Vanuatu’s government has urged the French ambassador in Port Vila to use established diplomatic channels rather than social media to communicate his concerns about state-to-state relations.

It is the latest development in a diplomatic spat that emerged this week when New Caledonia’s territorial government took umbrage at Vanuatu for hosting the leadership of the pro-independence Kanak and Socialist National Liberation Front (FLNKS) group as part of a trade forum earlier this week in Port Vila.

The ambassador, Jean-Baptiste Jeangène Vilmer, has made multiple Facebook posts in the past few days explaining his concerns. But he also found time to hit out at Vanuatu’s main daily newspaper Daily Post over its reporting of the dispute between the Melanesian country and France over the Matthew and Hunter (Umaenupne and Umaeneag/Leka) islets.

• READ MORE: New Caledonia suspends trade cooperation with Vanuatu in row over FLNKS meeting
• Other Kanaky New Caledonia reports

In a statement, Vanuatu’s government noted “with unreserved interest”, the ambassador’s “extraordinary decision” to go public through social media.

Vanuatu hosted a series of talks under the theme “VOICE 2030” (Vanuatu Opportunities for Investment and Caledonian Enterprises) dedicated to exploring the strengthening of trade relations with the neighbouring French Pacific territory of New Caledonia.

The FLNKS delegation attending was led by its president Christian Téin — who until recently was held in pre-trial custody in France on charges relating to independence unrest in New Caledonia in 2024.

The delegation also included government minister, Mickaël Forrest, who holds the Youth and Sports portfolio, but is not in charge of trade.

New Caledonia’s government issued a statement on Tuesday, May 5 — before the Ambassador’s comments on social media — stating that the delegation in Port Vila could not be regarded as an official delegation of the government and that those attending were not acting in any official governmental capacity.

That same day, Christopher Gygès, the member of New Caledonia’s government who is responsible for trade, announced that he was suspending work relating to the proposed trade cooperation agreement currently under negotiation between New Caledonia and Vanuatu.

The ambassador then made a series of posts on Facebook attempting to explain the crux of the problem from the French viewpoint.

“It was the president of the FLNKS — an opposition political party with no jurisdiction in this matter — who was presented as head of the delegation and officially welcomed at the airport by the head of protocol at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the chief-of-staff to the Minister of Trade,” Vilmer said.

In another post he explained he had met with Vanuatu’s Foreign Minister Marc Ati to give him a better understanding of France’s position “so that it is properly understood”.

‘Extremely unfortunate’
However, Vanuatu’s government said the delegation from New Caledonia “participated with the full approval of the Government of New Caledonia to engage with the Government of Vanuatu on opportunities relating to trade, investment, and broader economic cooperation”.

“It is therefore extremely unfortunate that the Ambassador’s posts on social media have unnecessarily provoked public misunderstanding and divided national opinions on the actual state of play.”

In its statement, the government of Prime Minister Jotham Napat also explained that the FLNKS’ attendance was part of Vanuatu’s “longstanding engagement with stakeholders involved in the New Caledonia decolonization process”, consistent with established foreign policy principles as well as the deep links between ni-Vanuatu and the indigenous Kanak people of New Caledonia.

The government said this did not diminish the importance Vanuatu placed on its “longstanding and constructive relationship” with France.

While Vilmer has insisted he was attempting “constructive dialogue”, his social media posts have been anything but that in the eyes of Vanuatu’s government.

Matthew and Hunter
The relations between the ambassador and Vanuatu further deteriorated today with a Facebook post indicating that the Vanuatu Daily Post had quoted him out of context in a recent article on the Kanak position regarding Matthew and Hunter.

Vilmer’s post noted that he had not made any “press statement” about this issue, as claimed in the article.

In a subsequent Daily Post piece today, encompassing the ambassador’s claim, Vilmer is further quoted as suggesting changes of leadership in Vanuatu’s government in recent years coincided with a stalling of negotiations on the disputed islets, suggesting it was not a priority for Vanuatu.

This drew a stern rebuke from former prime minister, Charlot Salwai, who is the leader of the Reunification of Movements for Change party, one of the parties in Vanuatu’s coalition government.

Salwai described Vilmer’s remark as misleading, and said Vanuatu always discussed Matthew and Hunter at every bilateral meeting with France or New Caledonia.

The next meeting between French and Vanuatu officials in which the dispute would be discussed is expected in the next couple of months.

Meanwhile, the disagreements this week have not prevented the broader economic relationship continuing, nor the ambassador continuing to work constructively on other matters with the government in Vila.

Yesterday, Vilmer joined the Deputy Prime Minister, Johnny Koanapo, to inaugurate a new maritime freight service linking Nouméa, Port Vila and Luganville, operated by the Compagnie Maritime des Îles’ vessel Karaka, with a capacity of 1700 tonnes of cargo and 80 containers — the first such maritime freight link in about 15 years.

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

It is the people of the Global South, not governments, who must resist this subversion of the concepts of the “nation’ and of non-alignment.

The Indian government’s position on the US-Israeli war against Iran shows an unbelievable degree of pusillanimity.

India attended the recent meeting of about 50 countries called by the United Kingdom where Iran was strongly criticised for closing the Strait of Hormuz, but not a word was uttered against the US-Israeli aggression on Iran.

• READ MORE: Iran war’s big winners: Wall Street, weapons firms, AI and green energy
• ‘Vengeance for all’: How Iran’s Lego videos won narrative war against Trump
• Iran hasn’t survived decades of hostile sanctions, assassinations and sabotage by accident – it’s by strategy
• Other US-Israel war on Iran reports

Likewise, India was one of the sponsors of a resolution at the UN General Assembly which criticised Iran for attacking other countries in the Gulf (though Iran was attacking only the American military bases located in those countries). Yet again, not a word was uttered in that resolution condemning the US-Israeli aggression on Iran.

It is also noteworthy that India took several days before expressing any grief over the assassination Iran’s supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, and several weeks before expressing any shock over the brutal killing of 175 innocent schoolgirls in Minab.

Such pusillanimity, however, is not confined to India: as many as 135 countries were co-sponsors of the dishonest and duplicitous UNGA resolution mentioned above, afraid that they would otherwise offend the Americans.

In fact, apart from a handful of countries in the entire world, none has had the gumption to condemn unambiguously the blatantly illegal and immoral war unleashed by the US-Israeli combine against Iran.

Extreme concern
This is a matter for extreme concern, for the attack on Iran abrogates the concept of sovereignty of nations that had been the core concept in the struggle for decolonisation and had underlain the entire post-colonial order. It destroys, in other words, the very rationale for decolonisation.

This pusillanimity on the part of Third World countries is also a matter of great puzzlement. After all, these are countries that have had long and arduous anti-colonial struggles to achieve the status of independent and sovereign states; how can they remain silent when this very sovereignty is being violated in the case of a fellow Third World state by the armed might of US imperialism?

The answer to this question, no doubt complex, must nonetheless incorporate recognition of at least two fractures that neoliberalism has introduced into our world. One is the fracturing of the concept of the “nation” whose coming into being had been accomplished by the anti-colonial struggle.

This concept of the “nation” had differed fundamentally from the European concept that had developed in the wake of the Westphalian Peace Treaties in at least three ways: first, it was inclusive and did not identify any “enemy within”; second, unlike European nationalism it shunned any imperial ambitions of its own, in the sense of having designs over the resources of distant lands; and third, it did not apotheosise the nation as standing above the people whose “duty” supposedly was to serve it.

The coming into being of this inclusive concept of the “nation” was in turn a reflection of the fact that the anti-colonial struggle was a multi-class struggle; and the dirigiste economic regime that was erected after independence, though it promoted capitalist development, also sought to put curbs on rampant capitalism in the name of achieving “national” development.

This was in the interests of preserving its multi-class support base, which even the monopoly capitalists were not averse to at that time, since they had wanted a trajectory of development where the state exercised relative autonomy vis-a-vis imperialism. The existence of a large public sector was a part of this trajectory.

Further, the policy of non-alignment pursued by these dirigiste regimes had complemented this quest for development in relative autonomy from imperialism. Michal Kalecki, the Polish Marxist economist, had erred in calling such regimes “intermediate regimes” and suggesting that the middle classes held decisive power in such regimes; but he had been right in identifying state capitalism (public sector) and non-alignment as the two most distinctive features of these regimes.

Monopoly bourgeoisie
With globalisation of capital, however, things changed. The domestic monopoly bourgeoisie integrated itself with globalised capital and abandoned its agenda of pursuing a development trajectory that was relatively autonomous of the metropolis.

Sections of the upper professional and bureaucratic segments of society, keen to send their children to study and settle down in the metropolis, joined in as supporters of the neoliberal regime that emerged under the aegis of this globalised capital.

The landed rich too sought their fortunes within this new neoliberal order, which not only promoted rampant unrestrained capitalism, but came down heavily against workers, peasants, agricultural labourers, petty producers and the lower salariat. A schism was effected within the class alliance that had been forged in the course of the anti-colonial struggle.

It was no longer the “nation” against the metropolis that was in focus, but big capital including multinational capital against those social groups which stood in the way of instituting rapid “development” defined exclusively in terms of GDP growth-rates.

The interest of big capital was, by a sleight of hand, identified as “national interest”, and the duty of all classes was to promote it.

This shift in the meaning of the term “nation” meant in effect a fracturing of the “nation” whose coming into being was the desideratum of the anti-colonial struggle. Freedom of the “nation” from imperialist domination, far from being the over-riding objective, was no longer even a desired or a relevant objective for the government within a neoliberal setting.

This is the first instance of “fracturing” referred to above. Because of this fracturing, the criterion on the basis of which the government of a neoliberal regime takes decisions is not whether a particular stance defends national sovereignty, but whether it promotes the material interests of big capital which are considered identical with those of the “nation” in its new meaning.

Deafening silences
Siding with the US-Israeli alliance appears, on balance, more advantageous than standing with Iran, the victim of aggression, from the point of view of the interests of big capital in countries of the Global South. This would go some way to explain the deafening silences, mentioned earlier, in the UNGA and other resolutions.

There is also a second “fracture” brought about by the neoliberal regime. While the neoliberal regime is “sold” to the Global South as ushering in export-led growth that would bring about a higher GDP growth-rate for all countries compared with the earlier dirigiste regime, this claim is completely false.

Since the growth rate of aggregate world demand does not increase when more countries pursue an export-led growth strategy, the neoliberal regime that generalises this strategy among all countries is, in effect, forcing them to engage in Darwinian competition against one another, that is, to pursue a “beggar-thy-neighbour” strategy.

Some countries’ higher growth-rate than before under the export-led growth strategy, it follows, must be at the expense of other countries that now experience lower growth-rate than before.

Countries engaged in a race to outdo one another can scarcely be said to be “co-operating” with one another. The effect of a general pursuit of the neoliberal strategy, therefore, is a de facto abandonment of non-alignment, of a trajectory where countries of the Global South stood with one another to face up to imperialism.

Now, countries of the Global South, each obsessed with achieving higher GDP growth and hence, within the neoliberal paradigm, obsessed with drawing in larger metropolitan investment for this purpose, would rather curry favour with imperialism in order to outdo their neighbours.

This leads to a fracturing of the non-aligned movement, which is the second fracturing we mentioned earlier.

The silence of most countries of the Global South in the face of the US-Israeli aggression on Iran, which may appear puzzling at first sight, is not so puzzling after all.

Subverting both ‘nation’, ‘non-alignment’
Neoliberalism has been at work for quite some time in subverting both the concept of the nation and the concept of non-alignment, abandoning the anti-imperialist core that characterised these concepts, and substituting in their place alternative concepts that prioritise the task of currying favour with imperialism over everything else.

The outcome of this process is what we see today.

Capitalism is invariably hostile to any collective praxis against it, even if this collective praxis takes the form of just trade union action. It believes in atomising economic agents.

Neoliberal capitalism, which represents a return to unrestrained and uncontrolled capitalism once more, brings to the fore this tendency toward the atomisation of economic agents, through a break-up of the class alliance that had participated in the anti-colonial struggle, and through a subversion of the non-aligned movement that had stood for collective opposition by countries of the Global South to imperialist hegemony.

It is for the people of the Global South, not the governments currently promoting the interests of the ruling big bourgeoisie, to extend solidarity to the people of Iran. The struggle of Iran against the US-Israeli alliance is of crucial importance for recovering the sovereignty of the Global South.

Dr Prabhat Patnaik is professor emeritus, Centre for Economic Studies and Planning, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi. The views are personal. This article is republished from Newsclick.

Most government offices in the Marshall Islands began enforcing a new policy this week of closing by 3pm daily as a way to conserve fuel given uncertainties of fuel supply globally.

The move is to save energy and reduce the strain on the Marshalls Energy Company’s diesel fuel resources with both fuel shortages and skyrocketing prices seen on world markets due to the US and Israel’s attacks on Iran and its retaliation by closing the Strait of Hormuz to global shipping.

The 3pm daily closure directive for all non-essential government services was issued by the government’s cabinet on April 10 as an Emergency Electricity Savings Policy.

• READ MORE: Other Pacific impact of War on Iran reports

Aside from the government office closure to reduce energy use, the emergency directive is expected to help the private sector through the mandate of government contracts for air conditioning maintenance and repair.

Government offices are expected to remain open during the lunch hour, allowing workers to operate seven hours daily instead of the usual eight.

A key provision about the shutdown of government offices by 3pm daily is that they are required to shut off air conditioners, lights and any other equipment drawing power. The aim is to reduce energy use by 30 percent over the 90 days of the emergency decree.

The 90-day emergency order mandates the Marshalls Energy Company, the government’s power utility company, to provide detailed monthly electricity bills to every government ministry, state-owned enterprise, and subsidised agency that detail each government offices power consumption compared to the 30-day period immediately prior to the emergency declaration.

Compliance ‘mandatory’
“Compliance with the 90-Day Emergency Electricity Savings Policy is mandatory,” the declaration said.

“The National Energy Authority will monitor the monthly MEC baseline reports to verify progress toward the 30 percent reduction goal.”

Various exemptions are made to the requirement of shutting down by 3pm daily. All essential services are exempted from the closure order, including public schools, the College of the Marshall Islands and Majuro and Ebeye hospitals.

Secretary of Health Francyne Wase-Jacklick said the ministry was specifically exempted so there would not be disruptions.

“So essential services remain ongoing,” she said. “Outpatient, maternal child health, immunization, public health programs, and rehab services will continue as usual, with only internal adjustments to reduce energy use where possible.”

As a consequence of the 3pm daily closure of all non-essential government/agency/state owned enterprise offices, government workers will be working only 30 hours each week. They will, however, continue to be paid for a full week of work.

The 90-day Emergency Electricity Savings Policy would accomplish two things, Finance Minister David Paul said this week

‘Skyrocketing’ fuel costs
It was “an opportunity to cut down on energy usage” (while it) ⁠⁠allows people to maintain their purchasing power,” he said.

Paul said the situation with skyrocketing fuel costs had caused “an affordability crisis — so it will be counterproductive if we are trying to address a problem while creating another one.”

This is why workers will still get their full paychecks, he said.

The new 90-day Emergency Electricity Savings Policy is likely to have a positive impact on the private sector.

The new policy directs the Ministry of Public Works, Infrastructure, and Utilities to implement an “immediate transition” to contracting out air conditioning cleaning and repair services to the private sector.

“Air conditioning constitutes the largest draw on the public power grid,” said the new government emergency policy. Performance and quality of air conditioners, therefore, had a big impact on their cost of power to operate.

Public Works “currently lacks the capacity to service all government units”, the policy said.

Transition maintenance
To resolve this, the ministry is directed to coordinate with the Ministry of Finance to immediately transition maintenance responsibilities and facilitate the contracting of air conditioning cleaning and repair services to the private sector.

Further, the policy directs that “every government ministry, state-owned enterprise, and subsidized agency must allocate funds from their current budgets to hire private contractors for air conditioning repairs, maintenance, and cleaning.

While agencies are directed to transition maintenance to the private sector, they are also encouraged to explore all available avenues — including internal staffing or collaborative partnership with other agencies — to ensure units are serviced.”

A part of the emergency order requires that within the 90-day period of the order, “every agency must compile a complete inventory of their air conditioning units”.

They must also secure a maintenance contract and schedule to ensure filters are cleaned every two-to-four weeks. While physical cleaning of all units may extend beyond this 90-day window, the finalised contracts and schedules must be in place.”

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

The managers of the New Zealand’s $86 billion Super Fund failed to properly address human rights issues when considering whether to exclude companies from its investments, the High Court has found

Justice Simon Mount granted an application by the Palestine Solidarity Network Aotearoa (PSNA) for judicial review of Guardians of New Zealand Superannuation’s policies relating to ethical investment.

In a decision released today, Justice Mount declared parts of the fund’s policy documents, standards and procedures, and its sustainable investment framework were “unreasonable and unlawful”.

• READ MORE: Illegal Israeli settlers kill Palestinian during raid on occupied West Bank village
  
• How Israel’s record budget will finance expanding illegal settlements
• Other PSNA Super Fund reports

The court also ordered the crown entity to pay PSNA’s legal costs.

PSNA co-chair John Minto said the decision was a victory for Palestinian rights, while Guardians of New Zealand Superannuation said it was considering its next move.

The sovereign wealth fund was created in 2001 to help provide for New Zealander’s superannuation costs.

By law, Guardians are required to invest the funds on a prudent commercial basis, manage and administer the fund with best-practice portfolio management, and avoid prejudice to New Zealand’s reputation as “a responsible member of the world community”.

Backbone of case
That last duty formed the backbone of the case taken by PSNA, who have long lobbied the Guardians to divest from companies it claims to be complicit in human rights abuses in the occupied Palestinian territories.

The Guardians excluded development, construction and technology companies involved in settlements in the Occupied Palestinian Territories in 2012.

In 2021, following years of lobbying by PSNA, the Guardians also excluded five Israeli banks from its portfolio on the grounds there was an unacceptable risk the banks were materially contributing to breaches of human rights standards and that engaging with the banks themselves was unlikely to be effective.

PSNA continued to request the exclusion of other investments due to alleged human rights breaches and focused on four companies that featured on a United Nations Human Rights Council database of companies trading with illegal Israeli settlements — Airbnb, Booking.com, Expedia, and Motorola.

Justice Mount said the chief executive of the Guardians replied to the group in mid-2024 noting none of the companies “currently meets the exclusion threshold under our Sustainable Investment Framework”.

In later correspondence, the Guardians’ head of sustainable investment reiterated that stance, which led PSNA to indicate it would seek the judicial review.

In his findings, Justice Mount noted the Guardian’s 2020 policy documents identified several standards and benchmarks that were later removed — including the Principles for Responsible Investment, principles of the UN Global Compact, and a broad reference to “other good practice standards”.

Earlier policy removed
The earlier policy referred to several sets of standards described as “universally recognised by the world community — with signatories including investment managers, investee companies and the peers of Guardians — and unlikely to be superseded”.

The 2020 policy stated its applicable principles were based on the UN Global Compact, in particular the requirements to support and respect human rights and “no complicity in abuses”.

It also set a threshold for excluding government bonds where there was “widespread condemnation or sanctions by the international community and New Zealand has imposed meaningful diplomatic, economic or military sanctions”.

Justice Mount noted the almost 3000 pages of evidence filed for the judicial review allowed him to gain a picture of how the Guardians had used their policy documents in practice.

The judge noted the Guardians’ approach to excluding investments was not entirely coherent and the policies failed to meet the basic requirements of the law when alleged breaches of human rights standards were concerned.

The Guardians had a duty to reformulate its policy documents to be consistent with the Act, he said.

Minto celebrated the court’s ruling.

Fund raking in money
The group was confident the Super Fund would divest from Airbnb, Booking.com, Expedia and Motorola once it had rewritten its policies to comply with the law, he said.

The High Court judgment showed the Super Fund had invested $67 million in the four companies.

Minto said the fund was raking in money from appalling breaches of international law by Israel in the Occupied Palestinian Territories of Gaza, the West Bank and East Jerusalem.

The country’s leading sovereign wealth fund should be setting the benchmark for all New Zealand investment funds, not deriving money from war crimes and massive human rights abuses, he said.

The lack of a clear grounds to exclude companies from investment because of human rights abuses were particularly problematic, Minto said.

“This is beyond outrageous. Our largest sovereign wealth fund, owned by the government on behalf of the people of New Zealand, has no specific references to human rights standards in its investment exclusions policy.”

The case had revealed the exclusions policy was weakened and direct references to human rights standards were removed the year after the fund divested from five Israeli banks, Minto said.

Replaced with vague policy
“The Super Fund replaced a principled policy with an entirely vague and subjective assessment of companies which meant they could resist pressure from human rights groups such as PSNA.

“The fund was entirely making up legal sounding excuses as it went. It meant they could now keep on their books other companies which abuse the human rights of Palestinians,” he said.

“The Super Fund owes us all an apology and in particular an apology to Palestinians here and in Palestine, whose suffering is helping pay the price of the fund’s increasing wealth.”

Guardians of New Zealand Superannuation chief executive Jo Townsend said the crown entity was still considering its response to the decision.

“We recognise that we are investing on behalf of all New Zealanders, and that gives people a legitimate interest in how we manage the fund,” she said.

“We will thoroughly evaluate today’s decision and determine how best to respond to it,” she said.

The UN Human Rights Council database featuring the four companies is from a list of 97 companies involved with illegal Israeli settlements.

The database came about following a 2016 UN Security Council resolution, co-sponsored by New Zealand, that led to diplomatic rupture between the two countries and Israel recalling its ambassador.

Israeli media reported at the time that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu warned Foreign Affairs Minister Murray McCully proceeding with the resolution wold be considered a “declaration of war”.

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

Most of Iranian oil — 96.7 percent — is destined for China. If you note this figure, you will realise that the Americans are really trying to choke off the supply of Iranian oil to China by blockading the Strait of Hormuz.

This is a major part of the American containment strategy against China.

Now that America will most likely lose control of the Strait of Hormuz to Iran, they are shifting their attention to the other most critical chokepoint in the world — the Strait of Malacca.

• READ MORE: Indonesia, US sign ‘major’ defence cooperation agreement
• Why Trump’s naval blockade to ‘strangle’ Iran is a joke
• Pakistani army chief in Tehran amid bid to restart US talks
• Other US-Israel war on Iran reports

About 80 percent of China’s imported oil has to pass through the Strait of Malacca. Vessels come down the Strait, sail past Singapore which is at the southernmost tip of the Strait, before they swing upwards into the South China Sea to go to the Philippines and East Asia, including China.

The two most important countries which border the Malacca Strait are Indonesia and Malaysia, one on either side of the Strait.

A very interesting development took place on Monday in Washington when the Defence Minister of Indonesia Sjafrie Sjamsoeddin signed a cooperation agreement with US War Secretary Pete Hegseth.

Speculation on details
People are speculating about the details of the agreement:

• Will it allow the Americans to base troops in Indonesia and use Indonesian airspace for their air assets?
• Will American naval vessels be allowed to dock at the old Dutch port of Belawan, near Medan, in Northern Sumatra, which is near the opening to the Strait?
• Will the Malacca Strait now become the focal point in this great power struggle between America and China?
• What will Indonesia’s other BRICs partners, principally China and Russia think of Indonesia’s move in signing this agreement with the Americans?

To spice things up, Indonesian President Probowo Subianto was in Moscow a few days ago meeting with President Putin.

Lim Tean is a Singaporean lawyer, politician and commentator. He is the founder of the political party People’s Voice and a co-founder of the political alliance People’s Alliance for Reform.

In the coming years, if Iran survives as a sovereign state and retains control over the Strait of Hormuz, countries like Australia, New Zealand, the UK, South Korea and Japan will be made to pay hundreds of billions of dollars in reparations for the US-Israeli war on Iran.

For this to come to pass, Iran must fight the aggressors to a standstill and ensure they can impose, if necessary, a chokehold on the oil, gas and fertilisers vital to the global economy.

• READ MORE: Protesters condemn Luxon govt for failing to condemn illegal war on Iran
• President Trump, don’t listen to your sycophants on Iran, this isn’t reality TV
• US bombing targets bridges and Pasteur Institute – ‘symbols of Iran’s scientific strength’, says spokeswoman
• Other US-Israel war on Iran reports

So, when next you see an image of spectacular US-Israeli violence, think this: “I might have to pay for that”.

There is no doubt that US-Israel has succeeded in setting fire to Iran, inflicting a heavy death toll, and hundreds of billions of dollars in damages to the civilian infrastructure of the country.

As the Leader of the so-called “Free World” said this week: the aim is to bomb Iran back to the Stone Age.

The US and Israel have dropped well over 15,000 huge bombs and missiles on Iran. According to the United Nations, by March 17 the US and Israel had already destroyed 54,000 civilian homes.

Destruction now far worse
The destruction is now far worse, approaching 100,000 structures. By the end of March hundreds of schools, dozens of universities, much of the civilian infrastructure including major bridges, energy systems and cultural sites had been attacked by the Americans and Israelis. Does anyone still believe they have come to Iran to free the people?

Who should pay for reconstruction? The Iranian government is clear: we should — because this immense crime was, from their perspective, aided and abetted by Australia, the UK, EU, New Zealand and others, who, as with the genocide in Gaza, did nothing meaningful to stop it.

According to Lloyds, Iran has now set up a toll booth at the Strait of Hormuz — referred to by some as “The Aya-Toll-a Booth” — to tax ships that pass through the strait. It may be questionable under the Law of the Sea but this would be to quibble after the US-Israelis blitzkrieg.

The Majlis (Iranian Parliament) is finalising a law declaring Iranian “sovereignty, control and oversight” of the Strait, something it had never asserted before. The bill introduces a system of transit fees for commercial vessels passing the Hormuz Strait, effectively imposing a tax of up to $2 million per vessel that wishes to pass.

A large oil tanker has a cargo worth about $200 million so the fee is not excessive. Multiply that by more than 100 ship movements per day under peacetime conditions and Iran could be in receipt of tens of billions of dollars per year.

Given the rogue states who launched this war will never submit to international law or reparations it seems an elegant solution.

Under the system, ships must now provide their International Maritime Organisation (IMO) number, cargo manifest, crew names, ownership details and destination before Iran will issue a safe passage clearance. The law bans vessels from the US, Israel, and their allies, while granting safe transit to China, Russia, India, Pakistan, Iraq, Bangladesh and other friendly nations.

Iran needs to win
For this to fully come to fruition, Iran needs to win.

Professor Robert Pape, a top US expert on warfare, based at the University of Chicago, says Iran will likely emerge from this terrible war as a super-power.  Many analysts, such as Colonel Daniel Davis, Mark Sleboda, Annelle Sheline, and Professor John Mearsheimer, now see an Iranian victory as likely.

Professor Pape himself has run simulations of US-Iran wars for decades and is clear: “Trump made a huge mistake.”

Professor Pape, who was one of the prime architects of the US Air Force’s war curriculum, told journalist Mahmoud Ansari that Trump and others are currently confusing tactical success with strategic outcomes. For the moment, the Americans and Israelis are enjoying success after success: killing leaders and school girls, blowing stuff up and so on.

“That can be mesmerising, and cause this illusion of precision control but it is not the same thing as a strategic victory. Iran before the war controlled 4 percent of the world’s oil. Twenty-six days later they control 20 percent of the world’s oil.”

As Trita Parsi of the Quincy Institute pointed out this week, Denmark charged transit fees for 400 years for vessels to pass through the Øresund Strait into and out of the Baltic. Panama, Egypt and Turkey all charge transit fees.

The countries who played the starring supporting roles in the genocide in Gaza — Germany, UK, Australia — and supported Israel and America in their rampages across the Middle East for decades may — if they are lucky — get access to the Gulf again but may have to pay a heavy price for their role in the destruction of the lives of tens of millions of people.

NZ awaits eventual negotiations
The energy security of a minor henchman like New Zealand will have to await eventual negotiations between its major suppliers — South Korea and Singapore — and Iran.

Bloodied but as yet unbowed, Iran knows it can — and must — rise like the Phoenix from the ashes.

In the Iranian version of the Phoenix tradition — reaching back thousands of years —  the Phoenix (Simurgh in Farsi) must face death and destruction before being reborn and revitalised.

The Simurgh is so ancient it possesses the wisdom of the ages: in other words it knows how to survive calamities that would consume others. This is called civilisational resilience and it is baked into the DNA of the Iranian people.

Eugene Doyle is a writer based in Wellington, New Zealand. He has written extensively on the Middle East, as well as peace and security issues in the Asia Pacific region, and is a contributor to Asia Pacific Report. This article was first published on his Solidarity blog.

Democrats in Congress have sounded the alarm over US President Donald Trump pledging to commit more war crimes in Iran after he traded threats to energy infrastructure with the Iranian government, with the Republican declaring Saturday that he would take out the country’s power plants unless it reopened the Strait of Hormuz to all traffic.

Just a day after Trump claimed that “we are getting very close to meeting our objectives as we consider winding down our great Military efforts in the Middle East with respect to the Terrorist Regime of Iran,” in a post that remains pinned to the top of his Truth Social profile, the president took to the platform with a clear threat on Saturday night.

“If Iran doesn’t FULLY OPEN, WITHOUT THREAT, the Strait of Hormuz, within 48 HOURS from this exact point in time, the United States of America will hit and obliterate their various POWER PLANTS, STARTING WITH THE BIGGEST ONE FIRST!” Trump said.

• READ MORE: Iran vows to ‘completely close’ Hormuz Strait if US attacks power plants
• No bigger hypocrisy in the world than Israel complaining about Iran’s ‘lawbreaking’
• Other US-Israeli war on Iran reports

Trump’s post came after Ali Mousavi, the Iranian representative to the International Maritime Organisation, told the Chinese news agency Xinhua on Friday that the Strait of Hormuz — the waterway between the Persian Gulf and the Gulf of Oman that is a key shipping route, including for fossil fuels — remains open to all vessels not linked to “Iran’s enemies.”

It also followed the Israeli military — which is bombing Iran alongside the United States — suggesting that the US was responsible for a Saturday attack on Iran’s uranium enrichment complex in Natanz.

According to The Associated Press, with his new threat, Trump “may have meant the Bushehr nuclear power plant, Iran’s biggest, which was already hit last week, or Damavand, a natural gas plant near Tehran, Iran’s capital.”

Responding to Trump’s Saturday post, US Representative Don Beyer (D-Va.) said: “It’s important not to shy away from candidly discussing the president’s increasingly erratic behaviour. His worsening instability is a clear and growing threat, not only to the American people but to the world.”

Trump has no plan to reopen the Strait of Hormuz, so he is threatening to attack Iran’s civil power plants. This would be an attack on civilians. This is what Putin is doing in Ukraine. This would be a war crime. End this war in Iran.

— Ed Markey (@SenMarkey) March 22, 2026

Hell-bent on destruction
Representative Yassamin Ansari (D-Ariz.) was similarly critical  over Trump’s pledge “From ‘help is on the way’ for Iranian protestors to threatening war crimes against an entire population. The United States is being run by a maniacal tyrant hell-bent on destroying this country and the world along with it.”

Other critics also pointed out that Article 56 of the Geneva Convention states in part that “works or installations containing dangerous forces, namely dams, dykes, and nuclear electrical generating stations, shall not be made the object of attack, even where these objects are military objectives, if such attack may cause the release of dangerous forces and consequent severe losses among the civilian population.”

The AP reported that after that strike on the Natanz complex, “Iranian missiles struck two communities in southern Israel late Saturday, leaving buildings shattered and dozens injured in dual attacks not far from Israel’s main nuclear research center.”

“Israel’s military said it was not able to intercept missiles that hit the southern cities of Dimona and Arad, the largest near the centre in Israel’s sparsely populated Negev desert,” according to the news agency. “It was the first time Iranian missiles penetrated Israel’s air defence systems in the area around the nuclear site.”

Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, Speaker of Iran’s Parliament, said on X on Saturday that “if the Israeli regime is unable to intercept missiles in the heavily protected Dimona area, it is, operationally, a sign of entering a new phase of the battle… Israel’s skies are defenseless.”

After Trump’s threat, the Speaker added on Sunday that “immediately after the power plants and infrastructure in our country are targeted, the critical infrastructure, energy infrastructure, and oil facilities throughout the region will be considered legitimate targets and will be irreversibly destroyed, and the price of oil will remain high for a long time.”

Jessica Corbett is a senior editor and staff writer for Common Dreams. This article is republished under Creative Commons.

The Marshall Islands Parliament this week endorsed legislation reducing income taxes for all working people in the country in a move to mitigate to some degree the soaring costs of living from the war that the US and Israel launched against Iran last month.

Bill 103, introduced by Finance Minister David Paul earlier this week, exempted the first US$8320 in a person’s salary from withholding tax. This means that for people earning this amount or more, they will have over US$600 more net income on an annual basis.

“This is a monumental day for the people of the Marshall Islands,” Paul told the Marshall Islands Journal in an interview after the legislation was passed.

• READ MORE: Other US-Israeli war on Iran impacts on the Pacific

He said the new law “will provide some relief to people” in view of the escalating costs of fuel that are affecting every part of life in the Marshall Islands.

The bill was introduced on the last day of parliament meetings for the current session, and passed on the same day in order to trigger a fast response to skyrocketing costs.

The new law will be implemented in April, reducing the income tax burden on working people.

Paul said this would result in about US$3.1 million less in tax revenue to the government over the next six months of the current fiscal year.

But he added “it isn’t like we are losing this money.”

“It is going into people’s pockets, and they will spend it so it will circulate in the local economy.”

Immediate increase
He said the intention was to provide an immediate increase in the amount of money people have to help with the skyrocketing costs from the war on Iran.

This combined with the release of the second quarter universal basic income payments beginning 24 March to all 37,000 citizens in the country, and the rollout of the Extraordinary Needs Distribution programme with food, cash power subsidies and other cost of living help for 11 atolls and islands is coming at a timely moment.

Both the universal basic income programme and the Extraordinary Needs Distribution programme are funded by the Compact of Free Association Trust Fund capitalised by the United States.

Already, gas prices at the pump have jumped about 14 percent in just two weeks and diesel at Mobil Oil-supplied stations is up 25 percent since the war on Iran started on  February 28.

The cascading impact of these global events can be seen everywhere. The Marshalls Energy Company (MEC), the government’s utility company, announced that it expected to raise electricity rates next month.

“Before the Iran War, MEC was spending approximately $3 million per shipment per month on diesel fuel,” the utility said in a media release on Wednesday.

“Based on current market conditions, that cost is now expected to reach close to $7 million per shipment.”

Global fuel price
MEC said it expected it would need to respond to this global fuel price rise by raising tariffs by as much as 23 percent in April.

The utility company raised its rates in early February and residential rates are now 43.2 cents per kilowatt hour (kWh).

A 23 percent increase is 10 cents, meaning home power could jump to 53 cents per kWh next month. Business power costs could rise from the current 51.6 cents per kWh to over 63 cents a kwh in April.

All of this — the higher cost of shipping goods from the US, Australia, New Zealand and Asia, airfares, fuel for drivers, and power — adds up to a fast-rising costs of living for people in the urban centres in the Marshall Islands.

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

AMY GOODMAN: This is Democracy Now! I’m Amy Goodman, with Nermeen Shaikh.

NERMEEN SHAIKH: Global oil and natural gas prices are soaring after Israel bombed a massive natural gas reserve in Iran, the largest in the world. Iran retaliated by twice attacking the world’s largest liquid natural gas production facility, located in Qatar.

Iran also attacked key energy infrastructure in Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and the United Arab Emirates. At one point, the price of oil reached US$118 a barrel, a 60 percent jump since the US and Israel launched their war on Iran.

• READ MORE: US-Israel attack Iran’s Natanz nuclear site as Diego Garcia base targeted
• Israel – the parasite state sabotaging peace in the Middle East
• Trump says no ceasefire as Khamenei tells of ‘dizzying blow’ to US, Israel
• Other US-Israeli war on Iran reports

In a post online, Trump threatened to blow up the entire South Pars gas field if Iran continued to target the Qatari facility. Trump also claimed the US, “knew nothing” about the Israeli attack on the South Pars gas field, but The Wall Street Journal reports Trump approved the strike to pressure Iran to open up the critical Strait of Hormuz.

AMY GOODMAN: About 20 percent of the world’s oil exports flows through the Strait of Hormuz. President Trump has asked other countries to send warships to help force open the strait, but many nations are rejecting the request.

We’re joined now by Laleh Khalili, professor of Gulf studies at University of Exeter and the author of several books, including her latest, Extractive Capitalism: How Commodities and Cronyism Drive the Global Economy. She also wrote Sinews of War and Trade: Shipping and Capitalism in the Arabian Peninsula.

Professor Khalili, thanks so much for being with us. Can you start off by talking about the state of the Strait of Hormuz right now, its closure; President Trump, according to Reuters, perhaps sending in thousands of troops, what exactly this means; and the Israeli bombing of the South Pars gas field, the largest in the world?

President Trump said, in a rare rebuke, the US didn’t know. Most people are saying that is highly unlikely, that is probably untrue.

The end of the petrodollar?             Video: Democracy Now!

Transcript:

LALEH KHALILI: So, the Strait of Hormuz is one of the most important choke points for oil — a choke point being an area during which, if it’s closed down, you end up getting a major disruption in the flow of global trade.

So, the Strait of Hormuz is one. The Suez Canal is another one. The Panama Canal is another one.

And there are a number of these different choke points all around the world. Now, what’s specific about Hormuz and what’s distinctive about it is that it is the choke point where the quantity of oil that goes through is higher than any other commodity that actually flows across the strait.

As you just mentioned, about 30 percent of the global oil flows through that. And part of the reason for that is, of course, that the world’s biggest oil producers — some of the biggest oil producers are all sitting around the Persian/Arabian Gulf, so Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia and Qatar, Abu Dhabi, which all are huge producers of oil in the first place, and then natural gas in the case of Qatar and Iran in second place.

Now, what has been fascinating is that anybody who has one of these apps that you can put on your phone, like MarineTraffic or VesselFinder, you can actually take a look at the flow of traffic, the flow of vessel traffic, flow of ship traffic, through these different seas in the world.

And if you zoom in on the Strait of Hormuz, what you’ll find is that instead of seeing actually a steady traffic of little usually pink or green arrows going through, which indicate tankers, what you end up seeing are major clusters of ships that are bunched up very near ports where oil is produced and usually put on ships.

What that indicates is that, basically, for a number of different reasons — and I’m going to go into that in a minute — the flow of ships, the flow of ship traffic, has basically come to a halt.

Now, the reasons behind this are multifold. Of course, there is, number one, that Iran is attacking a number of the ships that are going through, and the way that it’s attacking them is through the use of very cheap either drones or sea mines, and that means that it’s basically almost impossible to deal with this particular threat, because the drones are produced so extensively in terms of number and they’re so inexpensive that they can basically be replenished even if they are destroyed.

Also being smaller, they’re much harder to target, etc. So, there has been a number of drone attacks against ships carrying oil through the channel, and so, of course, that scares a lot of carriers, a lot of tankers.

The second reason, which I actually think is perhaps even more significant, in part because it is actually not something that either the US or Iran can control, is that the moment something like this happens, the moment that there is a threat against ships, what you end up having is that insurance brokers, primarily situated in London, but there are, of course, some also in the US, China and in Europe, but really the centre for provision of maritime insurance is London, at Lloyd’s, and the ship brokers end up putting a specific war risk premium on ships.

And that means that going from something like 1 percent of the cost of the hull, meaning the ship’s body, or the cargo, meaning what it’s carrying, goes to something like 5 percent, or it goes from one fraction of 1 percent to, say, 5 percent. So that means that suddenly, instead of paying in the hundreds of thousands for insurance for a super tanker, what you’re looking at is millions in insurance, which, of course, increases the cost of the oil that is traveling. So, that’s the second reason.

The third reason is something that the Houthis noticed when they were blockading the Red Sea in support of the Palestinians when Israel was committing genocide against Palestinians. And that is that sometimes the threat alone suffices in getting the ships to stop going through or, indeed, to make declarations that allows for them a degree of protection.

So, the Houthis, when they had blockaded the sea, had asked that any ships that claimed that they were not touching Israel, meaning they were not delivering to or picking up from Israel, could be allowed to go through the canal.

And so, it happened that this automatic identification system that a lot of ships — well, all ships carry — it’s called the AIS system, and the AIS system indicates what ship is in the vicinity of the system, what it’s carrying and what flag it has, meaning which authorities it responds to.

So, now what we’re seeing is that apparently Iran has mentioned that any ship, for example, that is going to China will be let through, or any ship that is not coming from one of these allied states to the US will be allowed through. Of course, there is a lot of variation in what kind of thing they have requested or what is being reported, so it’s a lot harder to see what exactly the AIS systems are being on these ships.

As I said, we are mostly seeing them clustering and waiting in these locations, one of the main ones being the Port of Fujairah, which is actually not in the Persian Gulf. It is in the Gulf of Oman.

And oil from Abu Dhabi, which is on the Persian Gulf side, is shipped to Fujaira through a pipeline. So we’re seeing a cluster of ships near Fujaira.

Iran, of course, also attacked Fujaira port. And then we’re seeing a cluster of ships near Ras Laffan, which is the main gas production and gas lifting port in Qatar. The third is, of course, around the oil fields of Saudi Arabia, a little bit further up the Persian Gulf. And so, these clusters of ships are waiting there and hoping to be able to at some point pick up oil to be carried out.

But we’re not seeing much of that flow anywhere at all.

NERMEEN SHAIKH: Professor Khalili, you mentioned that there are — they are looking for, the Iranians, to see which vessels in the Strait of Hormuz — to what countries they’re affiliated, looking at their flags. Chinese vessels have reportedly been permitted to pass through the strait. China imports about 40 percent of its oil from the Middle East and has been one of the largest buyers of Iranian oil. There are also reports that the Iranians are suggesting they’d consider allowing a small number of oil tankers to pass through the strait if the oil cargo is traded in Chinese yuan rather than —

LALEH KHALILI: Yes.

NERMEEN SHAIKH: — US dollars. If you could comment on that?

LALEH KHALILI: This is really fascinating, because, of course, we know that the fundamental basis of the US imperial order since the end of the Second World War has been, on the one hand, petroleum and, on the other hand, the US dollar. The globe’s production and finance worlds are dependent on the petroleum that the US has guaranteed the flow of since the end of the Second World War, and which, until the nationalisation of oil in the 1970s and 1980s, basically controlled something like 60 percent of the world’s oil reserves.

After nationalisation, that percentage dropped dramatically, but the US dollar continues to be, and the financial channels that the US has crafted, continue to be a very significant bolster for the empire.

So, the fact that Iran is actually looking for alternatives to the dollar in order to challenge the petrodollar regime, which is, you know, as I said, one of the fundamentals of the US empire, is a really interesting and quite clever indication of how the Iranians are hoping to influence the crafting of a world post this war, or a new world order post this war, where there’s a multipolar financial system, where, for example, the dollar is no longer a single currency that rules the world and the US is the only channel that controls — or, the only power that controls financial channels, because, of course, the US has used this inordinate power to strong-arm various states, to institute sanctions, to make it difficult for its enemies, for example, to purchase oil.

And, of course, it has used it to coerce a lot of countries, as we see, for example, in the case of Cuba or Iran, or indeed Russia, to do its bidding. So, the fact that Iran is calling for petroyuans to become an alternative to petrodollars is actually quite significant also in indicating that the Iranians are well aware of how extensively the US has used its coercive sanction capabilities, through its control of the financial channels and through its mastery of the petrodollar, and are trying to erode that power.

NERMEEN SHAIKH: Professor Khalili, you know, the US is now the world’s largest oil producer, but because oil is a globally priced commodity, the price goes up in the US if the world market price goes up. But —

LALEH KHALILI: That’s right.

NERMEEN SHAIKH: — how important do you think this might be in Trump’s calculation? Because another consideration, another aspect of this, may be that as oil supplies diminish from the Middle East, the US could benefit, because it is the world’s largest oil producer, and the price of its oil will go up, and the demand for its oil.

LALEH KHALILI: Absolutely. What a fantastic question, because, in fact, we have seen that when the Russian invasion of Ukraine began and the Nord Stream gas, natural gas, pipelines to Europe were sabotaged, we now — there are now indications that this may have been done at the behest of the US.and its Ukrainian allies. But nevertheless, when that sabotage happened, it actually translated into massive gains for US natural gas production.

The thing is that there are a number of reasons why oil is not — why the US cannot become the sole oil producer for the whole of the world. One is the question of proximity, for example. The second is the question of capacity that the US has in order to actually replace, for example, the oil that is produced by Saudi Arabia or by Iran or, indeed, by Russia.

But the third factor — and I think that this is the one that I think we should look out for — is that in the last 10 or 15 years, China has actually begun generating an alternative set of fuels, sustainable fuels, and developing technologies, particularly of electric and battery technologies, that will allow for, for example, solar or wind energy to displace fossil fuels.

And the more that the price of oil goes up, which, of course, we’ve seen that happen, as you mentioned earlier — and, in fact, this also translates into major windfalls for US oil companies. This oil prices going up benefits Chevron. It benefits Exxon. It doesn’t benefit the average US citizen at the petrol stations, at the gas stations, but it does benefit the oil companies.

So, it definitely does — that does happen. But the higher the price of oil goes up, the relatively cheaper it becomes to actually have sustainable alternatives, which, of course, that means that it benefits China in a major way, since China is way ahead of the rest of the world in producing these technologies and in producing them cheaply.

The solar panels that are being produced in China are a fraction of the price of solar panels that were being produced something like 15 or 20 years ago. And I think this shift is actually a major long-term concern for the oil companies.

In the short term, they’re taking all the windfall that they can get. But this, again, is — the kind of a postwar order that will likely also have major implications for the kind of energy people are paying to use or people are willing to use, actually.

AMY GOODMAN: We just have 20 seconds. But the effect of the bombing of the South Pars facility, the largest gas facility in the world, what it means for Iran, what it means for the world, and President Trump denying the US had anything to do with, which most do not believe?

LALEH KHALILI: No, absolutely not. There is no way that Israel would have actually done this without coordination with the United States. And, in fact, the channels that deny, for example, that the US coordinated, or report Trump’s denials, are the channels that are often used to feed us the kinds of lies that the administration tells us.

But what is quite significant about South Pars — and I know it’s a very short time left, so I’m going to be very quick about it — is that the South Pars field is actually shared between Iran and Qatar.

The North Dome, which is on the south part of the Persian Gulf, is Qatar’s share of this major field, and Iran’s bit is in the northern part of the Persian Gulf.

And so, the destruction of the infrastructure there will not only have an effect on Iranians’ ability to produce electricity and fuel their various kinds of industries and/or homes, but it will also have an effect on the infrastructures that are used by the Qataris and which the Iranians and Qataris have been using in an extraordinary degree — to an extraordinary degree of coordination since the fields have been used. So, this actually also affects Qatar.

The bombing itself also affects Qatar. And I don’t think that this is a calculation that the rather know-nothing Trump administration has taken into account.

AMY GOODMAN: Laleh Khalili, we want to thank you so much for being with us, professor of Gulf studies at University of Exeter, author of several books, including her latest, Extractive Capitalism: How Commodities and Cronyism Drive the Global Economy. Thanks so much for being there.

Republished from Democracy Now! under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States Licence.

When the Strait of Hormuz closes, you don’t need to be a military analyst to understand what just happened. You only need to understand what the world runs on.

Oil. Gas. Shipping lanes. Insurance rates. Container schedules. Energy prices that decide whether factories hum or go dark, whether households heat or freeze, whether governments fall or survive.

This is why serious analysts have been saying for years that Hormuz is not a “threat” Iran invented for propaganda; it is a structural red line that the US and its allies kept treating like a bluff because they could not imagine a regional actor actually pulling the lever that exposes a vulnerability — dependence.

• READ MORE: Iran vows ‘revenge’ for Larijani, Soleimani; 2 killed in attacks on Israel
• Thousands urge NZ prime minister Luxon to condemn illegal US-Israeli war on Iran
• As Israel keeps bombing Iran, Palestinians face growing violence in West Bank
• Trump scolds allies over Strait of Hormuz operation; UAE closes airspace
• Chris Hedges: The world according to Gaza – it’s only the start
• War on Iran: Australia should put trust in its neighbours not a modern Titanic rogue state
• Other US-Israel War on Iran reports

And this is why what we are watching now is a massive US miscalculation that will be studied later the way the Iraq invasion is studied today, with the same disbelief that decision-makers could be so arrogant, so blind, and so certain that the other side would fold.

Because Washington didn’t only miscalculate Iran’s will. It miscalculated geography, logistics, and blowback. It miscalculated the fact that the US empire in the Middle East is not a fortress; it is a web of exposed arteries: bases scattered across Gulf monarchies, troops housed in predictable locations, air defenses that are expensive and finite, radars and communications nodes that can be degraded, and a regional order that can be shaken with one choke point.

You can see the arrogance in the assumptions. For years, Iran warned that if its survival is threatened — if the US and Israel push the conflict into an existential zone — Hormuz becomes part of the battlefield. Washington heard that and filed it under “Iranian theatrics,” because the American political class is addicted to the idea that their enemies always bluff, while they alone possess the right to act.

But Iran was not bluffing. Iran was describing the rules of an environment where deterrence is the only language that keeps you alive.

Hormuz was always the red line
The Strait of Hormuz is the world economy’s pressure point, and the fact that it remained open for years was not proof of Western strength. It was proof that Iran understood escalation control, because keeping Hormuz open — even while under sanctions, sabotage, assassinations, and constant threats — was Iran’s way of signaling restraint.

The West interpreted that restraint as weakness.

That’s the miscalculation.

Washington assumed Iran would keep absorbing blows, keep taking “limited strikes,” keep responding in contained ways, because Washington has lived for decades inside a fantasy where escalation is something the US controls.

But in a real war environment, you don’t get to decide the boundaries alone. The other side gets a vote. And Iran’s vote is written in the geography of the Gulf.

Iran’s ‘Samson option’
I used the phrase “Samson option” not to be dramatic, but to describe the logic of a state pushed into a corner: if the enemy wants you neutralised, disarmed, and humiliated, you don’t respond only with missiles; you respond with the full spectrum of leverage you possess — military, diplomatic, economic, and psychological.

Iran’s leverage is not limited to striking targets. It includes making the war economically unbearable for everyone who enabled it. It includes turning a regional conflict into a global cost spiral. It includes demonstrating that the “free flow of energy” is not a natural law; it is a contingent privilege that can evaporate when a state is pushed past its red lines.

This is what the West still struggles to internalise. It thinks deterrence is only about bombs and bases. Iran thinks deterrence is about making aggression unaffordable.

And Hormuz is how you make it unaffordable.

The three “solutions” don’t solve anything
Once Hormuz becomes the choke point, you immediately hear the same three proposals recycled through Western media.

First: “military escorts”: The idea that you can escort tankers through the most militarised, most surveilled, most missile-saturated corridor on earth as if this is a piracy problem. But escorts do not remove risk; they merely concentrate it.

They turn commercial shipping into military convoys, and that increases the probability of a clash that escalates further. You can escort 10 ships. Can you escort everything, every day, indefinitely, under constant threat? And at what cost in interceptors, drones, naval assets, and insurance panic?

Second: “ceasefire”: The idea that Washington can call a pause and re-freeze the conflict after crossing lines that Iran considers existential. But a ceasefire is not a magic reset button; it is a negotiation outcome.

And Iran is no longer interested in ceasefires that reproduce the same cycle: war, negotiations, pause, then war again. Iran has learned — painfully — that diplomacy has been weaponised against it.

Third: “capitulation”: The fantasy that Iran will disarm itself and accept a future where it is strategically naked. This is the most delusional solution of all, because it assumes Iranians are incapable of reading the regional record.

Iraq disarmed and was invaded. Libya dismantled its programme and was destroyed. Syria gave up its chemical file and was still ripped apart. In that record, capitulation is not peace. Capitulation is an invitation.

So no, none of the three “solutions” solves the crisis. They only reveal the empire’s problem: it assumed it could impose costs without paying them.

Even The New York Times admits miscalculation
One of the most interesting developments is how even mainstream reporting — carefully framed, carefully sourced — has begun to concede what was obvious from day one: the Trump administration and its advisers miscalculated Iran’s response.

The New York Times, in the sections I cited, points to something the propaganda refuses to admit: Iran is not acting like a decapitated regime. Iran is adapting. It is learning. It is targeting vulnerabilities, not staging symbolic retaliation.

It is degrading key radar and air defence systems, hitting communications infrastructure, and shifting the battlefield away from the tidy “Israel–Iran” framing into a wider map that includes US assets and allies across the Gulf.

That matters because for years the West comforted itself with the idea that the Iranian response would be predictable and containable. The NYT reporting suggests the opposite: Iran is adjusting its tactics as the campaign evolves, hitting systems that matter to US coordination and defence, and doing so without the old “ample warning” pattern that allowed the US to frame everything as controlled.

In other words, Iran is making the environment less manageable for the US, which is exactly what deterrence looks like when you cannot match the empire symmetrically.

The miscalculation wasn’t only military
There is another layer that people avoid saying out loud, but it’s central: the US and Israel did not only miscalculate Iran’s missiles; they miscalculated Iran’s society.

Even Iranians who dislike the Islamic nature of their political system can still connect a basic dot: wherever America and Israel intervene, the country becomes worse.

People don’t need to love their government to recognise a foreign assault on their nation. This is why the fantasy of “decapitation + instant uprising” is so dangerous: it projects Western wishful thinking onto a society that is being attacked and then expects the society to celebrate its attacker.

That is not how national psychology works under bombardment.

‘They want Iran’s energy’ is the quiet part out loud
Now we come to the part that explains the deeper imperial logic behind all this: energy.

I referenced the mindset openly circulating among the empire-adjacent influencer class: the idea that “we need Iran’s energy for AI projects,” that the AI race with China will be decided by securing energy inputs, and that therefore this war is not only Israel’s war, but “our war”.

This is imperial logic in its purest form. It doesn’t even bother to hide behind democracy or human rights. It says: we need your resources for our future, and if you will not give them to us under cooperative terms, we will take them under coercive terms.

And here is the thing these people cannot understand, because their mindset is trapped in a 19th-century colonial reflex: cooperation is possible.

China shows that cooperation is possible. China buys resources, builds infrastructure, creates contracts, offers development pathways, and yes, does it for its own interests, but it does it through exchange, not through looting. The US model, by contrast, is too often: bully, sanction, destabilise, bomb, then pretend it’s about “order”.

So when I say this war has gone “too wrong” for Washington even to benefit from Iranian energy later, I mean something very simple: you do not kill people, destroy families, and then expect business as usual. You don’t kill children and then expect Iranian society to say, “Sure, let’s partner with you.”

This is where imperial arrogance collides with a proud, dignified Iranian society.

How Trump miscalculated                            Video: Syriana Analysis

Iran’s demands are not cosmetic
Now the crucial point: why Iran won’t stop now.

Iran is not continuing this because it “loves war”. It is continuing because the war created leverage, and Iran’s leadership understands that if you stop now, you waste the leverage you paid for in blood and risk.

This is why Iran’s demands are emerging with clarity.

First: deterrence restored. Not just for Iran, but for the wider deterrence ecosystem that includes Hezbollah. Iran wants to punish its enemy to a degree that makes future attacks psychologically and strategically unthinkable.

Second: US bases constrained or removed. Iran is not naïve; it knows it may not expel the US from the region overnight. But it can force a new reality where US installations become purely defensive or are reconfigured in ways that reduce their offensive utility against Iran.

In plain language: if Gulf monarchies host bases that are used to strike Iran, those bases become part of the battlefield, and Iran is signaling it wants to break that model permanently.

This is why the Iranian foreign minister’s tone matters, and why voices like professor Marandi’s matter: the message is no longer “we can negotiate and return to normal.” The message is “normal is what created this war, and we need a new security architecture.”

‘Deterrence or nothing’ framework
This is where Amal Saad’s analysis captures the logic cleanly: deterrence or nothing; total war or total ceasefire.

Her point is that the old conflict-resolution framework doesn’t apply, because Iran is not seeking a temporary suspension of hostilities; it is seeking to alter the bargaining space itself. Tehran rejects the framework in which negotiations are essentially arms control over Iran, and insists instead that the real issue is US-Israeli aggression and the regional order that enables it.

That is why Iran refuses a ceasefire that simply resets the cycle.

And that is why the US miscalculation is so profound: Washington thought it could strike under a cover of “diplomacy,” then return to negotiation as if diplomacy were a neutral channel. Iran now treats that as subterfuge, and it wants to make the weaponisation of diplomacy costly enough that it cannot be repeated.

Why Iran won’t stop now
So we return to the simple truth: Iran won’t stop now because stopping now would mean relinquishing the leverage it has finally acquired — militarily, economically, psychologically — at the very moment when the US and Europe are feeling pain they cannot hide.

Trump was elected on promises of prosperity. Now energy prices surge, markets shake, global supply lines tighten, and allies panic. From Tehran’s point of view, this is the rare moment when the empire is vulnerable enough that Iran can increase its demands instead of being forced to accept humiliating ones.

And when you understand that, you understand why this isn’t ending with a tidy “ceasefire” press release. Iran believes that if it accepts another temporary arrangement, it will simply be attacked again when the West finds a better moment.

So the choice Iran is presenting is brutal but clear: a settlement that restores deterrence and rewires the regional security order, or continued pressure through the one lever that forces the world to pay attention.

Hormuz.

Washington assumed it was a bluff.

Now the world is learning what happens when a red line is real.

Kevork Almassian is a Syrian geopolitical analyst and the founder of Syriana Analysis. This article was first published on his Substack Kevork’s Newsletter and shared via Collective Evolution.

French Polynesia’s President Moetai Brotherson says growing global instability is a reminder that Pacific nations must strengthen cooperation within the region.

Speaking to PMN News in an exclusive interview, Brotherson said the Pacific must focus on deeper partnerships with neighbours such as New Zealand to build resilience against external shocks.

“When we see the turmoil in the world, it’s a reminder to us, as all the Pacific Island nations, that our first and foremost vicinity is our region,” Brotherson said.

• READ MORE:  Iran says US, Israel have hit nearly 10,000 civilian sites since war began
• Other Pacific geopolitics reports

“We have to increase cooperation between ourselves to make us more resilient to outside crises.”

Brotherson has held the presidency since 2023 and previously represented French Polynesia’s third constituency in the French National Assembly from 2017.

He made the comments following discussions with New Zealand Foreign Minister Vaovasamanaia Winston Peters during Peters’ visit to French Polynesia.

Peters described the meeting as a unique opportunity to strengthen ties between Pacific neighbours.

“We had a very good, quite unique discussion,” he said.

‘Pretty special’
“Where in the world would you sit down like that, with a president, and have a friendly New Zealand-type discussion, or Pacific-type discussion? It’s pretty special.”

Peters said New Zealand must place greater importance on its relationships in the region.

“We underrate the value of this. Because when we talk about the Pacific, it’s not our backyard like we used to say decades ago,” he said.

“It’s our front yard. And the sooner we understand that, the better.”

Brotherson said the historical, cultural, and genealogical ties between the two nations provided a foundation for closer cooperation.

He said collaboration could cover areas such as climate adaptation, maritime and air connectivity, digital infrastructure, and economic development.

“We have many areas of cooperation that needed to be discussed, and these were the topics that were addressed during our meeting,” he said.

Geopolitical competition
The French Polynesian leader also raised concerns about the growing geopolitical competition in the Pacific, particularly between the United States and China.

“We don’t want to align with anyone. I mean, either China or the US,” he said. “We want to be able to discuss with everyone and to have relationships, be it cultural or economic relationships with everyone.”

The Pacific has become an increasingly contested strategic region in recent years, with China expanding its economic and infrastructure partnerships with several island nations.

The United States and its allies have also increased diplomatic engagement, development funding, and security cooperation.

Climate change remains another major concern, particularly for the low-lying atolls of the Tuamotu archipelago — the world’s largest chain of coral atolls, located in French Polynesia northeast of Tahiti.

The French territory consists of 118 volcanic islands and coral atolls across five archipelagos in the South Pacific. Comprising 78 low-lying atolls (like Rangiroa and Fakarava) spread over 3.1 million sq km, this destination is renowned for its remote, pristine lagoons, world-class scuba diving, and black pearl farming

“They are facing the same issues as Tuvalu or other Pacific island nations that are at the forefront of climate change and the sea level rise,” Brotherson said.

‘Salination of water’
“What we are seeing currently is a salination of the water lentils on those atolls, rendering life very hard. It’s not impossible.

“So water management is going to be a real issue in the upcoming years related to climate change but you also have the coastal erosion that we have to tackle.”

The President of the Government of French Polynesia and the Foreign Minister of New Zealand.

pic.twitter.com/z8QeiVsagB

— Winston Peters (@NewZealandMFA) March 8, 2026

For communities on these low-lying atolls, the impacts of climate change are already being felt through declining freshwater supplies, erosion, and pressure on traditional food sources.

Brotherson also reiterated his support for greater political sovereignty for French Polynesia. He said economic development and resilience must come first.

French Polynesia enjoys a high degree of autonomy under France, which retains control over defence, currency, and aspects of foreign policy.

Brotherson said the pathway toward greater sovereignty must be gradual and carefully managed.

He added that economic resilience will be key before any move toward full independence and said the territory could achieve political sovereignty within the next 10 to 15 years.

“It’s all about interdependencies, that’s how we’re going to build independence. When it comes to strengthening our economy, you know, we still have a lot of work to do on food security, on energy transition, and then we’ll be able to be more confident as a nation.”

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ and PMN News.

If Israel and the US attack Iran, the cosy worlds of Europe, Australia and New Zealand could be swept up in an economic catastrophe.

Should the Iranians survive a terrifying onslaught, they have vowed to strike back in a way that could crash the global economy.  How they could quite possibly do this is the topic of this article.

The leaders of the Islamic Republic — love them or hate them — know that they face an existential threat; that the continued existence of a unified state called Iran is imperilled.

• READ MORE: Iran will not bow down to US pressure in nuclear talks, Pezeshkian says
• Other Iran reports

They also know that the collective West will not stand up for international law and the proscription on launching wars of aggression. Under these circumstances a state will sacrifice anything to survive, including hitherto unthinkable acts like sinking the USS Abraham Lincoln, the glory of the American war machine.

All the signs are pointing to a new Shock and Awe campaign by the United States.

The goal, as it was in the 2003 US invasion of Iraq, is a fast knock-out. Mission Accomplished in a few weeks.

War, however, seldom goes entirely to plan — the Americans never expected they would spend 20 years in Afghanistan and waste trillions of dollars to move from the Taliban regime to . . .  the Taliban regime.

Here is a selection of options open to the Iranians if they survive the initial onslaught.

Shut down all civilian flights for the duration of the conflict
Without firing a single missile, Iran can likely bring all flights into and out of the entire Gulf region to a shuddering halt. That’s 500,000 passengers per day.

More than 180 million passengers pass through Doha, Abu Dhabi and Dubai every year.

Simply issuing a warning that the entire Gulf region is an air combat zone will put the brakes on all major airlines, effectively severing the primary link between Europe, Asia and Australasia for as long as Iran hangs on.

Insurance companies would issue a cancel note on all policies (for airlines, passengers, airports, provisioners) for the entire region.

No airline will defy this interdiction. Would Qantas, for example, fly one of its A380s loaded with mums, dads and kids into a potential kill zone?  The Iranians could underscore the seriousness by firing a couple of missiles onto runways or using EW (electronic warfare tools) to spoof or harass planes.

In an interview with @CBSNews , Iran’s FM Seyed Abbas Araghchi said uranium enrichment is Iran’s legal right under the NPT, reaffirming peaceful nuclear policy and commitment to diplomacy
More: https://t.co/XqHaDqxOfl https://t.co/3tGlg9SJKL

— Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran (@Iran_GOV) February 22, 2026

Shut down all oil and LNG shipments
Iran will likely mine the Strait of Hormuz 33 km (21 miles) wide, making it instantly uninsurable for any oil or LNG tanker to move into or out of the Gulf.  Huge numbers of smart mines (that can recognise the acoustic signature of a tanker) will be deployed as well as hundreds of semi-submersible drone boats.

Spread out across the Gulf are thousands of short-range anti-ship missiles that will be virtually impossible to suppress.

Papua New Guinea is under a close watch for money laundering, running a risk of being abandoned by global investors.

The Financial Action Task Force (FATF) has placed PNG on its “grey list” due to “strategic deficiencies” in government oversight.

The grey-list means that watchdog officials are monitoring closely, and that the government is time-bound to address their blind spots.

• READ MORE: It’s official, the FATF has added Papua New Guinea to its ‘grey list’

PNG is now one step away from the far more precarious “black list”, where other countries are compelled to stay away in order to protect the international financial system.

There are only three countries on the black list: North Korea, Iran, and Myanmar.

Prime Minister James Marape told local media outlet NBC that he accepted the conclusions of the FATF and welcomed their support.

“There is no point blaming the past. What has been identified, we will fix,” Marape said.

Need secure economy
“It is in our country’s interest to have a secure economy, not one with gaps that can be exploited.”

Marape said that investors could be assured the PNG government was doing all that is can ahead of elections in 2027.

“Our investors will not run away . . .  Papua New Guinea will work its way out of the grey-list and towards a trusted, credible financial standing,”

But as many as 30 banks have publicly ruled out the possibility of investing in Papua LNG, an Exxon-backed project in the Gulf of Papua, as reported by AAP.

The project owners, seeking to produce six million tonnes of LNG per annum for a predominantly Asian market, have yet to make a final decision on whether to move forward.

Far-reaching consequences
A note from the International Monetary Fund (IMF) in November 2025 called PNG “a fragile state” noting an “unstable social and political environment”.

It’s a judgment of PNG’s institutions, weakened by conflict and poor governance, thus creating ideal conditions for money laundering and corruption to thrive.

Michael Kabuni, an anti-money laundering researcher at Australian National University, told RNZ Pacific the grey-listing sends a signal to overseas banks and investors that business in PNG is rife with danger.

“We were saying all along that PNG was going to be added to the grey list. The evidence points to it.”

PNG’s greatest vulnerability is the exposure of each MP, bureaucrat and public servant to bribes and corruption, Kabuni said.

The more powerful an individual, the more likely they are to be targeted by criminals, and the greater those incentives to bend the rules would be.

“There was the anti-corruption body that was set up in 2014 called the task force suite,” he noted.

“It did an impressive job in confiscating proceeds of crime, arresting, prosecuting and jailing those involved. But eventually they went after the Prime Minister, and that task force was disbanded.”

Kabuni noted that MPs are given 10 million kina (NZ$3.9 million) each year in the course of their work, but rarely is it all accounted for.

He said it was also common for less money to be allocated to “integrity agencies”, such as watchdogs and enforcement bodies, than they are actually budgeted.

“It’s a combination of factors, from political interference, whether it’s appointments or interference into the investigations, to capacity and resources,” he said.

In the case of Papua LNG, Kabuni said he “would think” that the bank boycott was motivated in large part by the grey-listing.

“Investors use the mutual evaluation reports as a risk matrix to determine whether this country is safe.”

“It’s going to be difficult to draw investors finances . . .  we’ve never actually had an investor come in during the grey-list period.”

Risks for New Zealand
The Reserve Bank of New Zealand said banks were required to assess the associated risks with the countries that they dealt with.

“This may mean that transactions to or from Papua New Guinea may be subject to greater scrutiny,” it said.

Meanwhile, the Department of Internal Affairs said all customers from PNG are considered “high risk” under the Anti-Money Laundering and Countering Financing of Terrorism Act 2009.

“This could be a PNG company operating in New Zealand or a non-resident individual (such as a person on a temporary work visa),” a spokesperson said.

“As a result, an enhanced level of customer due diligence must always be applied.”

Anti-money laundering expert Kerry Grass told RNZ Pacific that businesses dealings with PNG were inherently risky.

“Trade-based money laundering (trading value for value) is not captured as an activity under the AML/CFT Act for international reporting obligations of trade,” Grass said.

Escaping obligations
“Hence I can trade you a shipping container of car parts for 1kg of Cocaine hidden in a container of coconuts. That type of international trading is escaping obligations of reporting under the AML/CFT Act if no wire transfer is relied on.”

In an ideal world, Grass said, customs officials would be able to manage risk based on knowledge of the source, but this could be disguised.

Efforts to stop ill-gotten gains from PNG to NZ would depend on their ability to decipher this information.

“I don’t think New Zealand is actually operating at a jurisdiction level where these controls or knowledge are actually down to that level,” she said.

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

Politicians are under fire overseas. But New Zealand should take note too.

The US Justice Department’s release of more than three million Epstein files (including 180,000 images and 2000 videos) has blown the doors off the most protected social network of the late 20th century.

What these documents reveal is not just a catalogue of one man’s depravity. It is, as Helen Rumbelow wrote in The Times, like “taking the back off the world clock”, exposing how power actually works at the top of the Western world.

• READ MORE:  ‘The girl from Tahiti’ – Pacific Islands in the Epstein files
• Other Epstein Files reports

And the implications reach all the way to New Zealand.

New Zealand media has done useful work tracking the Kiwi names that appear in the files.

Paula Penfold at Stuff searched more than a thousand New Zealand references. Joel MacManus at The Spinoff, Ben Tomsett and Ethan Manera at The New Zealand Herald, and Steve Braunias at Newsroom have reported on the local angles — Peter Thiel’s investment relationship with Epstein, the New Zealand Defence Force couple who managed Epstein’s properties, Auckland academic Brian Boyd, physicist Lawrence Krauss and his pursuit of Epstein money for an Otago University role.

These stories matter. But the fixation on which Kiwis appear in the files misses the real story. The Epstein scandal is not fundamentally about which individuals had dinner with a monster. It is about what kind of political systems allow monsters to operate at the centre of global power for decades without consequence.

On that score, New Zealand should be paying very close attention, because our systems are weaker than those now failing spectacularly in countries around us.

The Mandelson masterclass
The most instructive case study is not American but British. The fall of Peter Mandelson (the architect of New Labour, the self-described “Prince of Darkness”) is a textbook case of how politics and money have gone rotten in liberal democracies.

The Epstein files revealed that Mandelson, while serving as “Deputy PM” to Gordon Brown, and in the position of Business Secretary, forwarded highly sensitive government tax plans to Jeffrey Epstein.

He told Epstein he was “trying hard to amend” a planned tax on bankers’ bonuses and suggested that JPMorgan’s CEO should “mildly threaten” the Chancellor to water down the policy. He gave Epstein advance notice of a €500 billion EU bailout before public announcement.

On Christmas Day, he wrote to a convicted paedophile: “I do not want to live by salary alone”.

So, a sitting Cabinet minister was leaking government intelligence to a convicted sex offender, lobbying against his own government’s financial regulation on behalf of that offender’s banking contacts, and angling for post-politics employment — all at the same time.

Within weeks of leaving office, his lobbying firm Global Counsel was chasing work with the Russian state investment fund and the state-owned China International Capital Corporation.

The Starmer government is bleeding credibility. Police opened a criminal investigation, Mandelson’s properties were searched, and yesterday Starmer’s chief of staff Morgan McSweeney resigned, saying the appointment decision “has damaged our party, our country and trust in politics itself”.

The Economist magazine has called it “Britain’s worst political scandal of this century”. UK Labour now trails Reform UK in the polls.

As former Prime Minister Gordon Brown wrote in The Guardian last Friday, in a remarkable act of public contrition: “I greatly regret this appointment . . .  He seems to have used market-sensitive inside information to betray the principles in which he said he believed”.

Brown’s piece was not merely an apology. It was a manifesto for integrity reform. Brown called for an independent anti-corruption commission with statutory powers, a fully accountable vetting system for major political appointments, mandatory parliamentary hearings for senior ambassadors and ministers, a five-year cooling-off period for former ministers entering lobbying, and the creation of corruption as a new statutory offence.

Brown argued for nothing less than a “century-defining rebalancing of power and accountability”, and he warned that without fundamental change, the revelations would be “acid in our democracy, corroding trust still further”.

Heather Stewart, writing in The Guardian, drew out the structural lesson: Mandelson’s personal disgrace is “deep and unique, and may yet bring down a prime minister — but by laying bare the dark allure of the filthy rich, it also underlines the need for tougher constraints on money in politics”.

Stewart documented how Epstein’s efforts to influence government policy — working to water down Alistair Darling’s bonus tax at a time when the banks had crashed the economy — “underline the powerful forces with which politicians are faced”.

She noted that Transparency International warned last summer: “We stand at the beginning of a new and dangerous era, where big money dominates in a way that has corroded US politics across the Atlantic”. The campaign group Spotlight on Corruption warned the current system is “full of major loopholes and gaps”.

The real takeaway is this: when it comes to money and politics, whether post-parliamentary employment, lobbying, or party funding, it is unwise to take honesty and decency as a given. As Stewart concluded: “It is not too late to pull up the drawbridge . . .  by introducing stringent new rules to protect British democracy from the malign influence of powerful companies, and dodgy billionaires”.

The global rot at the top
What is striking is the convergence. Left, right, and libertarian commentators from across the ideological spectrum are reaching the same conclusion: the Epstein network was not an aberration. It was a symptom of what happens when wealth, power, and access operate without transparency or accountability.

As Josie Pagani observed in The Post, “there appears to be a high degree of crossover between the sort of people who attend World Economic Forum jamborees at Davos, and the sort of people who hung out with Jeffrey Epstein”. The Economist noted the files read “like a ‘Who’s Who’ which has gathered only a thin layer of dust”.

These are not fringe figures being exposed. These are the people who run things.

Pratap Bhanu Mehta, a political theorist at Princeton, described the files as “a sobering x-ray of some of America’s elites — immature, full of impunity, corrupt, venal, venial, and venereal all at once”. He warned that “an elite so needy, greedy, and now so vulnerable can hardly be trusted to exercise good judgment”.

Owen Jones put it bluntly: Mandelson is “the logical culmination of the career politician, attracted to government office not because of any commitment to a set of values or public service, but simply for power, position, and profit”. Jones asked the question that should haunt every democracy: “What is being done now by ministers and politicians to secure preferment and nice jobs later?”

The Economist observed on the Epstein-Mandelson scandal that “a weakened elite is also more vulnerable to populism” and that “public opinion is less tolerant of hypocrisy than of sex scandals or corruption”. A record 43 percent of Americans surveyed by Gallup now say they have “very little faith” in big business.

The political lesson people take from the documents is broader: elites protect elites. And once voters accept that as a general pattern, they start to look at their own politics differently. They see the local versions: the donor dinners, the quietly arranged appointments, the lobbyists writing submissions, the ministers lining up post-parliament careers. They start to interpret routine insider politics as corruption-by-another-name.

So what does this mean for New Zealand?
It’s easy to shrug this off as a foreign horror story. That shrug is the vulnerability.
New Zealand has no lobbying regulations. None. No register, no code of conduct, no cooling-off period for ministers who walk out of the Beehive and into lobbying firms or corporate boardrooms.

We rank 42nd out of 48 OECD countries on lobbying transparency. NZ is ahead of only Slovakia, Luxembourg, and Turkey. Yet Justice Minister Paul Goldsmith has said lobbying reform “is not a priority”.

As The NZ Herald editorial argued on the Epstein scandal, “what this all reveals . . .  is how utterly certain those in power are that they will be protected”. That certainty, and that sense of impunity, is not confined to Manhattan townhouses and Caribbean islands. It operates wherever wealth and politics intersect without adequate transparency.

Our own political history provides uncomfortable parallels. Minister Stuart Nash was sacked in 2023 for emailing confidential Cabinet information to wealthy donors, a mini-parallel to Mandelson’s alleged leaking of market-sensitive information to Epstein.

But in Nash’s case, he lost his ministerial role without ever facing a police investigation. The structural failure is the same: the revolving door, the undisclosed lobbying, the donation loopholes, the absence of any meaningful cooling-off period.

If the Mandelson affair teaches one lesson, it is this: weak integrity systems do not just allow bad behaviour, they incentivise it. New Zealand has all of these mechanisms for embedding soft corruption, in weaker form than the UK. We rely on a “she’ll be right” attitude in place of the institutional safeguards that comparable democracies take for granted.

The example of Peter Thiel sharpens this further. Thiel is a New Zealand citizen. He is also a billionaire power broker in Silicon Valley and a funder of rightwing politics who appears prominently in the Epstein files.

That is a reminder: New Zealand has granted citizenship, and effectively social legitimacy, to a man who sits inside the very global plutocratic networks now being publicly scrutinised for moral collapse and elite impunity. Thiel is symbolic because he represents something New Zealand has not seriously confronted: the country’s relationship with the global super-rich, and the way money can smooth entry into our political community.

Meanwhile, public trust in New Zealand’s institutions has collapsed. The 2025 Edelman Trust Barometer showed New Zealand’s trust index falling below the global average for the first time: 47 percent compared to 56 percent globally. Political parties are the least trusted institution, at just 32 percent according to the OECD’s 2024 survey. And the anti-politics mood is deepening.

The recent McSkimming police corruption scandal, where a Deputy Commissioner’s misconduct was systematically covered up, has already forced a national debate about the “C-word”. The ground was prepared before the Epstein files even arrived.

An election-year wake-up call
So what happens when this mood hits an election year? November 7 is nine months away, and the Epstein scandal feeds directly into a public mood that was already getting toxic.
The danger here is not that the public demands accountability. The danger is that the public concludes accountability is impossible, because the system is so captured by insiders and vested interests that reform cannot come from within.

Scandals like this feed anti-politics. People conclude that “they’re all the same,” that it’s a rigged game, that power protects itself. But the same disgust can create reform pressure. When trust collapses, political promises about integrity stop being an optional add-on.

They become central. Voters start demanding answers: who is lobbying whom? Who is funding whom? Why do politicians leave office and immediately cash in? Why are conflicts of interest treated as personal errors rather than structural failures?

No party in New Zealand “owns” the anti-corruption space. That’s also both a vulnerability and an opening. The party or leader who takes integrity reform seriously in 2026 — who makes the lobbying register, the donation caps, the Integrity Commission a genuine campaign commitment rather than a footnote — will be tapping into something powerful and real.

The party that ignores it will be betting that public anger stays diffuse. That would be a bad bet.

The global mood of elite scepticism will shape this election whether our politicians like it or not. Voters are more suspicious than ever of cosy relationships between politicians and the wealthy. They are less willing to accept opacity, conflicts of interest, and the revolving door as the price of doing business.

Chris Trotter, writing today in The Interest, argues there are “heaps of lessons New Zealanders can learn from what is unfolding in the United Kingdom”. He is right. New Zealand has an opportunity to get ahead of the global backlash. We can build the transparency infrastructure — the lobbying register, the Integrity Commission, the cooling-off rules — that most comparable democracies already have.

Or we can keep pretending that we are too small and too decent for this kind of corruption, and wait for the next scandal to prove us wrong.

Starmer’s warning to his own cabinet, that “the public don’t really see individuals in this scandal, they see politicians”, applies here too. New Zealanders are watching the Mandelson affair, they’re reading the files, and they’re drawing the obvious conclusion: that the people who run the world are not to be trusted, and the systems meant to hold them accountable are broken.

A country can’t keep shrugging at unregulated influence while telling voters to trust the system. If New Zealand’s political class wants to avoid the kind of legitimacy collapse now unfolding overseas, the time to act is now. Not after the next (inevitable) scandal.

An immediate test
And here is the immediate test. Transparency International is releasing its annual Corruption Perceptions Index. For the last couple of decades, New Zealand’s showing in the index has been in decline. Our score has slipped from the mid-90s to 83, and our ranking has dropped to fourth globally, now seven points behind Denmark.

Will this decline continue? If it does, it will be one more data point confirming what voters already sense: that the gap between New Zealand’s self-image as a clean, transparent democracy and the reality of our thin integrity architecture is growing wider.

The Epstein files have taken the back off the world clock. New Zealanders can see the mechanism now. The question is what do we do about it?

Dr Bryce Edwards is a political commentator and analyst. He is director of the Democracy Project, focused on scrutinising and challenging the role of vested interests in the political process. Republished with the author’s permission.

Speaking before the Senate Banking Committee this week, US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent explicitly stated that the US deliberately caused a financial crisis in Iran with the goal of fomenting civil unrest in the country.

Asked by Senator Katie Britt what more the US could be doing to place pressure on the Ayatollah and Iran, Bessent explained on Thursday that the Treasury Department had implemented a “strategy” designed to undermine the Iranian currency which crashed the economy and sparked the violent protests we have seen throughout the country.

“One thing we could do at Treasury, and what we have done, is created a dollar shortage in the country,” Bessent said. “At a speech at the Economic Club in March I outlined the strategy.

• LISTEN: A reading by Tim Foley
• Other Iran reports

It came to a swift and I would say grand culmination in December when one of the largest banks in Iran went under.

“There was a run on the bank, the central bank had to print money, the Iranian currency went into free fall, inflation exploded, and hence we have seen the Iranian people out on the street.”

This is not the first time Bessent has made these admissions. Speaking at the World Economic Forum in Davos last month, the Treasury Secretary said the following:

“President Trump ordered Treasury and our OFAC division, Office of Foreign Asset Control, to put maximum pressure on Iran.

And it’s worked, because in December, their economy collapsed. We saw a major bank go under; the central bank has started to print money. There is dollar shortage.

They are not able to get imports, and this is why the people took to the street. So, this is economic statecraft, no shots fired, and things are moving in a very positive way here.”

Following these remarks, Professor Jeffrey Sachs and Sybil Farres wrote the following for Common Dreams:

“What Secretary Bessent describes is of course not ‘economic statecraft’ in a traditional sense. It is war conducted by economic means, all designed to produce an economic crisis and social unrest leading to a fall of the government. This is proudly hailed as ‘economic statecraft.’

“The human suffering caused by outright war and crushing economic sanctions is not so different as one might think. Economic collapse produces shortages of food, medicine, and fuel, while also destroying savings, pensions, wages, and public services.

Deliberate economic collapse drives people into poverty, malnutrition, and premature death, just as outright war does.”

Bessent laid out these plans in advance at the Economic Club of New York back in March of last year, saying the following:

“Last month, the White House announced its maximum pressure campaign on Iran designed to collapse its already buckling economy. The Iranian economy is in disarray; 35 peRcent official inflation, has a currency that has depreciated 60 percent in the last 12 months, and an ongoing energy crisis.

“I know a few things about currency devaluations, and if I were an Iranian, I would get all of my money out of the Rial now.

“This precarious state exists before our Maximum Pressure campaign, designed to collapse Iranian oil exports from the current 1.5–1.6, million barrels per day, back to the trickle they were when President Trump left office.

“Iran has developed a complex shadow network of financial facilitators and black-market oil shippers via a ghost fleet to sell oil, petrochemical and other commodities to finance its exports and generate hard currency.

“As such, we have elevated a sanctions campaign against this export infrastructure, targeting all stages of Iran’s oil supply chain. We have coupled this with vigorous government engagement and private sector outreach.

“We will close off Iran’s access to the international financial system by targeting regional parties that facilitate the transfer of its revenues. Treasury is prepared to engage in frank discussions with these countries. We are going to shut down Iran’s oil sector and drone manufacturing capabilities.

“We have predetermined benchmarks and timelines. Making Iran Broke Again will mark the beginning of our updated sanctions policy. Watch this space.”

The US has been orchestrating plans to foment unrest in Iran by causing economic strife for years. In 2019 Trump’s previous Secretary of State Mike Pompeo openly acknowledged that the goal of Washington’s economic warfare against Iran was to make the population so miserable that they “change the government”, cheerfully citing the “economic distress” the nation had been placed under by US sanctions.

As unrest tore through Iran last month, Trump egged protesters on and encouraged them to escalate, saying “To all Iranian patriots, keep protesting, take over your institutions, if possible, and save the name of the killers and the abusers that are abusing you,” adding, “all I say to them is help is on its way.”

Deliberately trying to ignite a civil war in a country by immiserating its population so severely that they start attacking their own government out of sheer desperation is one of the most evil things you can possibly imagine.

But under the Western empire it’s just another day. They’re doing it in Iran, and they’ve also aggressively ramped up efforts to do it in Cuba, where the government has just announced it will be rationing oil as the US moves to strangle the island nation into regime change.

A lot of attention is going into The Epstein Files right now, and understandably so. But it’s worth noting that nothing in them is as depraved and abusive as what our rulers are doing right out in the open.

Caitlin Johnstone is an Australian independent journalist and poet. Her articles include The UN Torture Report On Assange Is An Indictment Of Our Entire Society. She publishes a website and Caitlin’s Newsletter. This article is republished with permission.

Will maximising investment returns override ethics? That is the question the tertiary sector posed to UniSaver, the academic equivalent of KiwiSaver, now revealed to invest in Israeli weapons and military intelligence.

In 2024, some 400 university staff appealed to UniSaver to divest from such companies.

The fund initially ignored the call.

• READ MORE: ‘Divest from genocide’ call by NZ university workers to UniSaver
• Just 5 Palestinians patients leave Gaza via Rafah amid 20,000 in dire need
• Other Gaza reports

The fund issued a statement in September 2025 emphasising its fiduciary duty to ensure best performance, arguing divestment was unnecessary because the New Zealand government had not imposed sanctions against Israel, and noting its Israel-linked exposure is only 0.11 percent of total assets.

After a November open letter signed by 715 staff, nearly double the earlier number, UniSaver agreed to meet representatives of the group.

What should the tenor of those discussions be?

And why should any of this matter to the average New Zealander returning from the summer lull, facing a new year that looks uncomfortably like the last, with no sign from the Prime Minister’s State of the Nation last weekend that domestic pressures will ease?

The core question
This is the core question: with so many local concerns, why should the Israel–Palestine conflict matter?

Or, more pointedly, why should 0.11 percent of a pension fund belonging to a relatively privileged cohort matter to those worried about jobs, the cost of living, and healthcare?

Global issues are closer than we think. The suffering of Gazans and the anxieties of New Zealanders share a root: public policy framed as instrumental and amoral, where the wellbeing of persons is sacrificed to detached abstractions of markets and efficiencies while morality and integrity are treated as incidental.

These attitudes yield the same harvest everywhere: dehumanisation, insecurity, and the corrosion of civic trust.

Our only defence is a moral standpoint that declares “thus far shall you come, and no farther”.

When a society publicly avows that certain principles, human dignity and the integrity of persons, are non negotiable, it restores those ideals to the centre of the public square.

This is what a rules-based order is for: to foreground the human person before power and profit. Where such an order is honoured, flourishing follows; where it is neglected, flourishing is the first casualty.

Small acts of moral probity — even a mere 0.11 percent — may appear inconsequential.

Beacons for human progress
Yet as articulations of what we hold valuable, they resound deeply in the moral universe. They are the lit matches that, gathered, become the beacon that lights human progress.

Recent years have seen our public life dominated by the contrary impulse: to measure every policy by an economic yardstick calibrated to austerity.

As we enter an election year, two paths lie before us: one paved by slavish adherence to instrumental rationality, the other by a politics that puts people in a place of honour and treats wellbeing, security, and human flourishing as the purpose, not by product, of policy.

We have precedents. In the 1930s, as the world entered a moment not unlike our own, New Zealand, small, distant, still reeling from the Depression, adopted what became known as a moral foreign policy.

After that most devastating conflict, we added our voice to a chorus that helped shape a rules-based international order privileging human rights, cooperation, and diplomacy over war.

From the gradual undermining of that settlement, particularly after the crisis-ridden 1970s, one can trace many of today’s global and national disorders.

So what has all this to do with UniSaver?

Instability gathering pace
From our relatively safe redoubt at the bottom of the world, we watch instability elsewhere gather pace. Shall we respond in the same polarising, amoral terms or recover the loftier stance that once gave us outsized moral influence?

The UniSaver Board now faces a profound opportunity. In opposing the 715 who call for ethical investment, it has chosen expediency over ethics.

But morality often begins with small, unfashionable acts that grow, over time, into the juggernaut of social change.

Consider how a small student-led divestment campaign in the 1950s catalysed what became the global movement that helped topple South African apartheid.

Such actions shift the parameters of the values debate. Even if it concerns only 0.11 percent, UniSaver can redraw the moral horizon.

If its decision signals that we value a fair go for all — yes, even for far off Palestinians — it will achieve far more than a simple reassignment of assets.

It will have reminded us who we are.

And it will return UniSaver to being an institution to be proud of, one that affirms that people matter at least as much as the return on investment.

Dr Vincent Wijeysingha is senior lecturer in social work and social policy at Massey University. He is a member of Uni Workers 4 Palestine but writes here in a personal capacity.

A New Zealand aid project in Papua New Guinea has been halted due to security concerns, and appears unlikely to be completed.

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade (MFAT) confirmed work on the Enga Electrification Project in PNG’s Highlands region had “stopped due to ongoing violence around the project area”.

New Zealand invested $6.7 million over the last six years into the project which aimed to connect at least 4000 households in the area to electricity.

• READ MORE: Other Enga reports

It was part of combined efforts with the US, Australia and Japan to help 70 percent of PNG homes get connected by 2030.

However, tribal and election-related violence has surged in numerous parts of Enga Province in the past few years, with police largely unable to quell the unrest.

A spokesperson for MFAT said contractors stopped work at the site in Tsak Valley in Enga’s Wapanamanda District last August.

Laden with risks
The choice of Enga for the electrification project was laden with risks, not just because of its remoteness and rugged terrain, but also due to the high level of tribal and election-related violence.

Development researcher Terence Wood of the Development Policy Centre said while the project’s goal was worthy, New Zealand appeared to rush into the project without giving enough thought to the complexities involved.

“You’d think very carefully about the country context, and contexts in different parts of the country, and that would guide where you work and also how you worked,” Dr Wood said.

“So violent parts of the Highlands, or the upper Highlands, of Papua New Guinea would be the last places you’re engaged with.”

He noted that large swathes of PNG’s population lack reliable access to electricity, so many rural communities in PNG would benefit from electrification, but added that challenges were compounded by the country’s poor governance.

“With work such as electricity, it’s one thing to build it, you also need a functioning government to maintain it.

Geopolitical motivation
When PNG hosted the APEC Leaders Summit in 2018, the country’s prime minister at the time, Peter O’Neill, agreed on the PNG Electrification Partnership with with leaders from Australia, New Zealand, Japan and the US.

Dr Wood said geopolitics had driven New Zealand, alongside the other countries, to plunge into the project.

“We’ve sort of jumped in thanks to a perceived threat that China might be going to engage in this type of aid work in Papua New Guinea, and because of our haste, we didn’t pay sufficient attention to some of the complexities associated with providing electricity to Papua New Guinea.

“Aid donors often race in propelled by other motivations, and therefore don’t think carefully enough about the context and about how they might design their aid work to make sure it’s effective.”

Dr Wood said there was a high probability that the project would never be completed successfully.

‘No respect for authority’
Enga Governor Sir Peter Ipatas admitted that escalating tribal violence and the build-up of illegal weapons in the province had got out of hand, putting many innocent lives at risk.

“In my province, my people have taken the lawlessness to another level using modern weapons, guns, and this has been also a sign of no respect for authority.”

He said a vacuum of law enforcement made the problem worse, as Engan warlords and their fighters were rarely arrested or prosecuted for fighting and destroying villages.

However, Governor Ipatas said the problem with the high level of Engan tribal fights was an internal one, not directed at foreigners.

“Now the guns are only used for tribal fights. Nobody outside the the tribes that are involved are in any danger in our context as Engans, because you only fight your enemy. That’s the rule from our tradition.”

He urged PNG’s national government to ensure police do their job, suggesting more police assistance from Australia and New Zealand would be helpful.

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

The logbook of presidential flights in Indonesia reveals an unusual pattern — from the Merdeka Palace to the Land of the Bird of Paradise.

By 2023, then President Joko “Jokowi” Widodo had set foot in Papua at least 17 times — a record in the republic’s history, surpassing the total visits of all previous presidents combined.

Each touchdown of the presidential plane on the land of Papua or at the new airports he inaugurated was more than just a working visit. It was a statement of presence as a political message: Papua is no longer marginalised; it exists on Indonesia’s main political map.

• READ MORE: Indonesia’s development dilemmas – a green info gap and budget pressure – David Robie
• Other West Papua development reports
• Other Laurens Ikinia articles

Yet, behind the roar of the presidential plane and the welcoming traditional dances, lies a critical question: Has the physical presence of a national leader, accompanied by the rumble of massive infrastructure projects, touched the core issues of Papua?

Or has it merely become a grand symbol of integration, while social fractures, injustice, and sorrow continue to flow?

This analysis evaluates the multifaceted impact of President Jokowi’s dozen plus visits and draw crucial lessons for the new administration of President Prabowo Subianto and Vice-President Gibran Rakabuming Raka (Jokowi’s Son) in weaving a more just and sustainable Papuan policy.

The multidimensional impact of Jokowi’s visits
From a national political perspective, the frequency of President Jokowi’s visits to Papua, was a smart and unprecedented political communication strategy. Each landing in the Melanesian land has not merely been a routine agenda but a powerful symbolic political performance.

Handshakes with tribal chiefs, meetings with traditional leaders in public arenas, and speeches amid crowds function as direct counter-narratives to long-standing issues of marginalisation and separatism.

This physical presidential presence is an undeniable visual declaration: Papua is an inseparable part of Indonesia, and the nation’s highest leader is consistently present there.

This presence serves as a potent tool of state legitimacy, shortening the psychological distance between the centre of power in Jakarta and the easternmost Melanesian region, while demonstrating the intended political commitment. However, beneath this symbolism, the legitimacy built through physical presence is temporary if not supported by real structural change.

The critical question often raised by the community, especially Indigenous Papuans (OAP), is simple yet fundamental: “After the president’s planes and helicopters leave and the protocol frenzy subsides, what has truly changed for our lives?”

The narrative of integration through presence and physical development often clashes with demands for self-determination and historical grievances still alive among indigenous Papuans, as reflected in the ongoing armed conflict in the Central Highlands, indicating that this approach has not fully addressed the deep-seated roots of dissatisfaction.

The most visible legacy of the Jokowi era in Papua is none other than the infrastructure revolution — thousands of kilometres of the Trans-Papua Road cutting through wilderness and remote mountains, the magnificent Youtefa Bridge in Jayapura, and airport modernisations like Ewer Airport in Asmat, Wamena Airport, and the construction of the trans-Wamena-Jayapura road, Wamena-Nduga road, and other physical developments.

The government’s logic is that connectivity is an absolute prerequisite for growth. With good roads, the price of necessities in the interior is expected to drop, tourism can develop, and public services like health and education can become faster and more equitable.

Data from the Ministry of Public Works and Housing indeed records significant accessibility improvements. However, behind this physical progress, reports from organisations like the Pusaka Foundation and Greenpeace Indonesia warn of massive and often overlooked ecological impacts.

The opening of certain segments of the Trans-Papua Road is judged to accelerate deforestation, threaten Papua’s unique biodiversity, and disrupt watershed areas.

More profoundly, the issue of community involvement and consent in land acquisition processes often becomes a source of new conflict, sparking tension. As Indonesian human rights activist Usman Hamid has stated, infrastructure development is like a double-edged sword: on one side, it opens isolation and shortens distances, but on the other, it paradoxically erodes customary land rights, damages the environment that is the source of their cultural life and subsistence, and ironically, is enjoyed more by new settlers with greater capital and networks.

On the socio-economic level, the government vigorously distributed various social assistance programmes such as the Indonesia Health Card (KIS), Indonesia Smart Card (KIP), and various forms of Direct Cash Assistance (BLT).

These affirmative policies aim directly at catching up on welfare gaps and, statistically, have succeeded in reducing poverty rates in cities like Jayapura, although they remain the highest nationally. Sectors like Youtefa Bay tourism also show rapid growth. However, the economic growth created is often enclave-like and not inclusive.

Maria, a small business owner in Jayapura, illustrates this reality — large infrastructure projects are handled by contractors from outside Papua, hotels and medium-scale businesses are often owned by non-Papuan investors, while local SMEs struggle to compete due to limited access to capital, training, and marketing networks.

The structural gap between OAP and non-Papuans in ownership of means of production and access to quality job opportunities remains wide. Consequently, many Papuan sons and daughters only become manual labourers or contract workers on the grand projects building their ancestral land, an irony that deepens the sense of injustice.

In the socio-cultural realm, President Jokowi’s presence, often adorned with Papuan cultural ornaments and humbly participating in traditional dances, was a powerful form of symbolic recognition. This gesture sent a national message that Papuan culture is respected and valued at the highest state level.

However, this symbolic recognition on the political stage often does not align with the daily reality in Papua. The late Papuan peace figure, Father Neles Tebay, once described that in Papuan cities, “two worlds” often coexist but do not integrate: the modern world of migrants dominating the formal sector and modern economy, and the world of indigenous communities, often marginalised in culturally insensitive development processes.

Ethnic-tinged horizontal conflicts that have occurred, such as in Jayapura and Mimika, are clear indicators of how fragile social harmony is and how deep the unresolved socio-cultural gap remains.

The darkest and most challenging point of this entire development narrative lies in human rights issues and the unending armed conflict. Although presidential visits often include a conflict resolution agenda, incidents of human rights violations and armed clashes between security forces and the TPNPB (West Papua National Liberation Army) continue to recur, with unarmed civilians often becoming trapped victims, as in the tragedies in Nduga and Intan Jaya highlighted by Komnas HAM and LBH Jakarta.

An approach relying almost solely on physical development, unaccompanied by sincere efforts towards historical reconciliation and fair, transparent law enforcement for past human rights violations, is considered by many in Papua as merely “covering a festering internal wound with a bandage”.

This unresolved historical pain and injustice continues to be the main fuel for resistance and demands for independence, proving that concrete and asphalt roads alone are not enough to build lasting peace and justice felt by all the nation’s children.

Valuable lessons for the Prabowo-Gibran era
The current administration under President Prabowo Subianto and Vice-President Gibran Rakabuming Raka must not continue the Papuan policy with business as usual. The previous administration’s legacy offers a clear roadmap, as well as warnings about dead ends that must be avoided.

Four critical lessons should form the basis for transitioning from symbolic development to substantive, just transformation.

First, policy focus must undergo a paradigm shift from mere physical development towards the holistic empowerment of Papuan people. This means massive investment in quality education with curricula relevant to social contexts and local potential, as well as vocational training that equips Indigenous Papuans with skills to manage the economy on their own land.

Firm and measurable affirmative schemes must be designed to ensure Indigenous Papuans are not merely spectators, but the primary owners and managers of strategic economic sectors, from culture-based tourism and organic agriculture to creative industries.

Without this step, magnificent infrastructure will only become a channel for an extractive economy controlled by outsiders, perpetuating dependency and disparity.

Second, the government must enforce the principle of absolute harmony between development, cultural preservation, and environmental protection. Every major project, especially those touching customary lands and indigenous forest areas, must undergo credible, participatory, and legally binding Environmental and Social-Cultural Impact Assessments (AMDAL & ANDAL).

Development must no longer sacrifice local wisdom and ecosystems that are the soul and identity of Papuan society. Development models imported from Java or Sumatra must be reviewed and replaced with approaches born from dialogue with local ecology and culture, so that progress is not synonymous with environmental destruction and cultural marginalisation.

Third, this new era must open space for conflict resolution through a courageous approach of dialogue and reconciliation. The government needs to initiate inclusive dialogue involving all elements of Papuan society, including pro-independence groups willing to discuss peacefully, to address the roots of historical and structural dissatisfaction.

This complex issue has been comprehensively formulated by the Papua Peace Network. The establishment of an independent and trusted Papua Truth and Reconciliation Commission could be a monumental step to heal past wounds and build a foundation for sustainable peace, recognising that true security is born from justice.

Fourth, Special Autonomy must be revived in its meaning and spirit. A comprehensive evaluation of the implementation of the Special Autonomy Law, along with its trillions of rupiah in fund flows, is a necessity.

These funds must be shifted from physical projects that are often off-target to investments in enhancing the capacity, health, and economy of indigenous Papuans. More importantly, Special Autonomy must be interpreted as a political recognition of the special rights of Indigenous Papuans.

This means strengthening traditional institutions and providing real and decisive participatory space in every strategic decision-making at the provincial and district levels, so that policies are no longer felt as something imposed from Jakarta.

Ultimately, the main challenge for the Prabowo-Gibran administration is to demonstrate that commitment to Papua goes beyond rhetoric and showcase projects. Success will be measured not by the length of roads built, but by the fading of tension, the reduction of disparities, and the rise of self-confidence and economic independence among Indigenous Papuans.

Only by making these four pillars — human empowerment, harmony, dialogue, and living autonomy — the foundation of policy can Papua be truly integrated into the Republic of Indonesia in a dignified and sustainable manner.

A revolutionary approach model
To translate the lessons from the previous era, the current administration requires a radical change in its approach model, moving from a centralised development paradigm towards participatory governance based on Papuan native institutions.

The most revolutionary option is to form a special ministry focused on empowering Indigenous Papuans, inspired by the Ministry of Māori Development in New Zealand.

This ministry is not intended to manage regional administration, but specifically to guarantee the fulfilment of indigenous Papuans’ rights, as mandated in the Special Autonomy Law.

By placing the Governing Body for the Acceleration of Special Autonomy Development in Papua (BP3OKP) and the Papua Special Autonomy Acceleration Executive Committee under it, the government can create centralised, strong, and accountable coordination, thereby avoiding programme overlap and leakage of Special Autonomy funds.

This institutional revolution must be supported by data-based governance and authentic participation. Every policy and fund allocation, especially the massive Special Autonomy funds, must arise from rigorous data studies and in-depth dialogue with the community, rather than just technocratic planning in Jakarta.

Transparency and accountability in fund use must be guaranteed through independent oversight mechanisms that actively involve representatives of traditional councils or institutions, religious institutions, and local NGOs as watchdogs. Only then can the allocated funds truly become an instrument of change, not merely an instrument of expenditure.

Another key pillar is building equal and formal partnerships with Papuan traditional institutions, such as the Papuan Customary Council (DAP) and various stakeholders. These institutions are not merely ceremonial objects but must be recognised as strategic government partners in every stage of development, from planning and implementation to evaluation.

As socio-cultural anchors, understanding the pulse and real needs of the community, their involvement can prevent social conflict and ensure development programmes align with local wisdom and customary rights.

Furthermore, meaningful decentralisation becomes a prerequisite for success. Local governments in Papua must be given substantive authority and massive capacity building to independently manage natural resources and public services.

Moreover, the development approach must start from the grassroots, making participatory development at the village level the standard method. This method ensures that community aspirations are heard directly and the projects implemented truly address their priority needs, not merely pursuing physical targets.

Ultimately, this approach aims to reverse the traditional relationship between the central government and local governments in Papua. From a relationship that has so far seemed patron-client, to a partnership based on the sovereignty of indigenous communities and substantive justice.

Thus, development is no longer felt as something given from above, but something built together from below, creating a sense of ownership and sustainability that will become the foundation for long-term peace and prosperity in Papua.

Indonesianising in the Papuan Way
Reinterpreting the term “Indonesianising” Papua is a main task for the current administration. This concept must no longer be interpreted as an assimilation process erasing distinctive identity, but must transform into an integration that respects uniqueness.

True integration is not homogenisation, but an effort to embrace diversity as a strength. In this context, Indonesia is not a single mould, but a mosaic that gains its beauty precisely from the differences of each piece. For this, a multidimensional approach grounded in four main pillars is required.

First, in the field of education, the national curriculum must become more flexible and inclusive. Enrichment with local content — such as the history and wisdom of Papuan tribes, local languages, and inherited ecological wisdom — should not be merely supplementary, but the core of the learning process.

Schools must become places where Papuan children are proud of their identity while mastering global competencies. Second, in the field of the economy, self-reliance must be built on local strengths.

Easily accessible micro-financing systems, entrepreneurship training, and strong marketing support for flagship products like Wamena arabica coffee, sago, matoa, or high-value marine products will create a sovereign economy that empowers, rather than displaces, the indigenous people.

Third, recognition at the legal level is the foundation of justice. Recognition of the customary land rights of indigenous communities in land and natural resource governance must be guaranteed and integrated into national regulations. This is a concrete step to prevent agrarian conflict and ensure development benefits return to the rightful land owners.

Fourth, building intensive cultural dialogue through student, artist, and youth exchange programs between Papua and other regions, or other countries. This direct interaction will break the chain of prejudice, build empathy, and strengthen a true sense of brotherhood as one nation.

Towards a ‘Just Papua’
The legacy from the previous period is ambivalent. On one hand, there is magnificent infrastructure and symbolic integration strengthened through physical presence; on the other, deep disappointment remains due to unbridged gaps and a persistently pulsating conflict.

The Prabowo-Gibran administration now stands at a historical crossroads. The choice is between continuing the visually spectacular yet often elitist “concrete development” model or taking a more winding yet dignified path: namely, the Papuan human empowerment model, which places indigenous Papuans as the primary subject and heir to the future of their own land.

This strategic choice will be fate-determining. It will measure, later at the end of their term, whether presidential and vice-presidential visits to Papua are still met with cold protocol performances, or with new hope and genuine smiles from a people who feel recognised, valued, and empowered.

Ultimately, genuine national integration can only be realised when Indigenous Papuans can stand tall with all their identity and dignity, not as a party being “Indonesianised,” but as fully-fledged Indonesians who also shape the face of the nation.

The future of Papua is not about becoming like others, but about being itself in the embrace of the Bird of Garuda.

Laurens Ikinia is a Papuan lecturer and researcher at the Institute of Pacific Studies, Indonesian Christian University, Jakarta. He is also an honorary member of the Asia Pacific Media Network (APMN) in Aotearoa New Zealand, and an occasional contributor to Asia Pacific Report.

New Zealand has scrapped a project to build an airport in Tokelau after sinking NZ$3 million into the design phase.

A spokesperson for the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade told RNZ Pacific that the Tokelau government had been advised of their decision.

Tokelau is completely inaccessible by plane, with visitors and its roughly 2600 residents required to travel via boat from Samoa. A return fare on the boat, which runs once every two weeks, is approximately NZ$306, with a travel time of around 24-32 hours.

• READ MORE: Other Tokelau reports

“This decision was made in the context of the high cost of the project and the constrained fiscal environment currently facing the New Zealand government,” MFAT said in a statement.

“We recognise that air services have been a long-held aspiration of the people of Tokelau. ”

The government had spent around $3 million on feasibility, design, business casing and procurement planning since 2020, with funding agreed to the year before. The project faced delays due to COVID-19.

Stuff reported in 2022 that tenders for the project that had been put out for one provider who would be willing to work with the council of elders, or Taupulega, on a design concept.

Intended design
An Official Information Act request from October 2024 confirmed that the intended design included one terminal with an 800m by 30m runway on Nukunonu, the largest of Tokelau’s three atolls.

A tender for a construction contractor had been placed as late as September 2025, with an expected timeline reaching out to 2030, according to MFAT’s DevData tool.

John Teao, former chairman of the Wellington Tokelau Association, said he was personally pleased to see the project come to its end.

“There’s not enough land to have an airstrip . . .  and it’s also the environmental impact — it’s a pristine environment,” Teao said.

“I just don’t see any any justification for an airport.

“Maybe in the future, if they have sea planes or things like that.”

Teao said he hopes to see the money spent on something more useful, such as improving the existing boat system.

Bridging the gap
The New Zealand Labour Party’s Pacific spokesperson, Carmel Sepuloni, said this project was intended to bridge the gap between Tokelau and the world.

“While the details are unclear, it’s disappointing to hear this news,” she said in a statement.

“There are real risks that come with having no access to an airstrip. With a population of about 2500 and almost 10,000 Tokelauans living in New Zealand, travel to and from Tokelau is difficult.

“There’s a clear need and given Tokelau is within the realm of New Zealand, I’d expect the government to offer a clear explanation as to why they’ve scrapped these plans.”

An election in Tokelau for their General Fono is set for January 29. Each village is selecting their candidates for just over a week of campaigning.

The Fono consists of three Faipule, or village leaders, three Pulenuku, or village mayors, and 14 general delegates, elected for a three-year term.

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney gave a speech at Davos this week that signals there may still be a leader in the West worth following.

“Middle powers must act together because if we’re not at the table, we’re on the menu,” he warned.

The Canadian PM was brutally honest about Western conduct in the world but shone a bright light on a better path forward.

• READ MORE: ‘The end of the world as we know it’: Is the rules-based order finished?

At a time when the US has pivoted to a smash-and-grab deployment of hard power that now extends to its closest allies, Carney stepped up.

The speech wasn’t a rhetorical tour de force; it was better than that: it was a declaration by the leader of a major, middle ranked Western power that the snivelling compliance, the fawning and the keep-your-head-down approach that has typified the collective West’s response to Trumpism is at a strategic dead end.

We are at a moment which Carney defines as “a rupture in the world order”.

Nostalgia is not a strategy
“We know the old order is not coming back. We shouldn’t mourn it. Nostalgia is not a strategy,” Carney said.

At a time when the US is led by a criminal toddler who can’t stop whining about not getting the Nobel Peace Prize even as he attacks country after country, it is refreshing to encounter a leader who thinks and speaks like a statesman of the first rank.

“We are in the midst of a rupture, not a transition. Over the past two decades, a series of crises in finance, health, energy and geopolitics have laid bare the risks of extreme global integration.

“But more recently, great powers have begun using economic integration as weapons, tariffs as leverage, financial infrastructure as coercion, supply chains as vulnerabilities to be exploited,” Carney said.

A modern non-aligned movement
Carney did not reference the Non-Aligned Movement formed at the Belgrade Conference in September 1961 but it leapt to my mind when I heard him say:

“In a world of great power rivalry, the countries in between have a choice: compete with each other for favour or to combine to create a third path with impact.”

Carney also reaffirms the importance of the institutions that the West itself, including Canada, has severely weakened in recent years — WTO, UN and COP to name three. Russia, with its invasion of Ukraine, comes in a distant second in this regard.

With an assertive, aggressive US hell-bent on getting whatever it wants, Carney looks on the times we have entered with much-needed clarity. His call is for an alliance of middle powers.

In a word: collectivism.

The Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) and what Carney is proposing have similarities, particularly structurally, but also significant differences, particularly ideologically.

Not least Carney is a reformer and not at heart an anti-imperialist. He is the former head of both the Bank of England and the Bank of Canada and will not be seen in a Che Guevara t-shirt any time soon.

As with the NAM, however, Carney advocates collective leverage, resistance to client-state dependency and using internationalism to resist divide-and-rule by great powers.

“When we only negotiate bilaterally with a hegemon, we negotiate from weakness. We accept what is offered. We compete with each other to be the most accommodating. This is not sovereignty. It’s the ‘performance’ of sovereignty while accepting subordination.”

The giants who formed the Non-Aligned movement were Josip Broz Tito (Yugoslavia), Gamal Abdel Nasser (Egypt), Jawaharlal Nehru (India), Kwame Nkrumah (Ghana), and Sukarno (Indonesia). They gathered nations around  the “Five Principles of Peaceful Coexistence”: mutual respect for territorial integrity and sovereignty, non-aggression, non-interference, equality and mutual benefit, peaceful coexistence.

In a nutshell: the polar opposite of the Western Rules-Based Order. Carney’s speech echoed many of the same sentiments.

“The powerful have their power. But we have something too — the capacity to stop pretending, to name reality, to build our strength at home and to act together.

“And it is a path wide open to any country willing to take it with us.”

Brilliant. But converting a speech into a movement that mobilises countries in an effective way requires commitment and resources we need to see emerge at pace.

In the 1960s and 70s, it was about small and middle powers navigating a course between two superpower blocs — a passage between Scylla (Soviet Union) and Charybdis (United States). Today we all must navigate the rough and rowdy world of the US, China and a resurgent Russia.

Canada’s astonishing resistance to the Empire
What is astonishing is that this time around, the impulse to rally together comes not from a socialist country like the former Yugoslavia or a “black Third World country” (in 1960s parlance) like Tanzania, but from the beating heart of the white-dominated Western world – from Canada, one of the capitals of the Western empire.  My, how times have suddenly changed.

This should act as shock therapy to somnolent countries like Australia and New Zealand who cleave to a past that no longer exists. Carney has shown the power of looking at the world through untinted lenses (though Macron did look pretty cool in Davos in his blue sunnies).

A rare moment of honesty about Western conduct
I don’t recall a Western leader being so open about the ear-splitting hypocrisy and double-dealing of the West.  Most impressively, Carney gives a clear signal of what needs to be done to survive in this world of jostling hegemons.

More submissive leaders like Christopher Luxon of New Zealand and Australia’s Anthony Albanese should take careful note because, as Carney says, we are at a turning point in the world.

Carney, who previously mumbled his way through issues like Venezuela and Gaza, made a valuable contribution to confronting the desolation of reality:

“First it means naming reality. Stop invoking ‘rules-based international order’ as though it still functions as advertised. Call it what it is: a system of intensifying great power rivalry where the most powerful pursue their interests using economic integration as a weapon of coercion.”

In time, this may open the door to Truth and Reconciliation.  The genocide in Gaza is an example par excellence of the falsity of the rules-based order; Venezuela’s recent rape by the Americans, greeted with shuffling indifference by the West, traduced international law. The lawless bombing of Iran, the starvation of hundreds of thousands of Yemeni civilians in a blockade imposed by Saudi Arabia and armed by the US and UK are just a few of many such examples.

“We knew the story of the international rules-based order was partially false. That the strongest would exempt themselves when convenient. That trade rules were enforced asymmetrically. And we knew that international law applied with varying rigour depending on the identity of the accused or the victim,” Carney said.

Noting the standing ovation Carney received, the threat to Greenland has clearly acted on the Western countries as a shock therapy that the Gaza genocide, the bombing of Iran and the attack on Venezuela failed to deliver.

Carney stands on the shoulders of giants
I would point out that former leaders like prime minister Helen Clark of New Zealand have been arguing along these lines for years, advocating, for example, for a nuclear free Pacific and recommending “that we always pursue dialogue and engagement over confrontation.”

Warning that Trump was too unstable to be relied on, she told a  conference in 2025 that New Zealand “should join forces with other countries across regions who want to be coalitions for action around these issues, not just little Western clubs.”

I’ll give the last word to the late Julius Nyerere, first President of Tanzania, from a 1970 speech to the Non-Aligned Movement. It expresses a worldview in accord with Carney’s speech but which is the polar opposite of 500 years of Western conduct from Christopher Columbus to Donald Trump:

“By non-alignment we are saying to the Big Powers that we also belong to this planet. We are asserting the right of small, or militarily weaker, nations to determine their own policies in their own interests, and to have an influence on world affairs which accords with the right of all peoples to live on earth as human beings equal with other human beings.

“And we are asserting the right of all peoples to freedom and self-determination; therefore expressing an outright opposition to colonialism and international domination of one people by another.”

Eugene Doyle is a writer based in Wellington. He has written extensively on the Middle East, as well as peace and security issues in the Asia Pacific region, and he contributes to Asia Pacific Report. He hosts the public policy platform solidarity.co.nz

]]> https://asiapacificreport.nz/2026/01/21/high-seas-treaty-welcome-news-for-sprep-in-uncertain-times/ Wed, 21 Jan 2026 02:30:09 +0000 https://asiapacificreport.nz/?p=122680 By Johnny Blades, RNZ Pacific bulletin editor

In an otherwise mixed month for the Pacific Regional Environmental Programme (SPREP), its leadership is hailing a win for Pacific conservation efforts with the UN Treaty on the High Seas coming into effect.

The legally binding UN High Seas Treaty officially received more than 60 ratifications, and following years of negotiations, has this month become international law.

It is a welcome positive development for Pacific conservation in a month when the US announced it was going to leave SPREP.

• READ MORE: Other SPREP reports

SPREP’s Director-General Sefanaia Nawadra described the treaty coming into effect as a testament to the long-running work by Pacific Island countries on ocean governance.

The treaty will give Pacific Island countries the ability to better manage high seas pockets in between their national waters, he said.

“The Pacific is peculiar in that within the national jurisdictions of countries in the Pacific, in between, there are what I call donut type spaces, international waters,” he said.

“So this [treaty] allows us to implement management measures beyond our national jurisdictions into these areas that are of particular concern to countries within our region.”

“So it’s a very important agreement for us, and is the continuation of the global leadership that Pacific Island countries have shown on oceans throughout the history of global oceans management, starting off with UNCLOS [United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea], which is the primary instrument that governs oceans.”

Asked whether the treaty might make it easier for deep sea mining to take place in the Pacific, Nawadra said: “Primarily it’s meant to be a conservation or sustainable management instrument. So you would allow conservation and protection in some cases, but in other cases, you would allow for managed activities”.

He said the onus would be on Pacific countries to work together in groups or sub-groups to settle on what activity is allowed.

The US retreat
Nawadra was philosophical about the US withdrawal from SPREP, but uncertainty lingers over what it means for the various programmes which the Pacific community cooperates with the US on.

He said he was not worried about the removal of US funding, but indicated the greater impact is likely to be on the work SPREP does with various US government agencies.

“We do a lot of joint activities with NOAA [National Oceanic and Atmoshperic Administration], with US CPA, US Department of Agriculture, Geological Service,” Nawadra explained.

“Those are joint activities that benefit the US as much as it benefits the Pacific. I’m not sure how that will pan out going forward over technical cooperation. That’s something that we have to work through with the US.”

Meanwhile, the director-general denied media reports that China’s latest funding offer to SPREP was about filling the gap left by the US.

Shortly after the US announcement, China, which is not a member of SPREP, announced a donation to the organisation of US$200,000 — which is approximately the amount of the funding shortfall created by the US departure.

The timing and amount of China’s donation was merely coincidental, Nawadra said.

“They didn’t step in because of the US. We’ve received funding from China for almost 10 years now,” he said.

“So it’s just a continuation of the annual contribution that they voluntarily give to SPREP. So it wasn’t additional to what they normally donate.”

He said the US retreat was not because of anything outside SPREP’s mandate that the organisation had done.

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

]]> https://asiapacificreport.nz/2026/01/10/popular-auckland-hot-springs-gets-name-change-to-kaipatiki/ Sat, 10 Jan 2026 04:39:43 +0000 https://asiapacificreport.nz/?p=122234 By Pokere Paewai, RNZ Māori issues reporter

As 2025 ticked over into 2026, New Zealand’s popular Parakai Springs near Helensville officially became Kaipātiki Hot Springs, the traditional indigenous name for the area which reflects the whakapapa of tangata whenua Ngāti Whātua o Kaipara.

The change comes as Te Poari o Kaipātiki ki Kaipara assumes management of the hot springs. The governors of Te Poari are appointed by Ngāti Whātua o Kaipara and Auckland Council in equal numbers.

Te Poari chairperson Mihi Blair said Kaipātiki literally translates to the abundance of pātiki, flounder, which the Kaipara area is quite famous for.

• READ MORE: Other Te Reo reports

The area was prized by Ngāti Whātua tūpuna for its abundance of healing, thermal waters, she said.

“The wai was always used for recovery for all our wounded warriors during cold and warm days, and also the abundance across the wetlands and the swamps and tidal areas was always rich with kai, manu, eel tuna, and lots of kuharu and, you know pātiki, of course.”

How Kaipātiki became Parakai
Blair said her whānau have a close history with Kaipātiki. In the early 1900s there was some confusion because there were two places called Kaipātiki in Auckland, one in Kaipara and one in Birkenhead, she said.

“So the mail used to get misdelivered quite a bit.”

“There was a community meeting held in the rohe of Kaipara and it was actually my great, great grandmother, Annie Emma Hamilton from Ngāti Maniapoto, who rightly got up and said, why don’t we just change Kaipara and switch it over and turn it to Parakai.

“So that decision itself has had a massive historical impact. It was a decision made on practicality, quite solutions focused she was, but it changed history. So from a whānau point of view, it’s something that we held dearly.”

It was a natural decision to return the name Kaipātiki to the area, she said.

“I was born and raised in the Kaipara area in Helensville and so from Ngāti Whātua, there was no stories being told in our rohe, within our playgrounds, within our schools and that.

“So we’re really taking this kōrero really seriously for the Kaipara area and we want to ensure that we bring not only our own uri along, but we also want to bring the community along that journey.”

Sharing the history
Blair said since 2011 when Ngāti Whātua o Kaipara and the Crown agreed to a settlement, the iwi has been focused on sharing the history of the area.

The Parakai Recreation Reserve, which surrounds the springs, had already been renamed Kaipātiki Reserve so it was a natural decision to rename the springs at the conclusion of the previous lease on 31 December 2025, she said.

Blair thanked the previous lease holders Parakai Springs Limited for their contribution to the economic growth of the area over the past three decades.

Te Poari o Kaipātiki ki Kaipara will now assume management of the springs in partnership with Belgravia Leisure, who also work in partnership with Rotorua iwi Ngāti Whakaue running the Wai Ariki Hot Springs, she said.

“[Belgravia] will bring in their expertise and they’ve done a really amazing job of supporting and ensuring that all our kaimahi there have been onboarded successfully and that actually the pools have remained open over this busy summer period.

“We had a very high, high influx of those who attended in the new year. So, you know, whānau going there to use the pools, having BBQs. So the only difference that actually happened was the name change.”

Blair said Te Poari are looking forward to seeing what could be developed and making sure the community was well involved in the design and the future of the pools.

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

]]> https://asiapacificreport.nz/2026/01/08/straight-up-piracy-and-extortion-trump-says-he-will-control-money-from-sale-of-venezuelan-oil/ Wed, 07 Jan 2026 23:21:20 +0000 https://asiapacificreport.nz/?p=122039 By Jake Johnson

US President Donald Trump has claimed that Venezuela’s interim leadership will turn over to the United States as many as 50 million barrels of sanctioned oil to be sold at market price, part of a broader, unlawful administration effort to seize the South American nation’s natural resources.

Trump, who authorised the illegal US bombing of Venezuela and abduction of its president this past weekend, said he would control the proceeds of the sale — which could amount to $3 billion.

“Just straight-up piracy and extortion from the US president,” Zeteo journalist and publisher Mehdi Hasan wrote in response.

• READ MORE: Sanctioned oil tanker falsely using Cook Islands flag, authority says
• ‘Anywhere in the world’: US seizes Venezuela-linked Russian oil tanker
• Other Venezuela invasion reports

Consistent with his administration’s conduct since the weekend attack that killed at least 75 people in Venezuela, Trump provided few details on how his scheme would work or how it would comply with domestic and international law, both of which the president has repeatedly disregarded and treated with contempt.

Where are our humane profiles of the families of these murder victims?

Where are the calls being amplified in the media to “Free the Hostages”?

As we all know by now, not all lives matter.

“State funeral in Venezuela to bury the 80 people murdered by American troops who… https://t.co/FXSyujFdcx

— Peter Cronau (@PeterCronau) January 7, 2026

It is also not clear that Delcy Rodríguez, Venezuela’s acting president and an ally of Nicolás Maduro, has agreed to Trump’s plan, which he announced on social media as his administration worked to entice US oil giants to take part in its effort to exploit the South American nation’s vast reserves.

Ahead of the US attack on Venezuela, the Trump administration imposed a blockade on sanctioned oil tankers approaching or leaving Venezuela, pushing the country closer to economic collapse.

The New York Times noted yesterday that Trump’s decision to “begin targeting tankers carrying Venezuelan crude to Asian markets had paralysed the state oil company’s exports.”

Floating storage facilities
“To keep the wells pumping, the state oil company, known as PDVSA, had been redirecting crude oil into storage tanks and turning tankers idling in ports into floating storage facilities,” the Times reported. During Trump’s first White House term, he banned US companies from working with PDVSA.

Trump wrote in his social media post yesterday that the tens of millions of barrels of oil “will be taken by storage ships, and brought directly to unloading docks in the United States.”

“I have asked Energy Secretary Chris Wright to execute this plan, immediately,” Trump wrote.

The Trump administration is also pushing Venezuela’s interim leadership to meet a series of US demands before it can pump more oil, ABC News reported.

Trump has illegally threatened to launch another attack on Venezuela, and target more of its politicians, if the country’s leadership does not follow his administration’s orders.

According to ABC, the Trump administration has instructed Venezuela to “kick out China, Russia, Iran, and Cuba and sever economic ties.”

“Second, Venezuela must agree to partner exclusively with the US on oil production and favour America when selling heavy crude oil,” ABC added, citing unnamed sources.

“According to one person, Secretary of State Marco Rubio told lawmakers in a private briefing on Monday that he believed the US can force Venezuela’s hand because its existing oil tankers are full.

Rubio also told lawmakers that the US estimated that Caracas has only a couple of weeks before it would become financially insolvent without the sale of its oil reserves.”

Jake Johnson is a senior editor and staff writer for Common Dreams. Republished from Common Dreams.

]]> https://asiapacificreport.nz/2026/01/07/papua-new-guinea-fully-retires-debt-for-liquefied-natural-gas-project/ Tue, 06 Jan 2026 22:19:16 +0000 https://asiapacificreport.nz/?p=121996 SPECIAL REPORT: By Scott Waide, RNZ Pacific PNG correspondent

Papua New Guinea’s largest resource development has reached a milestone more than a decade in the making.

The PNG Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) Project has fully retired its bank-financed project debt, closing one of the most complex financing arrangements in the country’s economic history.

The debt, raised in the late 2000s to fund construction of onshore and offshore infrastructure, totalled about US$16 billion, including interest.

• READ MORE: Other PNG LNG Project reports

Although liquefied natural gas exports began in 2014, repayments continued for more than a decade, limiting how much revenue flowed to equity holders, including the state through Kumul Petroleum Holdings, which holds a 19.4 percent stake.

In December 2025, joint venture partners accelerated the final repayment, clearing the facility around six months ahead of schedule. Sustained production, disciplined cost control and favourable global LNG prices helped bring forward the close, removing a long-standing financial constraint from the project.

Prime Minister James Marape described the milestone as a national achievement during a site visit to the LNG facilities.

“PNG LNG is now debt-free. It is a free-standing, world-class asset for the country,” he said, linking the early repayment to Papua New Guinea’s credibility as a destination for large-scale global investment.

The Prime Minister has pointed to the project’s long delivery arc — from financing during the global financial crisis to more than a decade of continuous operations — as evidence that PNG can sustain projects of international scale.

What changes now
With the project finance facility closed, PNG LNG’s future revenues will no longer be directed first to servicing debt. After operating costs, cash will flow directly to shareholders, including Kumul Petroleum and, by extension, the state.

That reshapes the project’s financial profile. It does not create an immediate budget windfall, but it improves long-term income prospects and balance-sheet flexibility for PNG’s national oil company.

Kumul Petroleum chairman Gerea Aopi said the timing was strategically important as PNG prepares for its next major gas development.

“Our increased income will strategically flow into and assist us to put together the necessary finance for PNG to take up its mandated 22.5 percent equity in the forthcoming Papua LNG Project, especially during its four-to-five-year construction period,” he said.

Aopi cautioned the announcement should not be read as a sudden cash surplus, noting future income remains exposed to global petroleum prices and largely committed to upcoming obligations.

How PNG compares with Malaysia and Indonesia
A useful comparison is often drawn with Malaysia and Indonesia, resource-rich neighbours that developed their oil and gas sectors earlier under different institutional models.

Malaysia centralised its hydrocarbons industry under Petronas, a commercially run national oil company with broad autonomy. Profits were reinvested domestically over decades, helping fund infrastructure, education and industrial diversification while reducing reliance on raw commodity exports.

Indonesia followed a hybrid approach through Pertamina, operating alongside international partners under production-sharing contracts. While governance challenges persisted, the model allowed the state to retain resource ownership while building domestic capability over time.

Papua New Guinea entered the LNG era later and adopted a project-finance joint-venture model, anchored by foreign operators and lenders. The state participates primarily as an equity partner through Kumul Petroleum rather than as an operator or sector-wide manager.

Large upfront borrowing was repaid from future LNG revenues, meaning debt servicing took priority over dividends for much of PNG LNG’s life.

The retirement of PNG LNG’s debt narrows the gap with regional peers, but it does not change the underlying model PNG follows — one reliant on project-by-project financing rather than a fully integrated national oil company structure.

That distinction now shapes decisions around Papua LNG and P’nyang, where the question is not only how much equity PNG holds, but how revenues are managed once construction and financing pressures return.

From one mega-project to the next
With PNG LNG’s debt chapter closed, attention turns to the next phase of the gas industry. Projects such as Papua LNG and P’nyang are intended to extend exports well into the 2030s, but they bring fresh financing needs, risks and negotiations.

Supporters argue that retiring PNG LNG’s debt early strengthens investor confidence and shows PNG can honour long-term agreements. Each new project, however, will reopen familiar debates over equity, landowner benefits and the balance between fiscal returns and long-term development.

The early retirement of PNG LNG’s project debt closes a significant chapter in Papua New Guinea’s resource history.

Whether it marks a decisive shift in how resource wealth supports long-term development — or simply resets the cycle ahead of the next mega-project — will depend on the choices that follow.

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

]]> https://asiapacificreport.nz/2026/01/04/trumps-gift-wrapped-maduro-package-has-done-the-world-a-favour-revealing-what-a-lie-us-foreign-policy-really-is/ Sun, 04 Jan 2026 10:54:35 +0000 https://asiapacificreport.nz/?p=121864 Kidnap, murder, torture, brutality, subversion, treachery, and barbarism, writes Adrian Blackburn reflecting on US President Donald Trump’s New Year present to the world.

COMMENTARY: By Adrian Blackburn

Blatantly, boastfully, bullyingly, shamelessly, Trump overnight threw open to the world’s eyes the cruel reality of US foreign policy. He has brought out from the shadows the ugly reality of what for generations previous administrations have found politic to keep covert.

That foreign policy has been shown most especially arrogant in regard to its neighbours anywhere in the Americas.

It has been based on a lie, a lie to its own people first but no less potently to the nations, including New Zealand, which have subscribed to that fiction of a United States democracy representing all the best human qualities.

• READ MORE: Maduro being questioned in New York as Trump says US will ‘run’ Venezuela
• Maduro joins Iraq’s Saddam, Panama’s Noriega as latest leader taken by US
• World reacts to ‘kidnapping’ of Venezuela’s President Maduro

The nicely gift-wrapped package includes belief in equality, fairness, justice, the sanctity of human life, acceptance of difference, mutual respect, kindness and love: The American way, the ultimate Christian morality in practice.

Trump has done all of us who have bought that lie a favour. What he is saying out loud with the attack on Venezuela and the kidnapping of President Nicolas Maduro is the age-old message of a rogue state — might is right, all power comes from the barrel of a gun, bow down to us.

Any self-reflection by Trump, unlikely, would reveal to him the deeper historical truth that empires which once seemed invulnerable resort to such desperate measures as his Venezuelan adventure in an attempt to deny, to delay, to divert from the fact they are in their death throes. Decline and fall.

It will get worse for the United States, as a state. The lie will become increasingly acknowledged internationally as trust is shown to be a one-way street. The allied fiction of US Treasury bills as a long-term safe repository for the world’s savings may be undermined even faster.

Run on the US bank
Trust gone, it’s the work of moments for an international run on the bank of the US to begin. Even if its already hard-working monetary printing presses go into overtime, an economy and society propped up on trillions upon trillions of dollars of debt can quickly become bankrupt

Immediately, though, what can the international community do in protest? I believe there’s a special obligation on the “Western” nations to assuage a little of their guilt as willing US accomplices over many years, accomplices ready to abandon true independence and a fair bit of morality to self-interest, cowardice.

Just a gesture in protest, but a powerful one, would be to immediately and in unison demand the temporary closure of US embassies and the withdrawal of their staff as persona non grata.

Unrealistic? Of course. Real-politik will rule, OK!

Turning blind eyes to Venezuela
But we should all beware of turning blind eyes to Venezuela. Who next, after Maduro, incurs the Don’s displeasure? If Zelensky stubbornly won’t surrender to Don and Vlad’s territorial demands, will he be safe on his next State visit to the US from arbitrary arrest and incarceration as an alleged war criminal?

Does our own Christopher Luxon need to brush up his flattery skills even further? Losing every hole of a golf match with Trump would help.

Trump, though, has already lost, whether in his hyperbolically hypocritical state he knows it or not. But he has done the world a useful service in revealing how an empire on the way out is likely to act.

Big oil will be triumphal about a grab for Venezuela’s oil riches in the hypocritical guise of protecting the US from illicit drug imports.

Chinese President Xi Jinping, meanwhile, is quietly gloating.

Adrian Blackburn is lifelong journalist and writer. Staff writer on many publications, including The NZ Herald, Sydney Morning Herald, BBC World Service, Beaverbrook Newspapers, NZ Listener and NZ Woman’s Weekly. Author of The Shoestring Pirates (Hodder and Stoughton, 1974) a history of pirate Radio Hauraki, and Gift: A Troubling Message from the Afterlife (2024). This commentary was originally a Facebook posting under the title “Trump grabs Venezuela by the pussy” and is republished here with permission.

]]> https://asiapacificreport.nz/2025/11/27/east-sepik-governor-bird-slams-marapes-risky-2026-budget-overspend/ Thu, 27 Nov 2025 06:49:32 +0000 https://asiapacificreport.nz/?p=121690 By Scott Waide, RNZ Pacific PNG correspondent

Papua New Guinea’s 2026 National Budget has drawn immediate opposition criticism from East Sepik Governor Allan Bird, who says the government continues to overspend, overestimate revenue, and deliver few tangible results for ordinary citizens.

The K$30.9 billion (about NZ$12.8 billion) spending plan, unveiled earlier this week, has been characterised by analysts as highly political and aligned with next year’s election cycle.

Critics argue the Marape government has again prioritised high-visibility projects over long-term structural programs that would strengthen essential services.

• READ MORE: Other PNG politics reports

Bird said this year’s budget followed a familiar pattern — record allocations on paper, but limited real-world improvements.

He pointed to ongoing shortages in medicines, persistent law and order challenges, and what he viewed as a widening gap between spending announcements and service delivery outcomes.

He has also raised concerns about revenue assumptions, noting that last year’s budget was short by K$2.5 billion and required significant mid-year corrections.

Bird believes similar risks exist in the 2026 plan, warning that overly optimistic revenue forecasts could again lead to financial strain.

Flawed fiscal discipline
Another key criticism centres on fiscal discipline. According to Bird, spending outside the formal budget framework remains common, with additional expenditures later reconciled in the Final Budget Outcome.

He said this practice undermines transparency and highlights deeper issues in the government’s financial management.

While the government insists the budget focuses on infrastructure, job creation, and community development, public reaction online has been overwhelmingly sceptical.

Many Papua New Guineans are questioning why record-high spending has not translated into better healthcare, education, or security.

For Bird and many critics, the central measure of any budget is whether it improves the everyday lives of citizens. Based on recent years, they believe the benefits have been limited — and they see little in the 2026 budget to suggest that trend will change.

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

]]> https://asiapacificreport.nz/2025/11/18/jacinda-ardern-why-nzs-tiny-group-of-hysterical-haters-cant-face-the-facts/ Tue, 18 Nov 2025 04:47:18 +0000 https://asiapacificreport.nz/?p=121261 COMMENTARY: By Gerard Otto

As you know, there’s a tiny group of Dame Jacinda Ardern haters in New Zealand who are easily triggered by facts and the ongoing success of the former prime minister on the world stage.

The tiny eeny weeny group is made to look bigger online by an automated army of fake profile bots who all say the same five or six things and all leave a space before a comma.

This automation is imported into New Zealand so many of the profiles are in other countries and simply are not real humans.

• READ MORE: Other Jacinda Ardern reports
• Other Gerard Otto | G News reports

Naturally this illusion of “flooding the zone” programmatically on social media causes the non-critical minded to assume they are a majority when they have no such real evidence to support that delusion.

Yet here’s some context and food for thought.

None of the haters have run a public hospital, been a director-general of health during a pandemic, been an epidemiologist or even a GP and many struggle to spell their own name properly let alone read anything accurately.

None of them have read all the Health Advice offered to the government during the covid-19 pandemic. They don’t know it at all.

Know a lot more
Yet they typically feel they do know a lot more than any of those people when it comes to a global pandemic unfolding in real time.

None of the haters can recite all 39 recommendations from the first Royal Commission of Inquiry into Covid-19, less than three of them have read the entire first report, none have any memory of National voting for the wage subsidy and business support payments when they accuse the Labour government of destroying the economy.

Most cannot off the top of their heads tell us how the Reserve Bank is independent of government when it raises the OCR and many think Jacinda did this but look you may be challenged to a boxing match if you try to learn them.

The exact macro economic state of our economy in terms of GDP growth, the size of the economy, unemployment and declining inflation forecasts escape their memory when Jacinda resigned, not that they care when they say she destroyed the economy.

They make these claims without facts and figures and they pass on the opinions of others that they listened to and swallowed.

It’s only a tiny group, the rest are bots.

The bots think making horse jokes about Jacinda is amusing, creative and unique and it’s their only joke now for three years — every single day they marvel at their own humour. In ten years they will still be repeating that one insult they call their own.

Bots on Nuremberg
The bots have also been programmed to say things about Nuremberg, being put into jail, bullets, and other violent suggestions which speaks to a kind of mental illness.

The sources of these sorts of sentiments were imported and fanned by groups set up to whip up resentment and few realise how they have been manipulated and captured by this programme.

The pillars of truth to the haters rest on being ignorant about how a democracy necessarily temporarily looks like a dictatorship in a public health emergency in order to save lives.

We agreed these matters as a democracy, it was not Jacinda taking over. We agreed to special adaptations of democracy and freedom to save lives temporarily.

The population of the earth has not all died from covid vaccines yet.

There is always some harm with vaccines, but it is overstated by Jacinda haters and misunderstood by those ranting about Medsafe, that is simply not the actual number of vaccine deaths and harm that has been verified — rather it is what was reported somewhat subject to conjecture.

The tinfoil hats and company threatened Jacinda’s life on the lawn outside Parliament and burnt down a playground and trees and then stamp their feet that she did not face a lynch mob.

No doors kicked in
Nobody’s door was kicked in by police during covid 19.

Nobody was forced to take a jab. No they chose to leave their jobs because they had a choice provided to them. The science was what the Government acted upon, not the need to control anyone.

Mandates were temporary and went on a few weeks too long.

Some people endured the hardship of not being present when their loved ones died and that was very unfortunate but again it was about medical advice.

Then Director-General of Health Sir Ashly Bloomfield said the government acted on about 90 percent of the Public Health advice it was given. Jacinda haters never mention that fact.

Jacinda haters say she ran away, but to be fair she endured 50 times more abuse than any other politician, and her daughter was threatened by randoms in a café, plus Jacinda was mentally exhausted after covid and all the other events that most prime ministers never have to endure, and she thought somebody else could give it more energy.

We were in good hands with Chris Hipkins so there was no abandoning as haters can’t make up their minds if they want her here or gone — but they do know they want to hate.

Lost a few bucks
The tiny group of haters include some people who lost a few bucks, a business, an opportunity and people who wanted to travel when there was a global pandemic happening.

Bad things happen in pandemics and every country experienced increased levels of debt, wage subsidies, job losses, tragic problems with a loss of income, school absenteeism, increased crime, and other effects like inflation and a cost of living crisis.

Haters just blame Jacinda because they don’t get that international context and the second Royal Commission of Inquiry was a political stunt, not about being more prepared for future pandemics but more about feeding the haters.

All the information it needed was provided by Jacinda, Grant Robertson and Chris Hipkins but right wing media whipped up the show trial despite appearances before a demented mob of haters being thought a necessary theatre for the right wing.

A right wing who signed up to covid lockdowns and emergency laws and then later manipulated short term memories for political gain.

You will never convince a hater not to hate with facts and context and persuasion, even now they are thinking how to rebut these matters rather than being open minded.

Pandemics suck and we did pretty well in the last one but there were consequences for some — for whom I have sympathy, sorry for your loss, I also know people who died . . .  I also know people who lost money, I also know people who could not be there at a funeral . . .  but I am not a hater.

Valuing wanting to learn
Instead, I value how science wants to learn and know what mistakes were made and to adapt for the next pandemic. I value how we were once a team of five million acting together with great kotahitanga.

I value Jacinda saying let there be a place for kindness in the world, despite the way doing the best for the common good may seem unkind to some at times.

The effects of the pandemic in country by country reports show the same patterns everywhere — lockdowns, inflation, cost of living increases, crime increase, education impacts, groceries cost more, petrol prices are too high, supply chains disrupted.

When a hater simplistically blames Jacinda for “destroying the economy and running away” it is literally an admission of their ignorance.

It’s like putting your hand up and screaming, ‘look at me, I am dumb’.

The vast majority get it and want Jacinda back if she wants to come back and live in peace — but if not . . .  that is fine too.

Sad, ignorant minority
A small sad and ignorant minority will never let it go and every day they hate and hate and hate because they are full of hate and that is who they really are, unable to move on and process matters, blamers, simple, under informed and grossly self pitying.

I get the fact your body is your temple and you want medical sovereignty, I also get medical science and immunity.

It’s been nearly three years now, is it time to be a little less hysterical and to actually put away the violent abuse and lame blaming? Will you carry on sulking like a child for another three years?

It’s okay to disagree with me, but before you do, and I know you will, without taking onboard anything I write, just remember what Jacinda said.

In a global pandemic with people’s lives at stake, she would rather be accused of doing too much than doing too little.

Gerard Otto is a digital creator, satirist and independent commentator on politics and the media through his G News column and video reports. This article is republished with permission.

]]> https://asiapacificreport.nz/2025/11/14/palaus-leader-urges-stronger-climate-action-after-new-zealand-lowers-methane-targets/ Fri, 14 Nov 2025 07:00:47 +0000 https://asiapacificreport.nz/?p=121108 By Caleb Fotheringham, RNZ Pacific journalist

Palau’s leader says the world needs to be working toward reducing emissions and “not dropping targets”, in response to New Zealand slashing its methane reduction goals.

Last month, the New Zealand government announced it would cut biogenic methane reduction targets to 14-24 percent below 2017 levels by 2050. The previous target was a reduction of 24-47 percent.

Palauan President Surangel Whipps Jr, who is in Brazil for the annual United Nations climate change conference, COP30, said more work needed to go into finding solutions.

• READ MORE: Climate change minister defends weakened methane emissions target ahead of COP30
• COP30: NZ must commit to buying offshore credits to meet Paris target, climate experts say
• Pacific leaders to push 100 percent renewable energy plan at COP30 in Belém
• Indigenous activists storm COP30 climate summit in Brazil, demanding action
• Other COP30 reports

“[It’s] unfortunate because we all need to be working toward reduction, not dropping targets,” Whipps said.

“Countries struggle because it’s about making sure that their people have their jobs and maintain their industry. I can see the reason why maybe those targets were dropped, but that means we just need to work harder.”

Whipps said it probably meant the government needed to “step up” and help farmers reduce emissions.

Tuvalu’s climate minister also told RNZ Pacific he was disheartened by the new goal.

New Zealand Climate Minister Simon Watts previously told RNZ Pacific in a statement that methane reduction was limited by technology and the only alternative would have been to cut agriculture production.

“New Zealand has some of the most emissions-efficient farmers in the world, and we export to meet global demand,” Watts said.

“If we cut production to meet targets, we risk shifting production to countries who are not as emissions-efficient, which would add to global warming and have a greater impact on the Pacific.”

NZ ‘doesn’t care about Pacific’ – campaigner
Pacific Islands Climate Action Network campaigner Sindra Sharma said she wanted to know what scientists Watts spoke with.

“I’d like to see what the data is behind New Zealand having the most emissions-efficient farmers. It blows my mind that that is something he would say.”

Sharma said it was especially disappointing given New Zealand was a member of the Pacific Islands Forum.

“I think the signal that sends is extremely harmful. It shows we don’t care about the Pacific.”

Speaking to RNZ Morning Report on Thursday, Watts said the country had not weakened its ambitions on climate change.

“We’ve actually delivered upon what has been asked of us. We’ve submitted our NDC (Nationally Determined Contributions) plan for 2035 on time,” he said.

“We’ve done what we believe is possible in the context of our unique circumstances.

“We’ve taken a position around ensuring that we are ambitious with balancing that with economic challenges.”

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

]]> https://asiapacificreport.nz/2025/11/11/cop30-pacific-nations-call-for-world-to-act-as-1-5c-threshold-nears/ Tue, 11 Nov 2025 00:23:50 +0000 https://asiapacificreport.nz/?p=120990 By Lydia Lewis, RNZ Pacific presenter/bulletin editor, and Caleb Fotheringham, RNZ Pacific journalist

Pacific nations are at the world’s biggest climate talks making the familiar plea to keep global warming under 1.5C to stay alive, as scientists say the world will now certainly surpass the limit — at least temporarily.

At the opening of the COP30 climate summit in Belém Brazil, United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres made the same call that Pacific nations have for years.

“Let us be clear, the 1.5-degree limit is a red line for humanity. It must be kept within reach and scientists also tell us that this is still possible,” Guterres said.

• READ MORE: ‘We are moving in the right direction, but at the wrong speed,’ warns Lula at the opening of COP30
• Other COP30 reports

“If we act now at speed and scale, we can make the overshoot as small, as short and as safe as possible.”

The World Meteorological Organisation (WMO) confirmed in its State of the Climate update that greenhouse gas emissions, which are heating the planet, have risen to a record high, with 2025 being on track to be the second or third warmest year on record.

“It will be virtually impossible to limit global warming to 1.5C in the next few years without temporarily overshooting this target,” WMO secretary-general Celeste Saulo said.

“But the science is equally clear that it’s still entirely possible and essential to bring temperatures back down to 1.5C by the end of the century.”

Pacific Network on Globalisation (PANG) climate justice campaigner India Logan-Riley said the world was now in “deeply unstable territory” with the “very existence” of some Pacific communities now at risk.

COP31 – a Pacific COP?
As this COP starts, there is still uncertainty over where COP31 in 2026 will be hosted.

Both Australia — in conjunction with the Pacific — and Türkiye have bid to host the event.

Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has written twice to his counterpart looking for a compromise to break the deadlock.

Palau’s President Surangel Whipps Jr, who is in Belém, said it was important for Australia to be successful in its bid.

“We’re here in Brazil and the Amazon, and the focus next year needs to be a ‘Blue COP’, we need to focus on the oceans,” President Whipps said.

“One of the things I always tell people is, in some countries they only face droughts, or they may face a storm but in the Pacific we suffer from all of them; sea-level rise, storms, droughts, extreme heat.

“Other people, they can’t relate or they think it may be unreal.”

One of those people, US President Donald Trump, told the UN last month the climate crisis is “the greatest con job ever perpetrated on the world”.

Palau has a particularly close relationship with the US as one of the Compact of Free Association (COFA) nations. The agreement gives the US military access to Palau, which in return is given financial assistance and for Palauans the right to work in the US.

Whipps said Trump’s comments were unfortunate, and more reason for COP to come to the Pacific.

“I would invite President Trump to come to the Pacific. He should visit Tuvalu, and he should visit Kiribati and Marshall Islands.”

100% renewable Pacific
The Pacific is aiming to be the first region in the world to be completely reliant on renewable energy, a campaign which being led by Whipps.

“Leading the energy transition not only helps the planet by reducing our carbon footprint, but also gives us energy independence, [it] allows us to create jobs locally, and it keeps the money circulating.”

Whipps wants Palau to be running completely off renewable energy by 2032.

Meanwhile, the UN emissions gap report shows the world is on track for 2.3C to 2.5C global warming, if nations stick to Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs).

However, it is an improvement from last year’s report, which predicted 2.6C to 2.8C of warming.

Pacific Islands Climate Action Network (PICAN) policy advisor Sindra Sharma said the report laid bare the fact that global ambition is nowhere near where it needs to be.

“[The new forecast] still is quite unacceptable for vulnerable communities and small island states in particular, because we’ll feel the effects the fastest with crossing anywhere beyond 1.5 even 1.51 it’s going to have significant implications.

“We’ve always had all the solutions to be able to do so and it’s just a lack of political will. It’s a choice that’s being made consistently and that choice is going to affect every single one on this earth.”

Sharma is hopeful there will be positive outcomes at this year’s COP, despite ongoing geopolitical tensions, which are in part driven by it being hosted close to the Amazon Rainforest — often referred to as the lungs of the earth — and marking 10 years since the Paris Agreement was signed.

It is also the first time Pacific nations have confirmation from the world’s top court that failing to protect people from the effects of climate change could violate international law.

“The advisory opinion that we have now is the first time that we’re going into COP with this kind of legal clarity and the legal clarity is telling us that there’s due diligence in terms of limiting warming to 1.5C.”

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

]]> https://asiapacificreport.nz/2025/10/29/pacific-lawmakers-call-for-creation-of-human-rights-commissions-to-fight-nuclear-testing-legacy/ Wed, 29 Oct 2025 07:18:03 +0000 https://asiapacificreport.nz/?p=120433 By Mark Rabago, RNZ Pacific Commonwealth of the Northern Marianas correspondent

A Marshall Islands lawmaker has called on Pacific legislatures to establish and strengthen their national human rights commissions to help address the region’s nuclear testing legacy.

“Our people in the Marshall Islands carry voices of our lives that are shaped by this nuclear legacy,” Senator David Anitok said during the second day of the Association of Pacific Island Legislatures (APIL) general assembly in Saipan this week.

“Decades later, our people still endure many consequences, such as cancer, displacement, environmental contamination, and the Micronesian families seeking safety and care abroad. Recent studies and lived experience [have shown] what our elders have always known-the harm is deeper, broader, and longer lasting than what the world once believed.”

• READ MORE: Other nuclear testing reports

Anitok said that once established, these human rights commissions must be independent, inclusive, and empowered to tackle not only the nuclear testing legacy but also issues of injustice, displacement, environmental degradation, and governance.

“Let’s stand together and build a migration network of human rights institutions that will protect our people, our lands, our oceans, our cultures, our heritages, and future generations,” he said.

“Furthermore, we call upon all of you to engage more actively with international human rights mechanisms. Together, it will help shape a future broadened in human rights, peace, and dignity.”

To demonstrate the Marshall Islands’ leadership on human rights, Anitok noted that the country has been elected to the UN Human Rights Council twice under President Dr Hilda Heine — an honour shared in the Pacific only once each by Australia and Tahiti.

Pohnpei Senator Shelten Neth echoed Anitok’s call, demanding justice for the Pacific’s nuclear testing victims.

“Enough is enough. Let’s stop talking the talk and let’s put our efforts together — united we stand and walk the talk.

“Spreading of the nuclear waste is not only confined to the Marshall Islands, and I’m a living witness. I can talk about this from the scientific research already completed, but many don’t want to release it to the general public.

“The contamination is spreading fast. [It’s in] Guam already, and the other nations that are closer to the RMI,” Neth said.

He then urged the United States to accept full responsibility for its nuclear testing programme in the Pacific.

“I [want to tell] Uncle Sam to honestly attend to the accountability of their wrongdoing. Inhuman, unethical, unorthodox, what you did to RMI. The nuclear testing is an injustice!” Neth declared.

Anitok and Neth’s remarks followed a presentation by Diego Valadares Vasconcelos Neto, human rights officer for Micronesia under the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, who discussed how UN human rights mechanisms can support economic development, health, and welfare in the region.

Neto underscored the UN’s 80-year partnership with the Pacific and its continuing commitment to peace, human rights, and sustainable development in the wake of the Second World War and the nuclear era.

He highlighted key human rights relevant to the Pacific context:

• Right to development — Economic progress must go beyond GDP growth to include social, cultural, and political inclusion;
• Right to a clean, healthy, and sustainable environment — Ensuring access to information, public participation, and justice in environmental matters; and
• Political and civil rights — Upholding participation in governance, freedom of expression and association, equality, and self-determination.

Based in Pohnpei and representing OHCHR’s regional office in Suva, Fiji, Neto outlined UN tools available to assist Pacific legislatures, including the Universal Periodic Review, special procedures (such as thematic experts on water, sanitation, and climate justice), and treaty bodies monitoring state compliance with human rights conventions.

He also urged Pacific parliaments to form permanent human rights committees, ratify more international treaties, and strengthen legislative oversight on human rights implementation.

Neto concluded by citing ongoing UN collaboration in the Marshall Islands-particularly in addressing the human rights impacts of nuclear testing and climate change-and expressed hope for continued dialogue between Pacific lawmakers and the UN Human Rights Office.

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

]]> https://asiapacificreport.nz/2025/10/29/political-chaos-fiji-pm-rabuka-confirms-biman-prasads-resignation-after-anti-corruption-charges/ Tue, 28 Oct 2025 23:24:43 +0000 https://asiapacificreport.nz/?p=120411 RNZ Pacific

Fiji Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka has confirmed that his Finance Minister — and one of three deputies — has resigned after being charged by the country’s anti-corruption watchdog.

Local media first reported that Professor Biman Prasad, the man in charge of government finances, had been charged with corruption-related offences under Fiji’s political party laws and was expected to resign.

According to local media reports, Dr Prasad was charged with allegedly failing to declare his directorship in hotel ventures as required under the Political Parties Act.

• READ MORE: Dark political clouds forming in Fiji – expect more lightning strikes after two DPMs charged — Stan Simpson
• Fiji’s Deputy Prime Minister Biman Prasad charged by FICAC
• Second Fijian Deputy PM charged with corruption-related offences
• Kamikamica resigns amid Fiji corruption charges

The development came less than a week after the resignation of co-Deputy Prime Minister Manoa Kamikamica, who is also facing corruption charges.

“Today, I received Biman Prasad’s formal notification of his resignation from Cabinet and as Deputy Prime Minister. He will remain a member of Parliament and caucus. His resignation follows the formal charges being laid against him by the Fiji Independent Commission Against Corruption (FICAC),” Rabuka said in a video statement released by the Fiji government yesterday afternoon.

Dr Prasad, who is the leader of the National Federation Party, has served as a cabinet member since 24 December 2022. He was responsible for finance, strategic planning, national development and statistics portfolios.

Rabuka told fijivillage.com that he believed the cases against his two deputies would not be resolved quickly, and that “it may take some portfolio management and reshuffling”.

‘Shortest possible time’
However, in a statement last evening, Dr Prasad said he intended to “deal with this charge in the shortest possible time and in accordance with proper legal process”.

“My lawyers are dealing with this expeditiously,” he said.

He said Rabuka had “assured me of his personal support while I do so”.

“One thing I have learned in 11 years of political leadership is that it involves many challenges, often from unexpected places,” he said.

“This is just one more of those challenges to be dealt with calmly, patiently, and as swiftly as possible.”

Rabuka has appointed an MP from his ruling People’s Alliance Party to take over the ministerial portfolios that Dr Prasad and Kamikamica had been overseeing.

Kamikamica is being charged with perjury and giving false information to a public servant, while the details of the charges against Dr Prasad have yet to be made public by FICAC.

‘Political and institutional chaos’ – Labour Party
The Fiji Labour Party says the latest developments is a sign of “a total breakdown of leadership” under Rabuka.

“Fiji Labour Party notes with deep concern the ongoing political and institutional chaos gripping the coalition government,” it said in a statement.

“Instead of confronting the crisis head-on, the Prime Minister has chosen to downplay the gravity of the situation, pretending that everything remains ‘under control’.

“The truth is quite the opposite — the coalition is collapsing under the weight of its own hypocrisy, infighting, and betrayal,” it said.

The party added the government is “in free fall” and the country needs “renewal, not recycled politics”.

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

]]> https://asiapacificreport.nz/2025/10/28/labours-capital-gains-nz-tax-gamble-from-leak-to-launch/ Tue, 28 Oct 2025 03:00:32 +0000 https://asiapacificreport.nz/?p=120388 COMMENTARY: By Craig McCulloch, RNZ News acting political editor

It was hardly a dream debut for Labour’s long-awaited, much-argued-over tax package for Aotearoa New Zealand.

What was meant to be a carefully choreographed reveal of a capital gains tax (CGT) later this week instead arrived early — leaked to RNZ over the long weekend and hastily confirmed by Chris Hipkins this morning.

In his media conference at Parliament, Labour’s leader downplayed the premature release, saying the details had been circulated widely and could have come from anywhere.

• READ MORE: What you need to know: Seven questions about a capital gains tax

He delivered a stern warning to any leaker, but also said he was not interested in pursuing any sort of investigation.

That is sensible. History shows such hunts usually end badly. Just ask National about Jami-Lee Ross.

Still, the leak will be of some concern to Hipkins.

The party’s internal debate over whether to pursue a wealth tax or CGT has been long and bruising, with strong feelings on both sides.

RNZ understands the caucus vote for a CGT plan was near unanimous – but not quite. And the party’s ruling council and policy council were more divided again.

Hipkins needs those proponents of a wealth tax to now fall in behind the selected proposal.

Unity will be crucial if Labour is to sell yet another version of a policy it has repeatedly failed to convince voters to support.

Containing the risk
Labour knows the political peril of talking tax. It’s been burned before — in 2011, 2014, and 2017.

This time, the party has chosen the smallest possible target: a cautious CGT applying only to property sales, excluding the family home and farms.

The rate would be set at 28 percent, in line with company tax, and would apply to profits made after 1 July 2027.

National disputes the description of “narrow” but compared to the other options on offer, it meets the definition. This does not cover shares, KiwiSaver, inheritances, or personal assets, like classic cars or artwork.

In many respects, it’s little more than an expanded bright-line test — closely resembling the minority view of the 2019 Tax Working Group.

The strategy is clear: keep it simple and sellable.

Labour believes a modest CGT will be more palatable to the public than the more novel and ambitious wealth tax. Capital gains taxes are familiar overseas and no longer as frightening a concept as they once were.

Definition complications
But even the narrowest design can have complications. For example, look to the definition of “family home”.

Labour is using the definition used currently by the brightline test which requires a person to be currently living in that house “most of the time”.

It means that a person who owns just one house, but lives in a rental property elsewhere, would still be taxed if they sold that property.

Keeping the scope tight also limits revenue.

Labour’s own policy paper concedes the returns will be “small relative to GDP and total tax revenue” – roughly $700 million a year.

And almost all of that will go straight into Labour’s accompanying health policy.

The sweetener: A ‘Medicard’ for GP visits
In a bid to soften any political blow, Labour has paired the tax with a tangible benefit — a “Medicard” giving every New Zealander three free GP visits a year.

By tying its CGT to the health system, Labour hopes to frame it not so much as punishment for property owners, but more as a pragmatic way to fund something people actually want.

It’s no mistake that the policy touches the two issues named most important by voters in polling: the cost-of-living and healthcare.

Labour has also intentionally made the entitlement universal to ensure the widest possible appeal — even if critics argue the money would be better targeted to those most in need.

Speaking of the critics, government MPs were practically salivating today, having eagerly awaited this announcement as a potential turning point in the polls.

Labour’s rise in popularity has come despite having little in the way of a policy platform and the coalition hopes the tide will turn as voters look more sceptically at the alternative.

Finance Minister Nicola Willis branded the proposal a “terrible idea”, warning it would hit small businesses that own property.

‘Tall-poppy politics’
Act’s David Seymour called it divisive “tall-poppy politics”, while New Zealand First declared the rollout “a trainwreck”.

NZ First’s post on social media included a noteworthy kicker, describing the CGT as merely “a foot in the door” for the Greens and Te Pāti Māori.

Hipkins today tried to shut down that attack, claiming that Labour’s tax plan would be the next government’s tax plan.

But he received no assistance from his purported partners, with the Greens insisting they would not be relinquishing their advocacy for a wealth tax.

Expect more heat on that front as the election approaches.

RNZ’s latest Reid Research poll shows the task ahead for Labour: 43 percent in support of a CGT, 36 percent opposed, and 22 percent undecided.

That’s not exactly a decisive mandate – but it’s not dismal either.

After months of indecision, Labour is finally in the policy game.

This may not be how it had hoped to roll out its flagship policy, but the real test will be how well it can sell it over the coming months.

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

]]> https://asiapacificreport.nz/2025/10/23/thousands-march-through-streets-as-part-of-nzs-mega-strike/ Thu, 23 Oct 2025 09:25:15 +0000 https://asiapacificreport.nz/?p=120162 RNZ News

Thousands have marched through major city streets and rallied in small towns across Aotearoa New Zealand as part of today’s “mega strike” of public workers.

More than 100,000 workers from several sectors walked off the job in increasingly bitter disputes over pay and conditions.

It was billed as possibly the country’s biggest labour action in four decades.

• READ MORE: Thousands of nurses, teachers and doctors take part in NZ’s ‘mega strike’
• Gerard Otto’s G News video commentary on the ‘mega strike’
• More photos and speech videos
• Other NZ public service reports

Strike action in Auckland’s Aotea Square.    Video: RNZ

Among those on strike were doctors, dentists, nurses, social workers and primary and secondary school teachers.

Several rallies were cancelled by severe weather in the South Island and lower North Island.

Auckland
One of the day’s main rallies got underway shortly after midday with thousands of protesters gathering in Aotea Square for speeches, before marching down Queen Street.

Many carried signs and chanted, cheered and danced as they made their way down.

Green Party co-leader Chlöe Swarbrick said it was embarrassing that the government was labelling the action politically motivated.

“Of course this is political. Politics is about power and it’s about resources and it’s about who gets to make decisions that saturate and shape our daily lives,” she said.

There was a smaller, earlier rally in the morning in Henderson.

Tupe Tai from Western Springs College, who has been teaching for several decades, said the situation had become untenable.

“We’ve got really underpaid and overworked teachers, they need that support.”

She also said teachers needed an environment where they could work on the curriculum, have time to do it, but also have a life.

Hamilton
The crowd swelled to an estimated 10,000 in Hamilton’s rally.

Kimberly Jackson and her daughter were at the rally on behalf of her husband, a senior doctor who had to be at the hospital working as part of lifesaving measures.

“For us it is personal, but it’s also about this country that I love, that I’ve grown up in, and I can see terrible things happening in this country and I feel really passionate about public health care,” she said.

Jackson said she had seen the system deteriorate over her lifetime.

Chloe Wilshaw-Sparkes, regional chair of the Waikato PPTA said teachers were on strike because the offers from the government were not good enough.

“They’ve been saying ‘get round the table, have a conversation,’ but a conversation goes two ways and I think they need to be reminded of that,” she said.

Principal of Hamilton East School, Pippa Wright, was at the rally with some of the school’s teachers.

She said she believed in the NZEI’s principles, and she wanted changes which would ensure schools had really good teachers in front of students.

Wright also said pay rates needed to rise.

“So they’re not treated like graduates, and we need better conditions for teachers, and nurses, and all the public sector,” she said.

Northland
In Whangārei, the weather was sweltering and a stark contrast from conditions further south.

About 1200 people marched through several city blocks, after leaving Laurie Hall Park.

As well as teachers, nurses and other union members there were students and patients showing support.

Sydney Heremaia of Whangārei had heart surgery a few weeks ago but said he was marching to show his concern about staffing levels and creeping privatisation.

Deserei Davis, a teacher at Whangārei Primary School, feared there would be no new teachers soon if pay and conditions were not improved.

“We’ve voted to strike because we feel that the government hasn’t been addressing our issues, and especially at bargaining,” she told RNZ.

“The government scrapped pay equity claims. And that was a shocking blow to women in general, but an absolute shock and a blow for us women in education. And it’s completely scrapped it.

“More importantly, we are standing up for our tamariki, who are really poorly resourced in schools, in terms of support and the requirements coming down on teachers on a daily basis, on a monthly basis.

“It’s burning out our teachers. We’re fighting for our support staff, our teacher aides, the most vulnerable of all our staff who don’t have job security.”

She said the ministry’s offer was “absolutely atrocious”.

“$1 extra an hour over a period of three years. Like let that sink in. 60 cents one year, maybe 25 cents the following and 15 cents the following year. How does that keep up with the rate of inflation?”

Northland emergency doctor Gary Payinda told RNZ it was “pretty important to support our essential public services”.

“We don’t like what’s been going on. Then the understaffing, the refusal to acknowledge the severity of the understaffing and then, of course, pay offers that are below the cost of living, which means . . .  pay cut. None of those things seem fair to the group of public workers that are working harder than ever under huge demand.”

Striking staff called in after power outage
A union organiser said striking staff returned to Nelson Hospital to care for patients after its backup generator failed in a power outage.

The top of the South Island lost power on Thursday as wild weather hit the country. It began to be restored from 9.30am.

PSA organiser Toby Beesley said the generators at the hospital started, but it’s understood they blew out an electrical board, which led to a 45-minute total power outage.

“The senior leadership at Nelson Hospital reached out to us under our pre-agreed crisis management protocol that we’ve been working on with them for the last three weeks for an event of this nature, and they asked for additional PSA member support, which we immediately agreed to to protect the community.”

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

]]> https://asiapacificreport.nz/2025/10/23/thousands-of-nurses-teachers-and-doctors-take-part-in-nzs-mega-strike/ Thu, 23 Oct 2025 01:29:01 +0000 https://asiapacificreport.nz/?p=120137 RNZ News

It is being billed as quite possibly New Zealand’s biggest labour action in more than 40 years.

It is the latest in a growing series of strikes and walkoffs this year, but the sheer size of it today means much of New Zealand will come to a halt.

Several public sector unions say the strike is going ahead in spite of wild weather across the country — though plans for some rallies may change due to conditions.

• READ MORE: RNZ’s live news blog

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

]]> https://asiapacificreport.nz/2025/10/15/pacific-voices-urge-experts-to-decolonise-adaptation-at-new-zealands-largest-climate-forum/ Wed, 15 Oct 2025 07:12:17 +0000 https://asiapacificreport.nz/?p=119844 RNZ Pacific

Pacific leaders believe climate experts are missing an opportunity to incorporate indigenous knowledge into adaptation measures.

The call has been made as hundreds of scientists, global leaders, and climate adaptation experts around the globe gather at the Adaptation Futures Conference in Christchurch.

At the conference’s opening session, Tuvalu’s Environment Minister Maina Talia explained how sea level rise was damaging agricultural land and fresh groundwater is becoming saline.

• READ MORE: Amnesty International wants NZ visa for climate-hit Pacific islanders

“The figures are alarming, this is not just for Tuvalu and this is not a Tuvaluan problem, it’s not even a small island developing states problem, it’s a global economic bomb,” he said.

Incorporating indigenous knowledge into climate adaptation has been a major focus of the event.

Talia told RNZ Pacific he feels adaptation is generally presented in a Western lens.

“We need to decolonise our mind, decolonise our soul, in order to integrate community-based adaptation measures.”

Flagship adaptation projects
The highest elevation in Tuvalu is only four and a half metres. A 2023 report from NASA found much of Tuvalu’s land would be below the average high tide by 2050.

To combat rising seas the government has started reclaiming land, which is one of the island nation’s flagship adaptation projects.

Talia said a “decolonisation approach” gave communities ownership of the work being done.

“It’s all informed by our elders, informed by our youth, informed by our women in society, we cannot come with the idea that this is how your adaptation measures should look like.”

Secretariat of the Pacific Regional Environment Programme (SPREP) director-general Sefanaia Nawadra, on a similar line, said the “biggest difference” of incorporating indigenous-led solutions was giving people a sense of ownership.

“It’s management by compliance rather than management by regulation, where you’re using a stick to say, ‘ok, if you don’t do this, you will be penalised’.”

‘Like a cheat code’
Pacific Islands Students Fighting Climate Change president Cynthia Houniuhi said those on the front line of the adverse effects of climate change are often indigenous people, which is almost always the case in the Pacific.

“Who knows the place better than the ones that have lived there, so imagine that experience informs the solution, that’s the best way, it’s kind of like a cheat code.”

United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) head of adaptation Youssef Nassef said it is not always clear how national adaptation plans included input from indigenous people.

He also said climate knowledge is not always accessible to those who need it most.

“We create knowledge, we put them in peer-reviewed publications but are the people who are actually needing it on the frontlines of climate change impacts really receiving that knowledge.”

Pacific climate activists are coming off a high after a top UN court found failing to protect people from the adverse effects of climate change could violate international law.

ICJ advisory opinion
Houniuhi was one of the students who got the advisory opinion in July from the International Court of Justice.

But she told those attending the conference it meant nothing if not acted upon.

“We must continue this same energy, momentum and drive into the implementation of the ruling. As one of our mentors rightly said, ‘the law has now caught up to the science, what we now need is for policy to catch up to the law’.”

Houniuhi said the advisory opinion provided “more weight to influence demands”. She expected the advisory opinion to be used as a negotiating tool by Pacific leaders at COP30 in Brazil next month.

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

]]> https://asiapacificreport.nz/2025/08/18/call-for-legal-shield-for-fiji-national-provident-fund-in-review-hearing/ Mon, 18 Aug 2025 11:30:46 +0000 https://asiapacificreport.nz/?p=118678 By Elena Vucukula in Suva

The main problem in for Fiji retirement is that there is no law to protect the Fiji National Provident Fund, claims a leading trade unionist.

Fiji Trades Union Congress national executive board member and National Union of Hospitality Catering and Tourism Industries Employees general secretary Daniel Urai has told the FNPF 2011 Act review committee in Lautoka that a law needed to be put in place to ensure that the FNPF and its members are protected.

“Whenever something happens, a new government comes in — they will tell FNPF to remove all their investments abroad,” Urai said at the hearing on Friday.

• READ MORE: Other Fiji National Provident Fund reports

“And that has an effect on the FNPF investment. So, I hope you will find a way to put in a law that no one just comes and directs FNPF to remove all its investments, and that has happened in the past.

“And I hope you can look at ways to ensure that it does not happen.

“Because every time that happens, FNPF loses, and the returns are not what is expected.”

Fiji Trades Union Congress national secretary and FNPF 2011 Act review committee member Felix Anthony claimed the government had interfered with FNPF’s overseas investments in 2007.

Withdrew investments abroad
“Soon after the coup, the government, actually through the Reserve Bank of Fiji (RBF), suggested that FNPF withdraw all its investments abroad,” Anthony said.

“Just so that they keep the Fijian dollar afloat, and that actually affected FNPF income and had some financial ratification on the FNPF bottom line.

“There was some consideration given whether the RBF itself should compensate FNPF for that directive, and nothing eventuated, of course, because the government had a stronghold at that time.”

The Fiji National Provident Fund is conducting a comprehensive review of the FNPF Act 2011 to ensure the law is modern, effective, and continues to meet the retirement needs of Fijians.

The public consultation continued at the Labasa Civic Centre today and will be in Suva tomorrow.

Republished from The Fiji Times with permission.

]]> https://asiapacificreport.nz/2025/08/18/new-australia-vanuatu-deal-wont-replicate-falepili-style-pact-says-analyst/ Mon, 18 Aug 2025 04:26:43 +0000 https://asiapacificreport.nz/?p=118642 By Koroi Hawkins, RNZ Pacific editor

A Pacific analyst and commentator says it is unlikely that Vanuatu will agree to any exclusive rights in the new security and economic pact with Australia.

Senior ministers of both countries, including deputy prime ministers Richard Marles and Johnny Koanapo, initialled the Nakamal Agreement at the summit of Mount Yasur volcano on Tanna Island, ahead of formal sign-off next month.

The two nations have agreed to a landmark deal worth A$500 million that will replace the previous security pact that was scrapped in 2022.

• READ MORE: Other Australia and Vanuatu security reports

Dr Tess Newton Cain of the Griffith Asia Institute said she did not believe Vanuatu would agree to anything similar to what Tuvalu (Falepili Union) and Papua New Guinea (Bilateral Security Agreement) had agreed to in recent times.

She said that the Australian government had been wanting the deal for some time, but had been “progressing quite slowly” because there was “significant pushback” on the Vanuatu side.

“Back in 2022, it took people by surprise that there was an announcement made that a security agreement had been signed while Senator Penny Wong, Australia’s Foreign Minister was in Port Vila. She and then-prime minister Ishmael Kalsakau had signed a security agreement.

“On the Australian side, they referred to it as having not been ratified. But essentially it was totally disregarded and thrown out by Vanuatu officials, and not considered to [be a] meaningful agreement.”

High-level engagement
However, this time around, Dr Newton Cain said, there had been a significant process of negotiation between Vanuatu and Australian officials.

“There has been a lot of high-level engagement. We have had a lot of senior Australian officials visiting Vanuatu over the last six months, and possibly for a bit longer. So, it has been a steady process of negotiation.”

Dr Newton Cain said the text of the agreement had undergone a much more rigorous process, involving input from a wider range of people at the government level.

“And in the last few days leading up to the initialling of this agreement, it was brought before the National Security Council in Vanuatu, which discussed it and signed off on it.

“Then it went to the Council of Ministers, which also discussed it and made reference to further amendments. So there were some last-minute changes to the text, and then it was initialled.”

She said that while the agreement had been “substantially agreed”, more details on what it actually entailed remained scarce.

Vanuatu Prime Minister Jotham Napat said earlier this month that he would not sign the agreement unless visa-free travel was agreed.

Visa sticking point
Dr Newton Cain said visa-free travel between the two countries remained a sticking point.

“Prime Minister Napat said he hoped Prime Minister Albanese would travel to Port Vila in order to sign this agreement. But we know there is still more work to do — both Australia and Vanuatu [have] indicated that there were still aspects that were not completely aligned yet.

“I think it is reasonable to think that this is around text relating to visa-free access to Australia. There is a circle there that is yet to be squared.”

Australia is Vanuatu’s biggest development partner, as well as the biggest provider of foreign direct investment. Its support covers a range of critical sectors such as health, education, security, and infrastructure.

According to Dr Newton Cain, from Canberra’s point of view, they have concerns that countries like Vanuatu have “more visible, diversified and stronger” relations with China.

“As we have seen in other parts of the region, that has provoked a response from countries like Australia, New Zealand, the United States and others that want to be seen to be offering Vanuatu different options.”

However, she said it was not surprising that Vanuatu was looking to have a range of conversations with partners that can support the country.

“China’s relationship has moved more into security areas. There are aspects of policing that China is involved in in Vanuatu, and that this is a bit of a tipping point for countries like Australia and New Zealand.

“So these sorts of agreements with Australia [are] part of trying to cement the relationship [and] demonstrate that this relationship is built on lasting foundations and strong ties.”

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

]]> https://asiapacificreport.nz/2025/08/06/mark-brown-rejects-talk-of-strategic-shift-in-cook-islands-new-zealand-relationship/ Wed, 06 Aug 2025 00:26:37 +0000 https://asiapacificreport.nz/?p=118232 By Caleb Fotheringham, RNZ Pacific journalist in Rarotonga

The Cook Islands has no intention of leaving its special relationship with New Zealand, says Prime Minister Mark Brown.

The Cook Islands marked 60 years of self-governance in free association with New Zealand on August 4.

“The value of our relationship with New Zealand cannot be overstated,” Brown said at the national auditorium in Rarotonga on Monday. His remarks were met with a round of applause.

• READ MORE: Other Cook Islands reports

“I would like to emphasise that there is not now, nor has there ever been, a strategic shift by the Cook Islands government or our peoples to reject the value and responsibilities of our relationship of free-association with New Zealand.”

The celebration was filled with dancing, singing, food and a 45-minute speech by Brown on where the nation has come from and where it’s going.

“Every island holds a piece of our future, let us stand with conviction on the global stage. Our people span oceans. Our voice carries across borders. And our contribution continues to grow,” Brown said.

Notably absent from the four Pacific leaders attending was New Zealand Prime Minister Christopher Luxon, who is in Papua New Guinea. Foreign Minister Winston Peters was also absent.

Reflection needed
Brown said like any relationship, there will be moments that needed reflection.

“There are times when we must pause and consider whether the conventions and evolved understandings between our freely associated states remain aligned, we find ourselves in such a moment.

“I see our relationship as one grounded in enduring kinship, like members of a family who continue to care deeply for one another, even as each has grown and charted their own path.”

Brown called the current issues a bump in the road. He said they had been through far worse, like natural disasters and the covid-19 pandemic.

“[The relationship] is too well entrenched and too strong, like steel, that nothing will break it, it is too strong that even disagreeing governments will not break it.”

Representing New Zealand was Governor-General Dame Cindy Kiro, who also talked of the long-standing relationship, stemming back hundreds of years to voyaging ancestors.

“That bond of deep friendship between our two peoples, that will transcend all else as we continue to face the challenges, and celebrate the joys of the future, together.”

Sharing their thoughts
After the official ceremony, there was a big kai kai. Those attending shared their thoughts on what they wanted for the future of their country.

“To see our future generations grow up in our own paradise instead of them going overseas,” one woman said.

Another said she wanted the Cook Islands to remain a Christian nation and to keep their culture strong.

One nurse said medical was always on the go and wanted more investment, “the resources we have are very limited, so I want to see a bigger improvement within our medical side of things”.

A dentist wanted the Cook Islands to be “a modern nation” and “to be a leader in economic wealth.”

Another man wanted to remain in free association with New Zealand but wanted the country “to make its own decisions and stand on its own two feet”.

A primary school principal said he wanted more young people to learn Cook Islands Māori.

“This is our identity, our language.”

More economic independence
He also wanted the country to be more independent economically.

“I think we as a nation need to look at how we can support other countries .. .  I don’t like that we’re still asking for money from New Zealand, from Australia, at some point in the future I would like us as a nation to help other nations.”

New Zealand paused close to $20 million in development funding in June, citing a lack of consultation on agreements signed between the Cook Islands and China earlier in the year.

China’s ambassador to New Zealand, Wang Xiaolong, was attending the event.

RNZ Pacific approached him, but the ambassador said he was unable to comment because he had to leave the event.

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

]]> https://asiapacificreport.nz/2025/07/28/pacific-islands-military-veterans-hope-for-us-action-over-benefits/ Mon, 28 Jul 2025 01:30:49 +0000 https://asiapacificreport.nz/?p=117909 By Giff Johnson, editor, Marshall Islands Journal/RNZ Pacific correspondent

United States military veterans in the Marshall Islands, Federated States of Micronesia and Palau received increased attention during the Biden Administration after years of neglect by the US Veterans Administration.

That progress came to a halt with the incoming Trump Administration in Washington in January, when the new Veterans Administration put many programmes on hold.

Marshall Islands Foreign Minister and US military veteran Kalani Kaneko said he is hopeful of resuming the momentum for veterans living in the freely associated states.

• READ MORE: Other US veterans reports

Two key actions during the Biden administration helped to elevate interest in veterans living in the freely associated states:

• The administration’s appointment of a Compact of Free Association (COFA) Committee that included the ambassadors to Washington from the three nations, including Marshall Islands Ambassador Charles Paul, and US Cabinet-level officials.
• The US Congress passed legislation establishing an advisory committee for the Veterans Administration for Compact veterans.
• Kalani Kaneko was appointed as chairman to a three-year term, which expires in September.

Kaneko said he submitted a report to the Veterans Administration recently on its activities and needs.

The Foreign Minister said it is now up to the current administration of the Veterans Administration to take next steps to reappoint members of the advisory committee or to name a new group.

Virtually non-existent
Kaneko pointed out that in contrast to its virtually non-existent programme in the Marshall Islands, FSM and Palau, the VA’s programme for veterans is “robust” in Puerto Rico and the US Virgin Islands.

Citizens of the three compact nations enlist in the US military at higher rates per capita than Americans.

But when they leave the service and return home to their islands, they have historically received none of the benefits accorded to US veterans living in the United States.

Kaneko and island leaders have been trying to change this by getting the Veterans Administration to provide on-island services and to pay for medical referrals of veterans when locally available medical services are not available.

Kaneko said the 134-page report submitted in June contained five major recommendations for improved services for veterans from the US-affiliated islands:

• Establish a VA clinic in Majuro with an accredited doctor and nurse.
• Authorise use of the Marshall Islands zip code for US pharmacies to mail medicines to veterans here (a practice that is currently prohibited).
• If the level of healthcare in Marshall Islands cannot provide a service needed by a veteran, they should be able to be referred to hospitals in other countries.
• Due to the delays in obtaining appointments at VA hospitals in the US, the report recommends allowing veterans to use the Marshall Islands referral system to the Philippines to access the US Veterans Administration clinic in Manila.
• Support and prioritise the access of veterans to US Department of Agriculture Rural Development housing loans and grants.

Kaneko said he is hopeful of engagement by high-level Veterans Administration officials at an upcoming meeting to review the report and other reports related to services for Compact nation veterans.

But, he cautioned, because there was nothing about compact veterans in President Trump’s “Big Beautiful Bill” passed recently by the US Congress, it means fiscal year 2027 — starting October 1, 2026 — would be the earliest to see any developments for veterans in the islands.

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

]]> https://asiapacificreport.nz/2025/07/22/why-has-a-bill-to-relax-nz-foreign-investment-rules-had-so-little-scrutiny/ Mon, 21 Jul 2025 14:19:44 +0000 https://asiapacificreport.nz/?p=117613 ANALYSIS: By Jane Kelsey, University of Auckland, Waipapa Taumata Rau

While public attention has been focused on the domestic fast-track consenting process for infrastructure and mining, Associate Minister of Finance David Seymour has been pushing through another fast-track process — this time for foreign investment in New Zealand.

But it has had almost no public scrutiny.

If the Overseas Investment (National Interest Test and Other Matters) Amendment Bill becomes law, it could have far-reaching consequences. Public submissions on the bill close tomorrow.

• READ MORE: Other NZ foreign investment reports

A product of the ACT-National coalition agreement, the bill commits to amend the Overseas Investment Act 2005 “to limit ministerial decision making to national security concerns and make such decision making more timely”.

There are valid concerns that piecemeal reforms to the current act have made it complex and unwieldy. But the new bill is equally convoluted and would significantly reduce effective scrutiny of foreign investments — especially in forestry.

A three-step test
Step one of a three-step process set out in the bill gives the regulator — the Overseas Investment Office which sits within Land Information NZ — 15 days to decide whether a proposed investment would be a risk to New Zealand’s “national interest”.

If they don’t perceive a risk, or that initial assessment is not completed in time, the application is automatically approved.

Transactions involving fisheries quotas and various land categories, or any other applications the regulator identifies, would require a “national interest” assessment under stage two.

These would be assessed against a “ministerial letter” that sets out the government’s general policy and preferred approach to conducting the assessment, including any conditions on approvals.

Other mandatory factors to be considered in the second stage include the act’s new “purpose” to increase economic opportunity through “timely consent” of less sensitive investments. The new test would allow scrutiny of the character and capability of the investor to be omitted altogether.

If the regulator considers the national interest test is not met, or the transaction is “contrary to the national interest”, the minister of finance then makes a decision based on their assessment of those factors.

Inadequate regulatory process
Seymour has blamed the current screening regime for low volumes of foreign investment. But Treasury’s 2024 regulatory impact statement on the proposed changes to international investment screening acknowledges many other factors that influence investor decisions.

Moreover, the Treasury statement acknowledges public views that foreign investment rules should “manage a wide range of risks” and “that there is inherent non-economic value in retaining domestic ownership of certain assets”.

Treasury officials also recognised a range of other public concerns, including profits going offshore, loss of jobs, and foreign control of iconic businesses.

The regulatory impact statement did not cover these factors because it was required to consider only the coalition commitment. The Treasury panel reported “notable limitations” on the bill’s quality assurance process.

A fuller review was “infeasible” because it could not be completed in the time required, and would be broader than necessary to meet the coalition commitment to amend the act in the prescribed way.

The requirement to implement the bill in this parliamentary term meant the options officials could consider, even within the scope of the coalition agreement, were further limited.

Time constraints meant “users and key stakeholders have not been consulted”, according to the Treasury statement. Environmental and other risks would have to be managed through other regulations.

There is no reference to te Tiriti o Waitangi or mana whenua engagement.

No ‘benefit to NZ’ test
While the bill largely retains a version of the current screening regime for residential and farm land, it removes existing forestry activities from that definition (but not new forestry on non-forest land). It also removes extraction of water for bottling, or other bulk extraction for human consumption, from special vetting.

Where sensitive land (such as islands, coastal areas, conservation and wahi tapu land) is not residential or farm land, it would be removed from special screening rules currently applied for land.

Repeal of the “special forestry test” — which in practice has seen most applications approved, albeit with conditions — means most forestry investments could be fast-tracked.

There would no longer be a need to consider investors’ track records or apply a “benefit to New Zealand” test. Regulators may or may not be empowered to impose conditions such as replanting or cleaning up slash.

The official documents don’t explain the rationale for this. But it looks like a win for Regional Development Minister Shane Jones, and was perhaps the price of NZ First’s support.

It has potentially serious implications for forestry communities affected by climate-related disasters, however. Further weakening scrutiny and investment conditions risks intensifying the already devastating impacts of international forestry companies. Taxpayers and ratepayers pick up the costs while the companies can minimise their taxes and send profits offshore.

Locked in forever?
Finally, these changes could be locked in through New Zealand’s free trade agreements. Several such agreements say New Zealand’s investment regime cannot become more restrictive than the 2005 act and its regulations.

A “ratchet clause” would lock in any further liberalisation through this bill, from which there is no going back.

However, another annex in those free trade agreements could be interpreted as allowing some flexibility to alter the screening rules and criteria in the future. None of the official documents address this crucial question.

As an academic expert in this area I am uncertain about the risk.

But the lack of clarity underlines the problems exemplified in this bill. It is another example of coalition agreements bypassing democratic scrutiny and informed decision making. More public debate and broad analysis is needed on the bill and its implications.

Dr Jane Kelsey is emeritus professor of law, University of Auckland, Waipapa Taumata Rau. This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons licence. Read the original article.

]]> https://asiapacificreport.nz/2025/07/04/un-expert-calls-on-world-to-end-trade-with-israels-economy-of-genocide/ Fri, 04 Jul 2025 02:13:32 +0000 https://asiapacificreport.nz/?p=116990 Asia Pacific Report

Francesca Albanese, the UN Special Rapporteur on the Occupied Palestinian Territory, has called on countries to cut off all trade and financial ties with Israel — including a full arms embargo — and withdraw international support for what she termed an “economy of genocide”, reports Al Jazeera.

Albanese made the comments in a speech to the Human Rights Council in Geneva yesterday as she presented her latest report, which named dozens of companies she said were involved in supporting Israeli repression and violence towards Palestinians.

“The situation in the occupied Palestinian territory is apocalyptic,” she said. “Israel is responsible for one of the cruellest genocides in modern history.”

• READ MORE: Israel kills more than 300 in Gaza in 48 hours as focus intensifies on GHF
• Palestine solidarity group lawyers refer NZ prime minister Luxon, 3 ministers to ICC over Gaza
• Other Israeli war on Gaza reports

Nearly 57,000 Palestinians have been killed by Israel since the war — now in its 22nd month — began, hundreds of thousands have been displaced multiple times, cities and towns have been razed, hospitals and schools targeted, and 85 percent of the besieged and bombarded enclave is now under Israeli military control, according to the UN.

Al Jazeera’s Federica Marsi reports that Albanese’s latest document names 48 corporate actors, including United States tech giants Microsoft, Alphabet Inc. — Google’s parent company — and Amazon.

“[Israel’s] forever-occupation has become the ideal testing ground for arms manufacturers and Big Tech — providing significant supply and demand, little oversight, and zero accountability — while investors and private and public institutions profit freely,” the report said.

“Companies are no longer merely implicated in occupation — they may be embedded in an economy of genocide,” it said, in a reference to Israel’s ongoing assault on the Gaza Strip.

In an expert opinion last year, Albanese said there were “reasonable grounds” to believe Israel was committing genocide in the besieged Palestinian enclave.

The report stated that its findings illustrate “why Israel’s genocide continues”.

“Because it is lucrative for many,” it said.

Francesca Albanese v Israel’s lobby.     Video: Al Jazeera

Military procurements
Israel’s procurement of F-35 fighter jets is part of the world’s largest arms procurement programme, relying on at least 1600 companies across eight nations. It is led by US-based Lockheed Martin, but F-35 components are constructed globally.

Italian manufacturer Leonardo S.p.A is listed as a main contributor in the military sector, while Japan’s FANUC Corporation provides robotic machinery for weapons production lines.

The tech sector, meanwhile, has enabled the collection, storage and governmental use of biometric data on Palestinians, “supporting Israel’s discriminatory permit regime”, the report said.

Microsoft, Alphabet, and Amazon grant Israel “virtually government-wide access to their cloud and AI technologies”, enhancing its data processing and surveillance capacities.

The US tech company IBM has also been responsible for training military and intelligence personnel, as well as managing the central database of Israel’s Population, Immigration and Borders Authority (PIBA) that stores the biometric data of Palestinians, the report said.

It found US software platform Palantir Technologies expanded its support to the Israeli military since the start of the war on Gaza in October 2023.

The report said there were “reasonable grounds” to believe the company provided automatic predictive policing technology used for automated decision-making in the battlefield, to process data and generate lists of targets including through artificial intelligence systems like “Lavender”, “Gospel” and “Where’s Daddy?”

Other companies identified in the report
The report also lists several companies developing civilian technologies that serve as “dual-use tools” for Israel’s occupation of Palestinian territory.These include Caterpillar, Leonardo-owned Rada Electronic Industries, South Korea’s HD Hyundai and Sweden’s Volvo Group, which provide heavy machinery for home demolitions and the development of illegal settlements in the West Bank.Rental platforms Booking and Airbnb also aid illegal settlements by listing properties and hotel rooms in Israeli-occupied territory.

The report named the US’s Drummond Company and Switzerland’s Glencore as the primary suppliers of coal for electricity to Israel, originating primarily from Colombia.

In the agriculture sector, Chinese Bright Dairy & Food is a majority owner of Tnuva, Israel’s largest food conglomerate, which benefits from land seized from Palestinians in Israel’s illegal outposts.

Netafim, a company providing drip irrigation technology that is 80-percent owned by Mexico’s Orbia Advance Corporation, provides infrastructure to exploit water resources in the occupied West Bank.

Treasury bonds have also played a critical role in funding the ongoing war on Gaza, according to the report, with some of the world’s largest banks, including France’s BNP Paribas and the UK’s Barclays, listed as having stepped in to allow Israel to contain the interest rate premium despite a credit downgrade.

Which are the main investors behind these companies?
The report identified US multinational investment companies BlackRock and Vanguard as the main investors behind several listed companies.

BlackRock, the world’s largest asset manager, is listed as the second largest institutional investor in Palantir (8.6 percent), Microsoft (7.8 percent), Amazon (6.6 percent), Alphabet (6.6 percent) and IBM (8.6 per cent), and the third largest in Lockheed Martin (7.2 percent) and Caterpillar (7.5 percent).

Vanguard, the world’s second-largest asset manager, is the largest institutional investor in Caterpillar (9.8 percent), Chevron (8.9 percent) and Palantir (9.1 percent), and the second largest in Lockheed Martin (9.2 percent) and Israeli weapons manufacturer Elbit Systems (2 percent).

New Zealand referrals to the International Criminal Court
Meanwhile, the Palestine Solidarity Network Aotearoa yesterday released a report saying that it was referring two New Zealand businessmen along with four politicians, including Prime Minister Christopher Luxon, to the International Criminal Court for investigation over alleged policies relating to Gaza.

The PSNA accused the six individuals of complicity in war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide by “assisting Israel’s mass killing and starvation of Palestinians in Gaza”.

In a statement, PSNA co-chairs John Minto and Maher Nazzal said the referral “carefully outlines a case that these six individuals should be investigated” by the Office of the Prosecutor for their knowing contribution to Israel’s crimes in Gaza.

“The 103-page referral document was prepared by a legal team which has been working on the case for many months,” said Minto and Nazzal.

“It is legally robust and will provide the prosecutor of the ICC more than sufficient documentation to begin their investigation.”

]]> https://asiapacificreport.nz/2025/07/01/micronesian-summit-in-majuro-this-week-aims-to-be-one-step-ahead/ Tue, 01 Jul 2025 09:57:16 +0000 https://asiapacificreport.nz/?p=116864 By Giff Johnson, editor, Marshall Islands Journal/RNZ Pacific correspondent in Majuro

The Micronesian Islands Forum cranks up with officials meetings this week in Majuro, with the official opening for top leadership from the islands tomorrow morning.

Marshall Islands leaders are being joined at this summit by their counterparts from Kiribati, Nauru, Federated States of Micronesia, Guam, Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, and Palau.

“At this year’s Leaders Forum, I hope we can make meaningful progress on resolving airline connectivity issues — particularly in Micronesia — so our region remains connected and one step ahead,” President Hilda Heine said on the eve of this subregional summit.

• READ MORE: Other Micronesian reports

The Marshall Islands and the Federated States of Micronesia have been negotiating with Nauru Airlines over the past two years to extend the current island hopper service with a link to Honolulu.

“Equally important,” said President Heine, “the Forum offers a vital platform to strengthen regional solidarity and build common ground on key issues such as climate, ocean health, security, trade, and other pressing challenges.

“Ultimately, our shared purpose must be to work together in support of the communities we represent.”

Monday and Tuesday featured official-level meetings at the International Conference Center in Majuro. Tomorrow will be the official opening of the Forum and will feature statements from each of the islands represented.

Handing over chair
Outgoing Micronesian Island Forum chair Guam Governor Lourdes Leon Guerrero is expected to hand over the chair post to President Heine tomorrow morning.

Other top island leaders expected to attend the summit: FSM President Wesley Simina, Kiribati President Taneti Maamau, Nauru Deputy Speaker Isabela Dageago, Palau Minister Steven Victor, Chuuk Governor Alexander Narruhn, Pohnpei Governor Stevenson Joseph, Kosrae Governor Tulensa Palik, Yap Acting Governor Francis Itimai, and CNMI Lieutenant-Governor David Apatang.

Pacific Islands Forum Secretary-General Baron Waqa is also expected to participate.

Pretty much every subject of interest to the Pacific Islands will be on the table for discussions, including presentations on education, health and transportation. The latter will include a presentation by the Marshall Islands Aviation Task Force that has been meeting extensively with Nauru Airlines.

In addition, Pacific Ocean Commissioner Dr Filimon Manoni will deliver a presentation, gender equality will be on the table, as will updates on the SPC and Secretariat of the Pacific Region Environment Programme North Pacific offices, and the United Nations multi-country office.

The Micronesia Challenge environmental programme will get focus during a luncheon for the leaders hosted by the Marshall Islands Marine Resources Authority on Thursday at its new headquarters annex.

Bank presentations
Pacific Island Development Bank and the Bank of Guam will make presentations, as will the recently established Pacific Center for Island Security.

A special night market at the Marshall Islands Resort parking lot will be featured Wednesday evening.

Friday will feature a leaders retreat on Bokanbotin, a small resort island on Majuro Atoll’s north shore. While the leaders gather, other Forum participants will join a picnic or fishing tournament.

Friday evening is to feature the closing event to include the launching of the Marshall Islands’ Green Growth Initiative and the signing of the Micronesian Island Forum communique.

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

]]> https://asiapacificreport.nz/2025/06/30/fijis-dr-prasad-unveils-4-8b-budget-as-deficit-widens/ Mon, 30 Jun 2025 00:42:52 +0000 https://asiapacificreport.nz/?p=116838 By Kaya Selby, RNZ Pacific journalist

The Fiji government is spending big on this year’s budget.

The country’s Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Finance, Biman Prasad, unveiled a FJ$4.8 billion (about NZ$3.5 billion) spending package, complete with cost of living measures and fiscal stimulus, to the Fijian Parliament on Friday.

This is about F$280 million more than last year, with the deficit widening to around $886 million.

• READ MORE: Other Fiji reports

Dr Prasad told Parliament that his government had guided the country to a better economic position than where he found it.

“When we came into office we were in a precarious economic crossroad . . . our first priority was to restore macroeconomic stability, rebuild trust in policymaking institutions, and chart a path towards sustainable and inclusive growth.”

The 2025/2026 budget consisted of a spending increase across almost every area, with education, the largest area of spending, up $69 million to $847 million overall.

The health sector received $611.6 million, the Fijian Roads Authority $388 million, and the Police force $240.3 million, all increases.

A package of cost of living measures costing the government $800 million has also been announced. This includes a value-added tax (VAT) cut from 15 percent to 12.5 percent on goods and services.

Various import duties, which firms pay for goods from overseas, have been cut, such as  chicken pieces and parts (from 42 to 15 percent) and frozen fish (from 15 to 0 percent).

A subsidy to reduce bus fares by 10 percent was announced, alongside a 3 percent increase in salaries for civil servants, both beginning in August.

Drastic international conditions
In a news conference, Dr Prasad said that responding to difficult global economic shocks was the primary rationale behind the budget.

“This is probably one of the most uncertain global economic environments that we have gone through. There has been no resolution on the tariffs by the United States and the number of countries, big or small,” he said.

“We have never had this kind of interest in Fiji from overseas investors or diaspora, and we are doing a lot more work to get our diaspora to come back.”

When asked why the VAT was cut, reducing government revenue and widening the deficit, Dr Prasad said there was a need to encourage consumer spending.

“If the Middle East crisis deepens and oil prices go up, the first thing that will be affected will be the supply chain . . . prices could go up, people could be affected more.”

On building resilience from global shocks, Dr Prasad said the budget would reduce Fiji’s reliance on tourism, remittances, and international supply chains, by building domestic industry.

“It kills two birds in one [stone]. It addresses any big shock we might get . . .  plus it also helps the people who would be affected.”

In their Pacific Economic Update, the World Bank projected economic growth of 2.6 percent in 2025, after a slump from 7.5 percent in 2023 to 3.8 percent in 2024.

Senior World Bank economist Ekaterine Vashakmadze told RNZ that Fiji was an interesting case.

“Fiji is one of the countries that suffered the sharpest shock [post-covid] . . .  because tourism stopped.”

“On the other hand, Fiji was one of the first countries in the Pacific to recover fully in terms of the output to pre-pandemic level.”

Deficit too high — opposition
Opposition members have hit out at the government over the scale of the spend, and whether it would translate into outcomes.

Opposition MP Alvick Maharaj, in a statement to local media outlet Duavata News, referred to the larger deficit as “deeply troubling”.

“The current trajectory is concerning, and the government must change its fiscal strategy to one that is truly sustainable.”

“The way the budget is being presented, it’s like the government is trying to show that in one year Fiji will become a developed country.”

MP Ketal Lal on social media called the budget “a desperate cloak for scandal” designed to appeal to voters ahead of elections in 2026.

“This is what happens when a government governs by pressure instead of principle. The people have been crying out for years. The Opposition has consistently raised concerns about the crushing cost of living but they only act when it becomes politically necessary. And even then, it’s never enough.”

He also pointed out, regarding the 3 percent increase in civil servants salaries, that someone earning $30,000 a year would only see a pay increase of $900 per year.

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

]]> https://asiapacificreport.nz/2025/06/17/decoding-png-leader-marapes-talks-with-french-president-macron/ Tue, 17 Jun 2025 06:20:52 +0000 https://asiapacificreport.nz/?p=116265 ANALYSIS: By Scott Waide, RNZ Pacific PNG correspondent

The recent series of high-level agreements between Papua New Guinea and France marks a significant development in PNG’s geopolitical relationships, driven by what appears to be a convergence of national interests.

The “deepening relationship” is less about a single personality and more about a calculated alignment of economic, security, and diplomatic priorities with PNG, taking full advantage of its position as the biggest, most strategically placed island player in the Pacific.

An examination of the key outcomes reveals a partnership of mutual benefit, reflecting both PNG’s strategic diversification and France’s own long-term ambitions as a Pacific power.

• READ MORE: Other France in the Pacific reports

A primary driver is the shared economic rationale. From Port Moresby’s perspective, the partnership offers a clear path to economic diversification and resilience.

But many in PNG have been watching with keen interest and asking: how badly does PNG want this?

While Prime Minister James Marape offered France a Special Economic Zone in Port Moresby (SEZ) for French businesses, he also named the lookout at Port Moresby’s Variarata National Park after President Emmanuel Macron drawing the ire of many in the country.

The proposal to establish a SEZ specifically for French industries is a notable attempt to attract capital from beyond PNG’s traditional partners.

Strategically coupled
This is strategically coupled with securing the future of the multi-billion-dollar Papua LNG project.

Macron’s personal undertaking to work with TotalEnergies to keep the project on schedule provides crucial stability for one of PNG’s most significant economic ventures.

For France, these arrangements secure a major energy investment for its national corporate champion and establish a stronger economic foothold in a strategically vital region between Asia and the Pacific.

In the area of security, the relationship addresses tangible needs for both nations.

PNG is faced with the immense challenge of monitoring a 2.4 million sq km Exclusive Economic Zone, making it vulnerable to illegal, unreported, and unregulated (IUU) fishing.

The finalisation of a Shiprider Agreement with France provides a practical force-multiplier, leveraging French naval assets to enhance PNG’s maritime surveillance capabilities. This move, along with planned defence talks on air and maritime cooperation, allows PNG to diversify its security architecture.

For France, a resident power with Pacific territories like New Caledonia and French Polynesia, participating in regional security operations reinforces its role and commitment to stability in the Indo-Pacific.

Elevating diplomatic influence
The partnership is also a vehicle for elevating diplomatic influence.

Port Moresby has noted the significance of engaging with a partner that holds permanent membership on the UN Security Council and seats at the G7 and G20.

This alignment provides PNG with a powerful channel to global decision-making forums. The reciprocal move to establish a PNG embassy in Paris further cements the relationship on a mature footing.

The diplomatic synergy is perhaps best illustrated by France’s full endorsement of PNG’s bid to host a future UN Ocean Conference. This support provides PNG with a major opportunity to lead on the world stage, while allowing France to demonstrate its credentials as a key partner to the Pacific Islands.

This deepening PNG-France partnership does not exist in a vacuum.

It is unfolding within a broader context of heightened geopolitical competition across the Pacific.

The West’s view of China’s rapid emergence as a dominant economic and military force in the region has reshaped the strategic landscape, prompting traditional powers to re-engage with renewed urgency.

increased diplomatic footprint
The United States has responded by significantly increasing its diplomatic and security footprint, a move marked by Secretary of State Antony Blinken’s visit to Port Moresby to sign the Defence Cooperation Agreement.

Similarly, Australia, PNG’s traditional security partner, is working to reinforce its long-standing influence through initiatives like the multi-million-dollar deal to establish a PNG team in its National Rugby League (NRL), a soft-power exercise reportedly linked to security outcomes.

This competitive environment has, in turn, created greater agency for Pacific nations, allowing them to diversify their partnerships beyond old allies and providing a fertile ground for European powers like France to assert their own strategic interests.

A strong foundation for the relationship is a shared public stance on environmental stewardship. The agreement on the need for rigorous scientific studies before any deep-sea mining occurs aligns PNG’s national policy with a position of environmental caution.

This common ground extends to broader climate action, where France’s commitment to conservation in the Pacific resonates with PNG’s status as a frontline nation vulnerable to climate change.

This alignment on values provides a durable and politically important basis for cooperation, allowing both nations to jointly advocate for climate justice and ocean protection.

For the Papua New Guinea economy, this deepening partnership with France is critically important as it provides high-level stability for the multi-billion-dollar Papua LNG project and creates a direct pathway for new investment through a proposed SEZ for French businesses.

Vital economic resource
Furthermore, by moving to finalise a Shiprider Agreement to combat illegal fishing, the government is actively protecting a vital economic resource.

For Marape’s credibility in local politics, these outcomes are tangible successes he can present to the nation as he battles a massive credibility dip in recent years.

Securing a personal undertaking from the leader of a G7 nation, gaining support for PNG to host a future UN Ocean Conference, and enhancing national security demonstrates effective leadership on the world stage.

This allows him to build a narrative of a competent statesman who, through “warm, personal relationships”, can deliver on promises of economic opportunity and national security while strengthening his political standing at home.

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

]]> https://asiapacificreport.nz/2025/06/12/progress-reported-out-of-bougainville-independence-talks-at-burnham/ Thu, 12 Jun 2025 05:34:41 +0000 https://asiapacificreport.nz/?p=115977 By Don Wiseman, RNZ Pacific senior journalist

Reports in Papua New Guinea say the governments of Bougainville and PNG have agreed to table the 2019 independence referendum results in Parliament.

While discussions are ongoing, some degree of consensus has been reached during the talks, being held at Burnham Military Camp, just outside of Christchurch in New Zealand’s South Island.

The talks are not open to the media.

• READ MORE:  Bougainville wants independence. China’s support for a controversial mine could pave the way
• Other Bougainville reports

A massive 97.7 percent of Bougainvillians voted for independence in 2019.

Former Bougainville president John Momis told delegates in Burnham to “take the bull by the horn” and confront the independence issue without further delay.

Both governments have agreed to present three highly pivotal documents to the PNG National Parliament.

Apart from the referendum results, there will be the moderator’s report, and the parliamentary bipartisan committee’s findings.

The commitment was formally conveyed by PNG’s Minister of Bougainville Affairs, Manaseh Makiba.

Only sovereignty acceptable
Meanwhile, the ABG President, Ishmael Toroama, said Bougainville would not accept a governance model that did not grant sovereignty.

This comes amid talk of other options, such as self-government in free association.

To achieve membership of the United Nations sovereignty is needed.

Writing in the Post-Courier, journalist Gorethy Kenneth said the Bougainville national leaders, for the “first time have come out in aligning with the Bougainville team in New Zealand”.

She reported that Police Minister and Bougainville regional MP Peter Tsiamalili Jr said he was in a peculiar position but he represented the 97.7 percent who voted for independence and he would go with the wishes of his people.

The ICT Minister, and South Bougainville MP Timothy Masiu also said his one vote in Parliament would be for independence as far as his people were concerned.

The PNG government has spoken previously of fears that independence for Bougainville would encourage other provinces to seek autonomy.

Provinces, such as New Ireland, have made no secret of their dissatisfaction with Port Moresby and desire to control more of their own affairs.

But the Bougainville Minister of Independence Implementation, Ezekiel Massat, said Bougainville’s status was constitutionally “ring-fenced” and could not set a precedent for other provinces.

He said “under the Bougainville Peace Agreement, independence is a compulsory option”.

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

]]> https://asiapacificreport.nz/2025/06/11/gutting-the-ponsonby-community-locals-say-post-office-should-stay-open/ Tue, 10 Jun 2025 19:26:11 +0000 https://asiapacificreport.nz/?p=115934 By Aisha Campbell, RNZ News intern

Ponsonby’s post office is shutting shop next month despite push back from the local community.

A sign on the storefront, which is at the College Hill end of Ponsonby Road, said the closure would take place on 4 July but the post boxes would be “staying put”.

Ponsonby local and author John Harris said New Zealand Post’s decision to close the store was “ill-considered” and it should “try harder” to cater for the people who use the shop’s services.

• READ MORE: Ponsonby community up in arms over impending post office closure
• New Zealand Post to close 79 shops: ‘I do have concerns’ – PM

“They’ve got to be mindful of the vital role that post shops like this one play in glueing the community together,” Harris said.

“If you go down to the post shop you’ll see it’s buzzing with activity; people popping in to post parcels or to get forms filled out and so forth . . .  they’ve got to think about the effect on small communities and this is like gutting the Ponsonby community.”

Viv Rosenberg, a spokesperson for the Ponsonby Business Association, said the group is saddened by the decision to close the shop.

”Our local post office has been part of the fabric of our community in Three Lamps for several years and we regard the team there as part of our Ponsonby family. We are working alongside others to try and keep it open.”

Plan but no timeframe
In 2018, NZ Post announced its plan to close its remaining 79 standalone post offices but did not give a timeframe on when the final store would be shut.

NZ Post general manager consumer Sarah Sandoval said customer data and service patterns were analysed to determine where NZ Post services were best placed.

“The Ponsonby area is well serviced by existing postal outlets, and to remove duplications of services, we’ve decided to make this change.”

She also said that there were nearby options available, including on Hardinge Street 1.4km away, and NZ Post Herne Bay, 1km away.

The NZ Post website said “store closures are given very careful consideration”.

“[Reasons for closure] can include a decline in customer numbers or services which significantly affect the economic viability of the store,” NZ Post said.

Harris emailed NZ Post CEO David Walsh expressing his disapproval of the decision to close the shop and requesting it be reconsidered.

He said a response by the NZ Post general manager consumer stated the closure followed a close look at customer data and that there were other stores serving the Ponsonby community, which was an unsustainable way for the business to operate.

“Herne Bay, Hardinge Street and Wellesley Street are either a challenging walk or you hop in the car and add to the grid,” Harris said.

“They’re only thinking about the sustainability of the New Zealand Post itself not the community.”

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

]]> https://asiapacificreport.nz/2025/06/07/ponsonby-community-up-in-arms-over-impending-post-office-closure/ Sat, 07 Jun 2025 04:29:35 +0000 https://asiapacificreport.nz/?p=115747 Asia Pacific Report

The community is up in arms over another local post office in Aotearoa New Zealand about to be closed down, this time in the iconic and historic Auckland inner city suburb of Ponsonby.

A local author and founder of Greenstone Pictures, John Harris, has led a pushback against plans to close the Ponsonby post office branch in Three Lamps next month with an undated open letter to the chief executive David Walsh.

Saying he was “surprised and dismayed” to see the “closing soon but staying put” sign in the Ponsonby NZ Post shop, Harris pointed out that the small office gave “great service to dozens of businesses” in the area, and hundreds of residents.

• READ MORE: New Zealand Post to close 79 shops: ‘I do have concerns’ – PM

“It is misleading on your poster to claim that people will be able to obtain the same services at nearby post shops like that in Jervois Road,” Harris said.

“Will they be able to pay their bills and car registration there? Collect mail and parcels? Buy courier bags and send mail and parcels?

“And do you expect them to walk there?  It is not helpful to say this closure ‘might mean a few minutes extra drive’.

This assumed that all clients were using a car, not elderly or young who were on foot.

Parking in busy streets
“And people are expected to try and find parking on other busy streets — Jervois Road, Karangahape Road, Wellesley Street.”

Harris said: “The Ponsonby post shop is a vital part of the network that binds the community together.

“To close it is like removing part of the community’s nervous system:  an ill-considered stab at the heart of a community which has always been vibrant, socially aware and productive.”

The NZ Post website proclaims that “we provide customers with the solutions and products to help them communicate and do business.”

However, said Harris, this planned closure for July 4 did not match those promises.

Harris also pointed out that NZ Post made a $16 million operating profit for the last six months of 2024.

“Congratulations. I’m pleased you are keeping NZ Post viable. But it shows there is a bit of ‘wriggle room’ to keep the Ponsonby store open.”

Digital services use
In response to the call to reconsider the decision, a customer services officer replied on June 6 on behalf of chief executive Walsh, saying that the NZ Post Office needed to “ensure our physical locations are in the right places and operating efficiently” in an age where more people used digital services.

“In some areas, including Ponsonby, we’ve had more than one store serving the same neighbourhood. That’s not a sustainable way for us to operate, so we’ve had to make some changes.”

However, critics of the decision to close the Ponsonby store say the reasoning  was “not credible”, stressing that all claimed alternative postal stores are several kilometres away.

A year after chief executive Walsh was appointed in 2017, it was announced that NZ Post would close almost 80 local post offices across the country and replace some of them with franchises.

Harris, a children’s author with a strong association with the local community stretching back to the 1970s and a former editor of West End News that circulated in Freemans Bay, Ponsonby, Grey Lynn, Herne Bay and Westmere, acknowledged that the Ponsonby PO boxes lobby was being kept open, “but what about the ordinary rank-and-file residents and small business owners who value the other everyday services offered at the store?”

He said he had also written to local MP, Green Party co-leader Chlöe Swarbrick and the Ponsonby Business Association seeking their support.

]]> https://asiapacificreport.nz/2025/05/30/french-politicians-in-new-caledonia-to-stir-the-political-melting-pot/ Fri, 30 May 2025 01:42:53 +0000 https://asiapacificreport.nz/?p=115457 By Patrick Decloitre, RNZ Pacific correspondent French Pacific desk

French national politicians have been in New Caledonia as the territory’s future remains undecided.

Leaders from both right-wing Les Républicains (LR) and Rassemblement National (RN), — vice-president François-Xavier Bellamy and Marine Le Pen respectively — have been in the French Pacific territory this week.

They expressed their views about New Caledonia’s political, economic and social status one year after riots broke out in May 2024.

• READ MORE: Other Kanaky New Caledonia reports

Since then, latest attempts to hold political talks between all stakeholders and France have been met with fluctuating responses, but the latest round of discussions earlier this month ended in a stalemate.

This was because hardline pro-France parties regarded the project of “sovereignty with France” offered by French Overseas Minister Manuel Valls was not acceptable. They consider that three self-determination referendums held in 2018, 2020 and 2021 rejected independence.

However, the last referendum, in December 2021, was largely boycotted by the pro-independence movement and its followers due to indigenous Kanak cultural concerns around the covid-19 pandemic.

The pro-France camp is accusing Valls of siding with the pro-independence FLNKS bloc and other more moderate parties such as PALIKA (Kanak Liberation Party) and UPM (Union Progressiste en Mélanésie), who want independence from France.

Transferring key powers
Valls is considering transferring key French powers to New Caledonia, introducing a double French/New Caledonian citizenship, and an international standing.

The pro-France camp is adamant that this ignores the three no referendum votes.

Speaking to a crowd of several hundred supporters in Nouméa on Tuesday evening, Bellamy said he now favoured going ahead with modifying conditions of eligibility for voters at local provincial elections.

The same attempts to change the locked local electoral roll — which is restricted to people residing in New Caledonia from before November 1998 — was widely perceived as the main cause for the May 2024 riots, which left 14 dead.

Bellamy said giving in to violence that erupted last year was out of the question because it was “an attempt to topple a democratic process”.

Les Républicains, to which the Rassemblement-LR local party is affiliated, is one of the major parties in the French Parliament.

Its newly-elected president Bruno Retailleau is the Minister for Home Affairs in French President Emmanuel Macron’s coalition government.

Nouméa Accord ‘now over’
Bellamy told a crowd of supporters in Nouméa that in his view the decolonisation process prescribed by the 1998 Nouméa Accord “is now over”.

“New Caledonians have democratically decided, three times, that they belong to France. And this should be respected,” he told a crowd during a political rally.

In Nouméa, Bellamy said if the three referendum results were ignored as part of a future political agreement, then LR could go as far as pulling out of the French government.

Marine Le Pen, this week also expressed her views on New Caledonia’s situation, saying instead of focusing on the territory’s institutional future, the priority should be placed on its economy, which is still reeling from the devastation caused during the 2024 riots.

The efforts included diversifying the economy.

A Paris court convicted Le Pen and two dozen (RN) party members of embezzling European Union funds last month, and imposed a sentence that will prevent her from standing in France’s 2027 presidential election unless she can get the ruling overturned within 18 months.

The high-profile visits to New Caledonia from mainland French leaders come within two years of France’s scheduled presidential elections.

And it looks like New Caledonia could become a significant issue in the pre-poll debates and campaign.

LFI (La France Insoumise), a major party in the French Parliament, and its caucus leader Mathilde Panot also visited New Caledonia from May 9-17, this time mainly focusing on supporting the pro-independence camp’s views.

Macron invites all parties for fresh talks in Paris
On Tuesday, May 27, the French President’s office issued a brief statement indicating that it had decided to convene “all stakeholders” for fresh talks in Paris in mid-June.

The talks would aim at “clarifying” New Caledonia’s economic, political and institutional situation with a view to reaching “a shared agreement”.

Depending on New Caledonia’s often opposing political camps, Macron’s announcement is perceived either as a dismissal of Valls’ approach or a mere continuation of the overseas minister’s efforts, but at a higher level.

New Caledonia’s pro-France parties are adamant that Macron’s proposal is entirely new and that it signifies Valls’ approach has been disavowed at the highest level.

Valls himself wrote to New Caledonia’s political stakeholders last weekend, insisting on the need to pursue talks through a so-called “follow-up committee”.

It is not clear whether the “follow-up committee” format is what Macron has in mind.

But at the weekend, Valls made statements on several French national media outlets, stressing that he was still the one in charge of New Caledonia’s case.

“The one who is taking care of New Caledonia’s case, at the request of French Prime Minister François Bayrou, that’s me and no one else,” Valls told French national news channel LCI on May 25.

“I’m not being disavowed by anyone.”

Local parties still willing to talk
Most parties have since reacted swiftly to Macron’s call, saying they were ready to take part in further discussions.

Rassemblement-LR leader Virginie Ruffenach said this was “necessary to clarify the French state’s position”.

She said the clarification was needed, since Valls, during his last visit, “offered an independence solution that goes way beyond what the pro-independence camp was even asking”.

Local pro-France figure and New Caledonia’s elected MP at the French National Assembly, Nicolas Metzdorf, met Macron in Paris last Friday.

He said at the time that an “initiative” from the French president was to be expected.

Pro-independence bloc FLNKS said Valls’ proposal was now “the foundation stone”.

Spokesman Dominique Fochi said the invitation was scheduled to be discussed at a special FLNKS convention this weekend.

Valls’ ‘independence-association’ solution worries other French territories
Because of the signals it sends, New Caledonia’s proposed political future plans are also causing concern in other French overseas territories, including their elected MPs in Paris.

In the French Senate on Wednesday, French Polynesia’s MP Lana Tetuanui, who is pro-France, asked during question time for French Foreign Affairs Minister Jean-Noël Barrot to explain what France was doing in the Pacific region in the face of growing influence from major powers such as China.

She told the minister she still had doubts, “unless of course France is considering sinking its own aircraft carrier ships named New Caledonia, French Polynesia and Wallis and Futuna”.

French president Emmanuel Macron has been on a southeast Asian tour this week to Vietnam, Indonesia and Singapore, where he will be the keynote speaker of the annual Shangri-La Dialogue.

He delivers his speech today to mark the opening of the 22nd edition of the Dialogue, Asia’s premier defence summit.

The event brings together defence ministers, military leaders and senior defence officials, as well as business leaders and security experts, from across the Asia-Pacific, Europe, North America and beyond to discuss critical security and geopolitical challenges.

More specifically on the Pacific region, Macron also said one of France’s future challenges included speeding up efforts to “build a new strategy in New Caledonia and French Polynesia”.

As part of Macron’s Indo-Pacific doctrine, developed since 2017, France earlier this year deployed significant forces in the region, including its naval and air strike group and its only aircraft carrier, the Charles de Gaulle.

The multinational exercise, called Clémenceau 25, involved joint exercises with allied forces from Australia, Japan and the United States.

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

]]> https://asiapacificreport.nz/2025/05/28/samoan-pm-fiame-advises-dissolution-of-parliament-calls-for-snap-elections/ Wed, 28 May 2025 02:24:58 +0000 https://asiapacificreport.nz/?p=115366 RNZ Pacific

Prime Minister Fiamē Naomi Mata’afa has advised Samoa’s head of state that it is necessary to dissolve Parliament so the country can move to an election.

This follows the bill for the budget not getting enough support for a first reading on yesterday, and Fiame announcing she would therefore seek an early election.

Tuimaleali’ifano Va’aleto’a Sualauvi II has accepted Fiame’s advice and a formal notice will be duly gazetted to confirm the dissolution of the Legislative Assembly.

• READ MORE: Other Samoan reports

Parliament will go into caretaker mode, and the Cabinet will have the general direction and control of the existing government until the first session of the Legislative Assembly following dissolution.

Fiame, who has led a minority government since being ousted from her former FAST party in January, finally conceded defeat on the floor of Parliament yesterday morning after her government’s 2025 Budget was voted down.

MPs from both the opposition Human Rights Protection Party and Fiame’s former FAST party joined forces to defeat the budget with the final vote coming in 34 against, 16 in support and two abstentions.

Defeated motions
Tuesday was the Samoan Parliament’s first sitting since back-to-back no-confidence motions were moved — unsuccessfully — against prime minister Fiame.

In January, Fiame removed her FAST Party chairman La’auli Leuatea Schmidt and several FAST ministers from her Cabinet.

In turn, La’auli ejected her from the FAST Party, leaving her leading a minority government.

Her former party had been pushing for an early election, including via legal action.

The election is set to be held within three months.

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

]]>