Updated
As the leaders of Fiji, Papua New Guinea, Solomon Islands and Vanuatu gather for their Melanesian Spearhead Group summit in Suva, Australia is playing down suggestions that by acting as host, the interim Fijian government is being legitimised in any way, The meeting has taken on greater importance than usual with Indonesia, East Timor and Luxembourg all attending as observers. But Australia’s Parliamentary Secretary for Pacific Island Affairs says international attitudes to Fiji’s military regime won’t change, however much gloss its leaders attempt to put on it.
Presenter:Richard Ewart
Speaker: Richard Marles, Australia’s Parliamentary Secretary for Pacific Island Affairs
- Listen:
- Windows Media
MARLES: It certainly doesn’t legitimatise the Fijian regime in the eyes of Australia, or indeed I think the region, and the important point to make here is that if you look at all the participating countries in the Melanesian Spearhead Group, with the exception of Fiji of course, they have all made very strong statements about the need for Fiji to return to democracy at the earliest opportunity, to see a restoration of human rights in Fiji and a return to the rule of law and those countries have been very strong both in their contribution to the position that the Pacific Islands Forum has taken, but also, for example, in relation to PNG the work that we did with PNG in the Ministerial Contact Group at Port Vila a month or so ago. So we’ve got no concerns about that. I would say that I think the Melanesian Spearhead Group has a very important role to play in relation to Fiji and we welcome the roles they have to play in relation to Fiji. Melanesian solidarity is clearly a key issue, but I think it’s important to remember that when Fiji has in place public emergency regulations, which stifle the freedom of speech, it’s Melanesians whose freedom of speech is being stifled. When there are abuses of human rights in Fiji, it is Melanesians who are suffering the abuse of human rights and I think Melanesian solidarity, it needs to be seen in that context, and I’m sure it will be and I know in my discussions with all, in fact, governments of countries that are participating in the MSG with the exception of Fiji. The fact that there is a strong concern and anxiety about where Fiji is at and about the need for Fiji to return to democracy at the earliest opportunity.
EWART: What do you make of the presence of Indonesia as an observer at the summit? Can that muddy the waters in some way?
MARLES: It’s for the MSG to sort out its own arrangements. Obviously they are having Indonesia there, because Indonesia does have a significant Melanesian population and we understand that, so that makes sense in our eyes. There’s a logic to that, but ultimately, that’s a matter for the MSG and no, I don’t think it really muddies the waters in the context of issues around Fiji.
EWART: Is Australia’s policy generally though one of maintaining if you like Fiji’s isolation, because there’s new research just been published in the last day or so by the Pacific Policy Institute. They’ve been talking to people around the region from the four Melanesian countries and all be it it’s a relatively small sample of around 400 people, but there seems to be an overwhelming sense that they would like to see Fiji engaged more and that may be that is the way to try and resolve the problems in the long term?
MARLES: Well, our policy is one of seeking Fiji to return to democracy at the earliest opportunity. We stand ready to engage with Fiji on the issue of them meaningfully returning to democracy. But the notion of dialogue is a two way street and you can’t have dialogue unless you can see your partner coming in the other direction, and I think that’s the issue, we need to see some meaningful steps on the part of Fiji towards democracy and that’s what we await to see, but we are very keen to engage with Fiji around a meaningful return to democracy.
At the most recent Ministerial Contact Group in Port Vila, there was an invitation for the MCG to visit Fiji. We welcome that invitation and really hope that that can occur, because I think that will be a useful opportunity to see first hand what’s occurring in Fiji. But it’s not an issue of trying to put Fiji in a corner and never talk to them again. The point here is we want to talk to them about a meaningful return to democracy. The problem from our point of view is that we’ve been unable to have that dialogue, because there don’t seem to be the steps being taken in that direction and that’s our concern.
EWART: Separating the issues of sport and politics can often be very difficult. I’m wondering if you can see a crunch looming for Fiji, because as you and most of our listeners will know only too well there are a number of people on the banned travel list who will not be allowed in New Zealand for the World Cup later this year unless things change. I mean could that be an incentive, could that get things moving?
MARLES: Ultimately that is a question which is best asked of the regime in Fiji. The travel restrictions that we have in place will continue until we see some meaningful steps towards a return to democracy in Fiji, whether or not those steps are taken, is of course a matter for Fiji and it’s perfectly open for them to take those steps and that will have an effect on the travel restrictions, but at this point, travel restrictions are in place because we don’t see any steps being taken by Fiji towards a return to democracy.
