“There was a renewed engagement from the Howard government and that was amplified by concerns in the so-called war on terror,” he said.
Maclellan argued that Australia’s re-engagement in the Pacific has been focused on trade and the “so-called transboundary security threats, so-called security threats about gun-running, money laundering, drugs, and indeed, the perceived threat of terrorism from al-Qaeda”.
However, Australia’s focus on these issues has allowed other powers to expand their involvement in the region. – PNS