Severe weather warnings are set to come into place this weekend as Cyclone Vaianu bears down on New Zealand.

Coromandel and parts of the Bay of Plenty are expected to be the worst-affected, though no part of the North Island will escape unscathed, forecasters warn.

A state of emergency has been declared for Northland as at 5pm, for an initial period of seven days, as part of the regional response.

• READ MORE: Tropical Storm Sinlaku strengthens, could hit CNMI as typhoon by Monday
• Other Pacific wild weather reports

The first warnings will be in effect from late Saturday night in Northland, before Vaianu makes its way south.

Most of the rain and winds will hit on Sunday, reaching the upper South Island by early afternoon.

Fiji’s Health Minister Dr Ratu Antonio Lalabalavu has defended the government’s handling of the country’s HIV crisis.

HIV is surging in Fiji with at least 9000 people — or nearly one percent of the population — reported to be now infected.

There are concerns that the real figure could be significantly higher, with global health experts saying HIV is historically under-reported.

• READ MORE: Other HIV in Fiji reports

The World Health Organisation (WHO) believes the country has been gripped by an “escalating HIV outbreak”.

The island nation declared an HIV outbreak in January last year, with the government calling it “a national crisis” and regional health experts warning that it could spread across the region.

Dr Lalabalavu told Pacific Waves that despite the rising tide of infection the government’s response to the crisis had been “responsible”.

“Look at the [HIV] trend and how it started, it goes way back to 2017, 2018. We are the government that recognised it and now we are doing something about it.”

Budget allocation
The government allocated FJ$10 million (US$4.4 million) in last year’s Budget towards initiatives designed to tackle the problem, he said.

“From last year there have been government initiatives put in place to ensure that we do try and get this under control.”

Alarming stats
The Health Minister revealed some alarming HIV statistics in Parliament earlier this month.

“In 2025, Fiji recorded 2003 new diagnoses, up from 1583 in 2024, with the national rate diagnosis rising to 226 per 100,000, up from 13 per 100,000 in 2019 — a 17-fold increase,” he said.

“Men remain more affected, but the gap is narrowing, showing that infection is increasingly affecting women and families.”

On top of that, a new trend has emerged showing that the number of HIV-positive newborns is on the rise, according to the head of Fiji’s National HIV Outbreak and Cluster Response team, Dr Jason Mitchell.

Sixty babies were born with HIV last year, up from 31 cases in 2024 and more than 3 percent of women attending antenatal care in Fiji were testing positive for HIV, with the number slightly higher in the capital, Suva, Dr Mitchell said.

One baby is being diagnosed with HIV every week due to mother-to-child transmission, and one child is dying every month from advanced HIV disease.

Mother-to-child transmission
Mother-to-baby transmission is a growing concern, according to treatment support worker Dashika Balak.

“They (the mothers) test negatively initially but over the course of the pregnancy they acquire HIV,” Balak said.

“This is a new trend that we are seeing, because these women may not have risky behaviours but most of the partners are injecting drug users and in pregnancy people do have sex.”

Testing during pregnancy is now underway to reduce the risk of transmission to babies, she said.

Dr Lalabalavu has admitted that sexual promiscuity and drug use among youth in particular are huge contributing factors in the HIV epidemic.

Asked exactly how the government planned to address this, he said “a behavioural change programme” was needed to ensure that happens.

“It is part of the plan, you need good planning and a programme to ensure that is implemented across the board,” he said.

“It is not just something for the Ministry of Health, it’s for the various ministries, important stakeholders, the vanua, the church and the family in general.”

Conservative beliefs
Although there were plans to introduce a vital needle and syringe exchange programme, its rollout would take time, Dr Lalabalavu said.

“We will have to tread carefully in terms of how it is accepted within the community, and also we need to look into the legal aspect of it. So we are in the final stages of ensuring that the programme is endorsed.”

Cultural and religious beliefs played a part in the sensitivity around the issue in Fiji, he said.

“First of all, you need to create awareness that by doing this we are not advocating for drug use. That is the challenge and the narrative that we need the general public are aware of,” he said.

“Right now we are looking at avenues to ensure that we get the message to important stakeholders such as the community, the vanua, and religious-based organisations that are here.”

“We want to tap into their capabilities so they can, together with the ministry, pass this message along to their congregations and to the public at large,” he said.

Echoing this, Mitchell told Fiji’s state broadcaster that introducing the programme would not be easy, given the negative reactions in the past when condom use and family planning were phased in.

He said health officials were accused of promoting promiscuity among youth, when they were responding to public health needs.

However, he stressed that the needle and syringe programme was crucial to reducing HIV and Hepatitis C infections in the country.

Needle sharing is described as widespread in group settings, leading to infection clusters within families and communities.

The Health Minister said he expected that by the time the programme went public, it would be well accepted by the people.

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

Public trust in Fiji’s mainstream media has significantly declined, a journalism academic has told the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, citing decades of political upheaval, censorship and institutional pressure.

At its third expert hearing in Suva, the commission heard from University of the South Pacific’s associate professor of journalism Shailendra Singh, who detailed how censorship, intimidation and political pressure had weakened the media landscape over decades.

Dr Singh, who is contributing to the commission’s media chapter, told the TRC that repeated disruptions — including the 1987, 2000 and 2006 coups — had lasting consequences on press freedom and public discourse.

• READ MORE: Other Fiji media reports

Drawing on more than 30 years of experience, he outlined how newsrooms faced closures, financial strain and the loss of skilled journalists, contributing to declining editorial independence and professional standards.

He said journalists were often forced into difficult ethical positions, navigating threats and highly polarised environments, which led to self-censorship, and, at times, uncritical reporting aligned with dominant political narratives.

He described the 2000 and 2006 coups as defining moments for the industry.

The 2006 period, he noted, brought the most stringent controls, including the introduction of the Media Industry Development Act 2010, which entrenched censorship and self-censorship in newsrooms.

Steady decline in public confidence
The long-term impact, he said, had been a steady decline in public confidence.

Dr Singh told the commission that perceptions of bias and compliance had contributed to the erosion of trust, with some members of the public even supporting tighter media control.

At the same time, restrictions on traditional media created space for alternative platforms such as blogs, social media and diaspora outlets — opening new avenues for expression but also raising concerns around misinformation and accountability.

Despite the repeal of the MIDA legislation in 2023, Dr Singh said the sector continued to grapple with its legacy, including financial instability, skills shortages and the risk of renewed political interference.

He recommended stronger legal protections for press freedom, improved training to lift professional standards, greater media literacy and independent regulatory mechanisms.

Republished from The Fiji Times with permission.

Former Fijian President Ratu Epeli Nailatikau died on Thursday, aged 84.

Ratu Epeli, a chief and former Fiji military commander, served as president from 2009 to 2015.

He also served as Speaker of Parliament from 2019 to 2022.

Local media reported Ratu Epeli died at the Suva Private Hospital after being admitted earlier on Thursday evening.

• READ MORE: Ratu Epeli Nailatikau is no longer with us

In Saturday’s frontpage story titled “Nailatikau is no longer with us”, The Fiji Times described the late president as “widely respected for his leadership and dedication to the people of Fiji”.

The Fiji Sun described him as a “respected chief, soldier, diplomat and statesman”.

A former opposition leader and high chief, Ro Teimumu Kepa, said Ratu Epeli’s death had left many people in shock.

“The flowing tributes on social media shows how his personality touched many lives that he came in contact with,” she wrote in a social media post.

The ‘people’s president’
Fiji’s former Attorney-General Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum described Ratu Epeli as “the people’s president”.

“Ratu Epeli Nailatikau lived his life among his people, not above them. We see that in the countless stories coming in from across the country about his personal interactions with everyday people,” Sayed-Khaiyun said.

“He put his belief of the dignity of every Fijian into practice every day, including the day he promulgated our Fijian Constitution in 2013 which granted every citizen an equal voice in our democracy while concomitantly protecting everyone’s specific rights including the marginalised and the vulnerable.

“And as if God hadn’t given the man enough rare qualities — he had both a wonderful singing voice and the wits to know when to close out a long night in song and send us all home on a high note.”

The Fiji Labour Party said that as the great-great-grandson of Ratu Seru Cakobau — one of Fiji’s most significant figures — and the grandson of King George Tupou II of Tonga, “Ratu Epeli was undoubtedly a scion of royal lineage”.

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

Fiji’s human rights watchdog has warned that the country’s pro-Israel foreign policy and diplomatic engagement works against its international obligations and could be enabling “genocide, war crimes, and crimes against humanity” in Gaza.

The Fiji Human Rights and Anti-Discrimination Commission (FHRADC) released a statement on Tuesday in response to the Fiji government announcing plans to establish a resident embassy for Israel in Suva.

The FHRADC said that the announcement “raises important questions” and is calling on the government to uphold its human rights obligations “in all aspects” of its diplomacy.

• READ MORE: Other Israeli-Fiji relations reports

As a state party to the Genocide Convention, Fiji is bound by international human rights law and international humanitarian law, the FHRADC said.

It added under the Convention of the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, the country “is obligated to support international efforts to prevent genocide” and ensure those responsible for such crimes are held responsible.

“This includes ensuring that Fiji’s foreign policy and diplomatic relations do not assist, enable, or legitimise conduct by parties or states involved in serious violations of international law.”

The International Court of Justice (ICJ) in 2024 said that claims are “plausible” that the rights of Palestinians in Gaza under the Genocide Convention are being “violated . . .  by Israel’s large-scale military operation in Gaza” a position firmly rejected by Israel, which has maintained its actions are necessary for self defence against Hamas.

“The duty to prevent genocide is a jus cogens obligation, a non-derogable principle of international law,” FHRADC commissioner Alefina Vuki said.

Legal responsibility
She said according to international law every state had “the legal responsibility to intervene and prevent the intentional or deliberate destruction of a group of people”, suggesting Fiji had failed to do this.

“No government can ever justify or excuse its failure to carry out this responsibility. States must ensure diplomatic relations that uphold, rather than undermine the duty to prevent genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity,” she said.

Fiji opened its permanent diplomatic post in Jerusalem in September last year.

Fiji Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka said at the time that the opening of Fiji’s embassy in Jerusalem “reflects our desire to build bridges — not walls — between nations, cultures, and peoples”.

Fiji is one of a handful of countries to open a diplomatic mission in Jerusalem rather than Tel Aviv, which is controversial.

Diplomatic actions
According to FHRADC, the Fiji government has the “sovereign prerogative to determine bilateral relations”.

However, Vuki said Fiji must ensure that its “diplomatic actions do not violate international norms relating to occupation, self-determination, and the protection of civilian populations”.

“Any strengthening of bilateral relations must be carefully balanced against Fiji’s responsibilities as a member of the international community,” she said.

The FHRADC has offered to provide “independent and technical advice” to support the Fijian government with its foreign policy to keep it aligned to its international human rights commitments.

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

The legacy of nuclear testing in the Pacific is unfinished business. From the 1997 disappearance of journalist Jean-Pascal Couraud to the 2025 return of the Rainbow Warrior, these stories are part of a continuous struggle for justice.

In the Pacific, the “Atomic Age” and the climate crisis are not competing issues, they are the same fight for habitability and truth. To face our future, we must first address the lingering shadows of the past.

In “French” Polynesia, there are concerns about the mysterious fate of former anti-nuclear investigative journalist Jean-Pascal Couraud, known as “JPK” (his byline),  who was editor of the now closed Les Nouvelles de Tahiti newspaper.

Early in 2015, a judge upheld prosecution against three men accused of a kidnapping that led his death in Tahiti in 1997.

More than a decade earlier, JK’s family lodged an allegation of murder with the police following claims that he had been assassinated by a (now disbanded) local presidential militia. An investigating commission had alleged that three men, Rere Puputauki, Tino Mara and Tutu Manate, had abducted JK and dumped his body at sea.

• READ MORE: Other Eyes of Fire reports
• The Rainbow Warrior bombing 40 years on: re-energising for global peace
• Eyes of Fire website (Little Island Press)

Twenty two years later, the family are still waiting for justice, and fed up with France’s “investigation”. When the Rainbow Warrior bombing on 10 July 1985 is set against its broader political context in the Pacific, it can be seen that this event was much more than the dramatic, isolated episode against the Greenpeace flagship as portrayed by most New Zealand media.

An “Eyes of Fire” video project in 2015, which included more than 40 student journalists, also demonstrated the importance of a continuing interpretation of these events for the future of Aotearoa New Zealand and its citizens. The students looked back at the past, but were asking questions relevant to the present and future when they interrogated me and my Greenpeace colleagues involved in the Rongelap voyage.

My own baptism in French nuclear arrogance and perfidy was thanks to the late Swedish activist, researcher, and writer Bengt Danielsson, who was awarded the 1991 Right Livelihood Award for “exposing the tragic results… of French colonialism”. He and his wife Marie-Thérèse Danielsson wrote the classic and chilling books Moruroa, Mon Amour and Poisoned Reign.

In 2021, a French investigation team published a book and website that introduced new revelations about the nuclear testing programme and its health and environmental harm inflicted on Tahitians. The book, Toxique: Enquête sur les essais nucléaires français en Polynésie, by Sébastien Philippe and Tomas Statius, and the associated website Moruroa Files, were a forensic analysis of about 2,000 French government documents declassified in 2013.

Consistently lied about the tests
According to former Auckland University of Technology scholar Ena Manuireva, who was born in Mangareva (an atoll near the French nuclear testing sites of Moruroa and Fangataufa), these publications confirmed what Tahitian people already knew: “That since 1966, the French government has consistently lied about and concealed the deadly consequences of their nuclear tests, which they now seem to acknowledge, to the health of the populations and their environment.”

Following the third test after French nuclear bombs began in the Pacific, on 7 September 1966, local Tahitian lawmaker John Teariki challenged then French president Charles de Gaulle by saying: “No government has ever had the honesty or the cynical frankness to admit that its nuclear tests might be dangerous. No government has ever hesitated to make other peoples — preferably small, defenseless ones — bear the burden.”

“May you, Mr President, take back your troops, your bombs, and your planes.”

De Gaulle ignored the advice. And it took another 30 years and 190 further tests before France stopped its ruthless nuclear pollution in the Pacific.

France’s Atomic Energy Commission (CEA) was reported in early 2025 to have spent 90,000 euros in a big public relations campaign in a vain attempt to discredit the research in Toxique and the Moruroa Files, according to documents obtained by the investigative outlet Disclose.

The CEA published 5000 copies of its booklet, titled ‘Nuclear tests in French Polynesia: why, how and with what consequences’ and distributed them across Oceania.

The Rainbow Warrior bombing, with the death of photographer Fernando Pereira, was a terrible tragedy. But a greater tragedy remains in the horrendous legacy of Pacific nuclear testing for the people of Rongelap, the Marshall Islands and “French” Polynesia; associated military oppression in Kanaky New Caledonia; and lingering secrecy.

New Zealand and the PIF states should now require full investigation of nuclear testing in French Polynesia and seek a more robust compensation programme than currently exists. New Zealand and the PIF states also need to take a less ambiguous position on decolonisation in the Pacific, give greater priority to that issue and seek a “re-energising” of the activities of the UN Special Committee on Decolonisation.

This is especially important in relation to “French” Polynesia, Kanaky New Caledonia and the end of the Bougainville transitional political autonomy period with a unilateral declaration of independence slated for 1 September 2027.

Decolonisation is also a critical issue that has a bearing on New Zealand’s relations with Indonesia, particularly over the six Melanesian provinces that make up the region known in the Pacific as “West Papua” and Indonesia’s growing politically motivated role in the region over climate change aid.

A massive new transmigration programme under current President Prabowo Subianto is taking place at the same time as Jakarta’s “ecocidal” deforestation regime intensifies in the Melanesian region with the destruction of millions of hectares of tropical rainforest.

“The wealth of West Papua — gas from Bintuni Bay, copper and gold from the Grasberg mine. Palm oil from Merauke — has been sucked out of our land for six decades, while our people are replaced with Javanese settlers loyal to Jakarta,” says a West Papuan leader, Benny Wenda.

Taking the lead
It is critically important that New Zealand and the PIF states take a lead from the Melanesian Spearhead Group — at least those states other than Fiji and Papua New Guinea, which have both been co-opted by Indonesian bribery through economic aid.

They should take a more pro-active stance on West Papuan human rights and socio-political development, with a view to encouraging a process of political self-determination and a new, more credible United Nations supervised vote replacing the 1968 “Act of No Choice”.

With regard to climate change issues, it is essential to address the lack of an officially recognised category for “climate refugee” under international law. It is also important to seek an international framework, convention, protocol and specific guidelines that can provide protection and assistance for people crossing international borders because of climate change.

The existing rights guaranteed refugees — specifically the right to international humanitarian assistance and the right of return — must be extended to “climate refugees” or climate migrants.

This issue should be acted on systematically and with a practical vision by the PIF with the Australian and New Zealand governments. Australia and New Zealand need to respond to Pacific Island States’ (PIS) concerns over climate change and global warming with a greater sense of urgency and resolve.

Regional and country specific climate change plans and policies are needed to deal with large numbers of Pacific refugees or climate-forced migrants, in the event of worsening climate-change scenarios in the future.

This is especially important for New Zealand, as a country with a significant Pacific population (442,632 — 8.9 percent, 2023 NZ Census) with island communities well integrated into the national infrastructure and as a country that is well placed to welcome more Pacific Islanders.

In April 2025, the New Zealand government announced plans to double defence spending as a share of GDP over the next eight years under its long-awaited Defence Capability Plan.

Trump-inspired global arms race
However, the priority appeared to be New Zealand joining a new Donald Trump-inspired global arms race while the country faced no threat, at the expense of the climate crisis, nuclear free and Pacific peace-making capacity that have forged the country’s global reputation.

Speculation was also rife about the possibility of New Zealand joining a second tier of the controversial AUKUS security pact between Australia, the UK and the US, which would raise geopolitical tensions with little benefit for the Pacific region.

As Marshall Islands Journal editor Giff Johnson has remarked, the people of Rongelap changed the course of history for Pacific nuclear justice by taking control of their destiny with the help of Greenpeace’s Rainbow Warrior.

However, the relocation of the islanders four decades ago has revealed that the legacy of nuclear tests remains unfinished business.

“In the current global turbulence, New Zealand needs to reemphasise the principles and values which drove its nuclear-free legislation and its advocacy for a nuclear-free South Pacific and global nuclear disarmament,” says former New Zealand prime minister Helen Clark.

“New Zealanders were clear — we did not want to be defended by nuclear weapons. We wanted our country to be a force for diplomacy and for dialogue, not for warmongering.”

“On the fateful last voyage,” reflects Greenpeace Aotearoa executive director Dr Russel Norman, “the crew of the Rainbow Warrior, look at us in black and white through the lens of time, and lay down the wero — the challenge. They faced down a nuclear threat to the habitability of the Pacific.

“Do we have the courage and wits to face down the biodiversity and climate crises facing humanity, crises that threaten the habitability of planet Earth?’

To Ngāti Kura kaumatua Dover Samuels, the Rainbow Warrior was “probably the biggest battleship that ever traversed the oceans of the world. But she wasn’t armed with guns, she was armed with peace”.

An edited extract from the final chapter of New Zealand journalist Dr David Robie’s recent book Eyes of Fire: The Last Voyage and Legacy of the Rainbow Warrior marking the 40th anniversary of the bombing. He sailed with the Greenpeace crew to Rongelap Atoll for the evacuation of the nuclear health-damaged community and remained on board for 11 weeks. This article was first published by Greenpeace Aotearoa.

• David is speaking about the Rainbow Warrior and nuclear justice tomorrow, 24 March 2026, at Grey Lynn Library, 6-8pm, as part of EcoFest.

High-ranking Fiji government ministers have formally approved plans for the establishment of resident embassies for Israel and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) in Suva.

The Fiji government has announced a double diplomatic expansion in a post-cabinet meeting statement on Wednesday.

Fiji and Israel established diplomatic relations in 1970. The government said Israel’s embassy in Suva “will further enhance bilateral cooperation” between the two nations.

• READ MORE: Fiji’s stance on Israel and new embassy stirs revived condemnation
• Iran warns of ‘zero restraint’ if energy facilities attacked again
• Other Fiji and Israel reports

In September last year, Fiji opened its embassy in Jerusalem. At the time, Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka said it “reflects our desire to build bridges — not walls — between nations, cultures, and peoples”.

The government statement said that since establishing diplomatic relations over five decades ago, Fiji and Israel had been cooperating in areas such as peacekeeping, agriculture, security, and development cooperation.

“Bilateral relations have continued to strengthen in recent years, including through agricultural cooperation with MASHAV — Israel’s Agency for International Development Cooperation, and the opening of Fiji’s Embassy in Jerusalem in 2025,” the statement said.

The government said key areas that would benefit from the setting up of Israel’s embassy in Fiji included security, climate change, agriculture, and emerging technologies.

‘Significant milestone’
On the setting up of the UAE’s resident embassy, the government described it as “a significant milestone”.

Fiji and the UAE established diplomatic relations in 2010, with Fiji opening its mission in Abu Dhabi in 2012.

“The proposed mission will be the first diplomatic presence from the Gulf region in Fiji, with expected accreditation across the wider Oceania region,” the government said.

“The establishment of the UAE embassy will strengthen bilateral cooperation in areas such as renewable energy, climate resilience, trade and investment, education, and development assistance, while reinforcing Fiji’s role as a regional diplomatic hub in the Pacific.”

• The United States and Israel attacked Iran on February 28 in a war that has thrown the Middle East into turmoil.

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

Pacific Island governments are urging their citizens not to panic about the supply of fuels amid the conflict in the Middle East between Israel, the United States and Iran.

The conflict has resulted in the closure of the Strait of Hormuz, a vital shipping route that carries around 20 percent of the world’s oil (20 million barrels a day), by Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC).

The IRGC has warned that any ship passing through the strait would be attacked, triggering a near-total halt in vessels attempting to pass through the waterway, causing a surge in oil prices.

• READ MORE: 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

However, according to Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi, the Strait of Hormuz is closed only to Iran’s “enemies and their allies”, the IRGC-aligned Tasnim News Agency reported.

US President Donald Trump has demanded that allies send naval vessels to the Middle East to help escort ships through the strait.

Pacific Islands nations get nearly all of their refined fuel from refineries in Singapore, South Korea and Japan. But roughly 80 percent of the crude oil used by these Asian refineries passes through the Strait of Hormuz.

The Fiji government said on Monday that fuel supplies in the country were sufficient to meet energy needs for the next few months.

“There is no need to indulge in ‘panic buying’ at the service station,” it said in a statement.

Closely monitoring the war
It added that the government was closely monitoring the US-Israel war on Iran, and meeting with local suppliers who had already secured fuel supplies.

Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka and his cabinet were meeting today “to firm-up on the plan of action for the long-term, if there is no resolution to the conflict in the near future”.

Tonga’s government has also called on Tongans not to queue at petrol stations.

“There is no immediate need for concern or panic buying of fuel,” the Tonga Prime Minister’s Office said in a statement.

“We are assured by the energy sector that there is sufficient fuel available for now.”

Samoa’s Prime Minister Laaulialemalietoa Leuatea Polataivao Schmidt said his government’s immediate priority was to ensure that the country had enough fuel supply to meet its needs.

“What is happening . . .  we can’t control, but we are working to ensure we have enough fuel for the next one or two years because we do not know what’s going to happen next,” La’auli said during a joint press conference with New Zealand Prime Minister Christopher Luxon yesterday.

Current stocks sufficient
Vanuatu’s government said it has engaged with Pacific Energy, Vanuatu’s primary fuel importer and supplier, to assess potential impacts on national fuel supply.

“Pacific Energy reports current stocks are sufficient to cover usual consumption, the company’s supply programme, based on a three-month rolling forecast, is secured, and no shortages are anticipated in the foreseeable future,” the Ministry of the Prime Minister in Vanuatu said in a statement.

In the Solomon Islands, the country’s central bank said that while the fuel prices at the petrol stations were currently stable, “the impact of the oil price shock is expected to be felt from April 2026 onwards”.

“Preliminary assessment indicates that sustained increases in global oil prices are likely to push up domestic fuel costs, thereby feeding into higher imported inflation and overall headline inflation,” the Central Bank of Solomon Islands said in a statement.

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

The United States and Fiji have filed separate declarations of intervention in South Africa’s genocide case against Israel at the International Court of Justice (ICJ), alleging the country is committing genocide in Gaza.

While the US explicitly rejects the allegation that Israel is committing genocide, Fiji raises issues about how the 1948 Genocide Convention should be interpreted.

The 34-page Fiji declaration was filed on March 12 and is signed by Ambassador Ilaitia Tamata, Fiji’s Permanent Representative of Fiji to the United Nations and other international organisations in Geneva, reports The Fiji Times.

• READ MORE: Fiji files intervention in Gaza genocide case at ICJ
• Israel’s genocide in Gaza: Whatever happened to South Africa’s case at the ICJ?
• Palestine will continue to seek justice against Israel at ICC and ICJ, says The Hague ambassador
• More Gaza genocide lawsuit reports

In the declaration, Fiji said it was exercising its right under Article 63(2) of the ICJ Statute to intervene as a party to the Convention, arguing that the case raises important questions about how it should be interpreted.

The filing confirms that Fiji has appointed its Permanent Representative to Israel, Ambassador Filipo Tarakinikini, as agent for the proceedings.

The Fiji filing was made alongside separate interventions by Namibia and Hungary, according to a press release issued by the court on Friday, reports Middle East Eye.

All four states submitted declarations under Article 63 of the ICJ statute, which allows countries that are parties to a treaty under dispute to intervene in order to present their interpretation of that treaty.

Iceland, Netherlands also file
Earlier on Thursday, Iceland and the Netherlands also filed declarations under Article 63.

South Africa filed the case in December 2023, accusing Israel of breaching the Genocide Convention through its military campaign in Gaza following the Hamas-led attacks of  October 7 that year.

Pretoria argues that Israel’s conduct — including mass killings, destruction of infrastructure and the imposition of conditions of life threatening the survival of Palestinians in Gaza — amounts to genocide.

Israel denies the accusation and claims its war is justified by considerations of self-defence.

The US submission on Thursday stands out among most interventions for directly defending Israel against the accusation brought by South Africa. Taking sides in a case is highly unconventional under Article 63 submissions.

“It’s very unusual for an intervening state (US) to use language like that,” explained Professor Gerhard Kemp, a scholar of international law.

“States normally stick to the legal issues, which can even be helpful for both sides. But terms like ‘false’ or ‘wrong’ don’t really move the needle,” he told Middle East Eye.

“They are probably aimed at a different audience.”

US argues genocide claim ‘false’
In its declaration, Washington argues that allegations that Israel has committed genocide in Gaza are “false” and urges the court to apply a strict legal threshold when determining genocidal intent.

It says, uncontroversially, that genocide can only be established where there is clear proof of specific intent to destroy a protected group.

Israel’s genocide in Gaza: Whatever happened to South Africa’s case at the ICJ?

That intent should only be inferred when it is the only reasonable explanation for the conduct in question, it says.

The submission argues that the ICJ must be fully convinced before determining an act is genocide, due to the exceptional gravity of the crime. It also says civilian casualties and destruction during armed conflict do not by themselves prove genocidal intent.

“The United States submits that the Court should maintain its standard for inferring intent. Lowering the standard risks broadening the application of the term ‘genocide’ such that it no longer carries its original weight and meaning, and invites attempts to misuse the Genocide Convention as a gateway for bringing extraneous disputes before the Court,” the US claimed.

Hungary and Fiji’s submissions similarly advance legal arguments that align closely with Israel’s position in the case.

Narrow interpretation
Hungary’s declaration calls for a narrow interpretation of genocide and emphasises that civilian casualties and destruction during armed conflict do not in themselves demonstrate genocidal intent.

Fiji’s intervention likewise urges the court to apply an extremely high evidentiary threshold for genocide, and cautions against relying heavily on reports by international organisations or non-governmental groups when assessing allegations.

By contrast, Namibia’s declaration focuses on a broader interpretation of the Genocide Convention and emphasises how genocidal intent may be inferred from patterns of conduct and cumulative evidence.

Namibia argues that acts such as the denial of humanitarian aid, repeated displacement and deprivation of basic necessities could fall within the Convention’s prohibition on deliberately inflicting conditions of life calculated to bring about the destruction of a protected group.

Its submission also stresses that genocide can be committed through omissions, including a refusal to allow or facilitate life-saving humanitarian assistance to civilians under a state’s control.

Third-state interventions
The new filings add to a rapidly expanding list of states seeking to intervene in the proceedings.

Since April 2024, similar interventions have been submitted by Colombia, Libya, Mexico, Palestine, Spain, Turkey, Chile, the Maldives, Bolivia, Ireland, Cuba, Belize, Brazil, the Comoros, Belgium and Paraguay in support of the South African argument.

Palestine and Belize have also sought to intervene under Article 62 of the court’s statute, which allows states to apply to participate in proceedings if they believe they have a legal interest that could be affected by the court’s decision.

Under Article 63, intervening states do not become parties to the dispute. Instead, they are permitted to present their interpretation of the treaty at issue — in this case the 1948 Genocide Convention.

The interpretation adopted by the court in its eventual judgment will also be binding on those states.

The case has become one of the most closely watched disputes ever heard by the ICJ and has drawn an unusually large number of third-state interventions, which have reached 22.

The court has already ordered Israel in legally binding provisional measures to take steps to prevent acts that could violate the Genocide Convention and to allow humanitarian aid into Gaza.

Israel ignores court orders
Israel has repeatedly ignored the orders.

A final ruling on whether Israel has breached the Convention is expected in 2028. But it could take longer, depending on the length of hearings and the two parties’ adherence to deadlines.

On Thursday, Israel was scheduled to submit its counter-memorial, or arguments in response to South Africa’s accusations, after several deadline extensions by the court.

The court has yet to announce that Israel has filed its evidence, however.

During its devastating onslaught, Israel has so far killed more than 74,000 Palestinians in Gaza, most of them women and children. It has also destroyed most of the enclave’s homes, hospitals, schools and other infrastructure, rendering it largely uninhabitable for its 2.3 million civilians.

A UN commission of inquiry concluded last September that Israel has committed genocide in Gaza since 7 October 2023.

The UN report’s authors, including legal experts Navi Pillay and Chris Sidoti, told Middle East Eye that the report used evidence and a similar methodology in its analysis to that which will be used by the ICJ.

Pacific broadcasters say the future of storytelling will depend on how well traditional media adapts to the fast moving world of social media.

This topic is front and centre of a conference organised by PCBL/Pasifika TV, which brought together broadcasters, producers and media leaders from across the region to share ideas and strategies.

Held this week in Auckland, the conference explores how to “navigate the digital landscape” while maintaining cultural authenticity.

• READ MORE: Other Pacific media reports

With audiences increasing their consumption of online content, many broadcasters say they need to rethink how they deliver news programmes.

While the opportunities are ever increasing, so too are the challenges for Pacific media to balance credibility and cultural sovereignty.

The founder of the Pacific Islands Film Festival in New York City, Stacey Young, says many organisations are still figuring out how to navigate the digital landscape.

Young said the region needs to work together to stay on top of technological advancements.

‘Fear of the unknown’
“So it is a lot of that education and a bit of a fear of the unknown, like, how much resources do we need in order to diversify and end up in these spaces?

“And the truth of the matter is, it’s not that many, but it does need to be strategic. So it does need to be a conversation and a coalesce brainstorming amongst all of the islands, because it, it sounds cliche, but we’re stronger together,” Young said.

Young said traditional media needs to ensure their content is also available online.

She said sharing Pacific content on social platforms keeps those stories circulating and reaches beyond the region.

“It’s very, very important. Like, we all do it, first thing in the morning, last thing at night, you’re scrolling and love it or hate it, that’s how people consume information… And the thirst for Pacific Island stories and Pacific Island creators is a huge demand right now,” she said.

For broadcasters on the ground in the Pacific, the challenge is making sure they reach their audiences on multiple platforms.

Cannot ignore platforms
The director of Fiji’s Mai TV, Stanley Simpson, said traditional media companies cannot ignore the platforms people are using.

“I think we’ve got to be (on) every space or platform where our audience is, you know, we can’t be just in the waves or the platforms that we’ve been in traditionally in the past. Where our people are going, we need to go there too,” Stanley Simpson said.

But not all broadcasters are having positive experiences posting online.

The managing director of Samoa Broadcasting Corporation, Faiesea Lei Sam Matafeo, said their comment sections can be a battlefield of negative debate.

Faiesea said Samoa is still adjusting to social media etiquette.

“You know, social media is it’s relatively new when compared to the rest of the world in Samoa, but sadly, I think it’s doing more harm than good right now. You know, our people are still trying to adjust to this freedom to express themselves, and sadly, it’s doing more harm than good,” Faiesea said.

Despite these challenges, she said traditional media organisations continue to adapt.

‘Something you can’t fight’
“We’ve come to realise that this is something you can’t fight. You know, social media is going to be there forever.

So we’re learning to adjust and to accept that it’s going to be part of life, so we have to shift all the contents that we have and so that it’s also available on social media,” Faiesea said.

She said social media did not rule out the role of traditional media, but it was a way for Pacific broadcasters to connect with audiences.

Navigating the digital landscape continues to be the main topic of discussion for the region’s media bosses meeting in Auckland.

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

The seventh narco sub in Pacific waters was discovered last week as the wave of methamphetamine becomes the latest crisis challenging the region.

1News Pacific correspondent Barbara Dreaver has spent decades reporting on the region from this country, including the drug battle and subsequent HIV epidemic in some countries.

Dreaver has released her memoir — Be Brave: The Life of a Pacific Correspondent — on covering the Pacific through natural disasters, military coups and criminal activity.

• READ MORE: Barbara Dreaver: I’ve never defended who I am, why should I?
• Other Barbara Dreaver reports

She was detained and deported from Fiji before being blacklisted and not allowed to return for many years during former Prime Minister Voreqe Bainimarama’s reign.

Bainimarama was recently charged with inciting mutiny over allegations they encouraged senior Fiji Military Forces officers to act against the military commander in 2023.

She is a well known face within in Aotearoa, and in much of the Pacific where 1News is screened.

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

• Listen to her interview with RNZ Nine to Noon

The governments of Fiji, Solomon Islands and Vanuatu have issued advisories for their nationals in the Middle East to remain calm and take the necessary precautions due to US-Israeli airstrikes on Iran.

Fiji’s Embassy in Abu Dhabi said Fijian nationals who were not residents of the United Arab Emirates should register with the embassy as soon as possible amid airspace closures in the Gulf Cooperation Council region.

The embassy said registration would allow them to offer necessary consular support and maintain situational awareness of Fijian nationals in-country.

• READ MORE:  Trump says Iran attacks to continue until ‘all objectives’ achieved
• World leaders react cautiously to U.S. and Israeli strikes on Iran
• Critics say weak NZ response over US-Israel attacks on Iran a ‘disgrace’
• UN’s Guterres condemns US-Israeli strikes, retaliatory attacks by Iran
• Other US-Israel attack on Iran reports

The Solomon Islands Foreign Affairs Ministry has advised all its nationals not to travel to the region until further notice.

“Solomon Islanders residing in the Gulf Region and Israel are urged to take necessary precautions, remain calm, follow host country authorities, and monitor reliable updates,” the ministry said in a statement.

While the Vanuatu government is advising its nationals and passport holders that the situation “is extremely volatile and unpredictable” and those caught in affected areas should “make immediate arrangements to depart if possible”.

“Stay informed about local conditions and register with the Vanuatu Ministry of Foreign Affairs if you’re planning to travel to affected areas,” the Vanuatu Foreign Ministry said.

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

The arrest and charging of British-Fijian publisher Charlie Charters has pushed Fiji’s anti-corruption watchdog into fresh controversy.

Charters’ arrest by police last weekend has raised sharp questions about whistleblowers, due process, and political pressure in the Pacific island nation.

The 57-year-old appeared in the Suva Magistrates’ Court on Monday charged with two counts of aiding and abetting.

• READ MORE: Fiji PM Rabuka stands by anti-corruption body after arrest of critic
• Arrest and charges against British-Fijian national spark free speech concerns
• FICAC defends silence in Charlie Charters case amid social media commentary
• Charters bailed and stop departure issued
• Other FICAC reports

The Fiji Independent Commission Against Corruption (FICAC) alleges he helped an officer of the commission unlawfully release official information, which was then posted on his Facebook account, “Charlie Charters”.

In a statement, FICAC saID the first charge related to posts made between 2 November and 14 December 2025. The second related to a post on 2 February 2026.

Under section 13G of the FICAC Act, it is an offence for an officer or former officer to divulge official information without written authorisation.

Charlie Charters speaking outside the court.             Video: FijiVillage News

Section 45 of the Crimes Act states that a person who aids and abets an offence is taken to have committed that offence and is punishable accordingly.

Stopped at airport
Charters was stopped at Nadi International Airport on Saturday while travelling to Sydney.

He reportedly declined requests from FICAC officers to reveal his sources and spent two nights in custody before being granted bail.

The court imposed strict bail conditions, including surrendering his travel documents and a stop departure order.

A non-cash bail bond of $2000 was set with a surety. The matter has been adjourned to March 2.

FICAC said it had not issued a public comment earlier because the matter was under active investigation.

“It would have been inappropriate and contrary to established investigative practice to discuss a live investigation while inquiries were continuing, irrespective of commentary circulating on social media,” the statement read.

“The matter is now properly before the court and will proceed in accordance with due process.”

Agency challenged
But Charters’ lawyer, Seforan Fatiaki, has strongly challenged the agency’s actions.

He has publicly alleged that the arrest and detention were aimed at forcing his client to reveal his source instead of pursuing a genuine criminal investigation.

“It was made clear that Mr Charters’ arrest and detention were carried out for the sole purpose of extracting that information from him,” Fatiaki said.

“If Mr Charters will not volunteer that information, FICAC cannot lawfully use its powers of detention and arrest to pressure him into giving it.”

Fatiaki described the actions as a gross misuse of FICAC’s statutory powers, particularly the prohibition on departure from Fiji.

The case comes at a sensitive time for FICAC. Fiji’s Judicial Services Commission is reportedly of the view that the appointment of the agency’s current head, Lavi Rokoika, was not legal.

Appointed after sacking
She was appointed last May after the sacking of former commissioner Barbara Malimali.

The High Court has since ruled that Malimali’s removal was “unlawful”.

Fijian Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka has sought to distance his government from the unfolding saga.

“We will not interfere [with FICAC],” Rabuka told reporters in Suva.

He acknowledged Fiji does not have a whistleblower policy but said it needed one. Rabuka added that questions remained about “how do we know that the whistleblower is genuine and the facts that they raised are factual”.

As the case heads back to court next week, many in Fiji and across the Pacific will be watching closely.

For some, it is about whether anti-corruption laws are being upheld. For others, it is about whether those who publish leaked information can do so without fear of being forced to reveal their sources.

Republished from Pacific Media Network News with permission.

Fiji Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka says his government will not interfere with the work of the country’s anti-corruption body following the latest turn of events involving a British-Fijian national.

On Monday, Charlie Charters, a former Fiji Rugby administrator and a journalist, was released on bail by the Suva Magistrates Court after being charged with aiding and abetting an unknown Fiji Independent Commission Against Corruption (FICAC) whistleblower into releasing confidential information from the agency.

Charters, 57, was en route to Sydney on Saturday but was held at Nadi International Airport and reportedly asked by FICAC officers to reveal his sources in order to proceed with his scheduled flight.

• READ MORE: Arrest and charges against British-Fijian national spark free speech concerns
• FICAC defends silence in Charlie Charters case amid social media commentary
• Charters bailed and stop departure issued
• Other FICAC reports

He reportedly declined to comply and as a result spent two nights in FICAC custody before appearing in court yesterday. He has been released on strict bail conditions and has been ordered to surrender his travel documents.

Charters’ arrest comes amid a deepening constitutional crisis at FICAC.

According to local media, Fiji’s Judicial Services Commission, the body responsible for making recommendations to Fijian President on constitutional officers, is of the view that the appointment of FICAC’s current head Lavi Rokoika was not legal.

It makes the saga significantly complicated for Rabuka, as Rokoika was appointed in May last year following the sacking of FICAC’s previous chief, Barbara Malimali.

Appointment unlawful
While Rabuka said that the decision to dismiss Malimali was in response to the findings of a 650-page Commission of Inquiry led by Judge David Ashton-Lewis, the Fiji High Court has now ruled Malimali’s appointment was “unlawful”.

Charters has been using his Facebook platform to highlight what he describes as shortcomings of Rabuka’s coalition government which came into power in December 2022.

His posts have focused mainly on governance concerns, including issues at FICAC.

His arrest, detention, and charges have heightened anxiety among politicians, advocates and the public about FICAC and Rokoika using intimidation tactics — tactics for which the previous FijiFirst administration was accused.

“We will not interfere [with FICAC],” Rabuka told reporters in Suva when asked about the situation.

He said Fiji did not have a whistleblower policy but it needed one.

However, he added that questions needed to be asked about “how do we know that the whistleblower is genuine and the facts that they raised are factual”.

“Those are the things that will have to be considered before we formulate the policy on whistleblowing.”

Meanwhile, the case against Charters has been adjourned until March 2.

FICAC said the matter was now before the court and would proceed according to due process.

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

Last week, New Zealand First leader Winston Peters said Aotearoa’s immigration settings were “no way to treat our Pacific cousins”.

“All Pacific people want is a fair go, equivalent to what other nations are getting, and they’re not getting it,” he said outside Parliament.

While Peters’ comments were made in the context of the Pacific Justice petition, the concept of the Pacific as “family” has become a common rhetoric used by politicians and leaders across New Zealand.

• READ MORE: Four key facts about climate change and human migration
• UN warns of millions displaced by climate change as COP30 opens in Brazil
• Other climate migration reports

In 2018, former Prime Minister Dame Jacinda Ardern spoke on such issues facing the Pacific.

“We are the Pacific too, and we are doing our best to stand with our family as they face these threats,” she said during a talk at the Paris Institute.

At the Pacific Islands Forum last year, New Zealand Prime Minister Christopher Luxon said: “This is the Pacific family and we prioritise the centrality of the Pacific Islands Forum.”

But is Aotearoa doing enough to live up to this “Pacific family” rhetoric in the face of daunting and life-changing threats, such as climate change, continues to reshape the region?

Discussions and comparisons continue to arise off the back of Australia’s Falepili Union Treaty, which saw the first group of Tuvaluan migrants relocate towards the end of 2025.

Australia’s implementation of the treaty has sparked criticism over whether New Zealand is failing its Pacific neighbours when it comes to climate-related migration.

‘Increasingly perilous situations’
For Pacific Islanders hoping to move to Aotearoa, there is a pathway.

Under the Pacific Access Category (PAC) ballot, 150 people from specifically Kiribati and 250 from Tuvalu — two of the most vulnerable nations at the forefront of climate impacts — can gain residency every year.

Applicants must pay $1385, pass health checks, meet English requirements, be under 45, and secure a job offer.

Dr Olivia Yates has spent years researching climate mobility from Kiribati and Tuvalu.

She said the tension around climate mobility sits not in a lack of awareness, but in the design of the system itself.

“I think the main takeaway is that New Zealand’s current approach to climate mobility, or at least for the last five years — things are starting to change now — but initially — we do a lot of research, get a lot more information, and leave immigration systems as they are,” she said.

She said Pacific neighbours islands are facing “increasingly difficult” circumstances.

“Disasters are becoming more frequent … the access to food and to water is being challenged because of these creeping impacts of climate change. So as the New Zealand government takes one step forward, I feel like climate change is sort of a step ahead of us,” Dr Yates said.

“It sounds very doom and gloom, but the other thing I would say is that our Pacific neighbours, fundamentally and primarily, want to stay in place. Nobody wants to have to leave.”

In the meantime, people are moving, often through pathways never intended to respond to climate pressure.

“People are using these laws to come to the country and their laws that were not really set up to address climate change and the movement of people in response to climate change,” Dr Yates said.

“They’re primarily economically motivated, and so this creates a whole bunch of issues that are the downstream consequence of using a system for something that is not what it was designed for.”

She said that PAC ballot, created in 2001, has effectively become “the de facto pathway for people from Kiribati and Tuvalu to move here for reasons related to climate change”.

While many migrants cite work, family or opportunity as the primary motivations, these distinctions are becoming blurred.

“It’s kind of becoming increasingly difficult to separate climate change drivers from these factors,” Dr Yates explained.

And the consequences can be significant. When visas hinge on employment and strict eligibility criteria, families can find themselves vulnerable if those circumstances shift.

“Our current immigration laws are being used in a way that they weren’t designed for, and this is having really negative consequences on people, specifically from Kiribati and Tuvalu,” she said.

“On the other side of that, those that wish to stay, whether because they choose to or because they can’t afford to leave, that visas aren’t available to them, and they start to face increasingly perilous situations that breach their rights.”

Lacking a plan
Kiribati community leader Kinaua Ewels, who works closely with Pacific migrants settling in Aotearoa, said the system’s rigidity has left many feeling excluded and unsupported.

She does not believe New Zealand is set up to deal with the realities of climate migration

“I’m hoping the New Zealand government could help the people who are able to move on their own, using their own money, but when they get here, they can actually access work opportunities,” she said.

Ewels said the PAC still feels restrictive, and lacks a plan to help new arrivals adapt or secure employment.

“They pressure them to look for their own job. There’s no plan for the government to help them settle very easily, to run away from climate change and their life situations back on the island,” Ewels said.

“More can be done.”

According to Ewels, the families who do arrive with the hopes of safety and stability, end up struggling to navigate basic systems, such as healthcare and employment, and get no formal support.

“It’s very restricted in the way that it’s not supportive to the people from the Pacific Islands,” she said.

NZ govt ‘not ready to bring climate refugees’

Ewels said that while New Zealand spoke of the Pacific as “family,” those words continued ringing hollow for communities who saw little practical support.

“They use the family name, which is a very meaningful and deep word back home, but the process is not done yet,” she said.

“In reality, the government is not actually ready to bring people over here in terms of climate refugees or people needing to move because of climate change.”

Ewels said if New Zealand truly viewed the Pacific as family, that connection would extend itself into some meaningful collaboration with Pacific community leaders here in Aotearoa, who could help them navigate the complexities of this situation.

“If the government talks about family, they should work with us, the community leaders, so we can help them at least make sure people are warmly welcomed and supported when they come here,” Ewels said.

Dr Yates said the government was making efforts, but warned the the pace of policy was struggling to keep up with the pace of change happening in the world today.

“I would say that the New Zealand government is trying. But as the government takes one step forward, climate change is starting to outpace us.”

Pacific sea levels have risen by as much as 15cm over the past three decades.

There are predictions that around 50,000 Pacific people across the region could lose their homes each year as the climate crisis reshapes their environments.

In the past decade, one in 10 people from Kiribati, Nauru and Tuvalu have already migrated.

Kiribati community leader Charles Kiata told RNZ Pacific in October last year that life on the Micronesian island nation was becoming increasingly difficult, as it was being hit by severe storms, with higher temperatures and drought.

“Every part of life, food, shelter, health, is being affected and what hurts the most is that our people feel trapped. They love their home, but their home is slowly disappearing,” Kiata said at the time.

Crops are dying and fresh drinking water is becoming increasingly scarce for the island nation.

Kiata said Kiribati overstayers in New Zealand were anxious they would be sent back home.

“Deporting them back to flooded lands or places with no clean water like Kiribati is not only cruel but it also goes against our shared Pacific values.”

In 2020, Kiribati man Ioane Teitiota took New Zealand to the United Nations Human Rights Committee after his refugee claim, based on sea-level rise, was rejected.

The committee did find his deportation lawful, although ruled that governments must consider the human rights impacts of climate change when assessing deportations.

The term “climate refugee” remains unrecognised in binding international law. It is a term Dr Yates has previously told RNZ was always flawed.

“Climate change is this unique phenomenon because what is forcing people out of their countries comes from elsewhere,” she said.

“At face value, the idea of being a refugee didn’t fit.”

Many communities suffering at the hands of climate change do not want to leave their home, their culture, their land, their community.

Dr Yates said the term “climate mobility” was a better fit — describing it as a spectrum that recognises the desire for communities to have options.

Australia’s Falepili Treaty v NZ’s climate pathways
In late 2025, the first Tuvaluans began relocating to Australia under the Falepili Union, a bilateral treaty signed with Tuvalu in 2023.

The agreement creates a new permanent visa for up to 280 Tuvaluans each year, allocated by ballot. Applicants do not need a job offer, there is no age cap, nor disability exclusion.

The treaty has led debate on online platforms around why New Zealand does not offer a similar pathway.

International law expert Professor Jane McAdam is cautious against simplistic comparisons between New Zealand and Australia.

“It has been mislabelled in a lot of the international media as a climate refugee visa when it’s nothing of the sort,” Prof McAdam said.

“There’s often nothing in this visa that requires you to show that you’re concerned about the impacts of climate change in the future,” she said.

Professor McAdam pointed out that New Zealand had never been viewed as “totally useless” in climate-related migration of Pacific peoples.

“Historically, New Zealand has been seen as leading the way when it comes to providing pathways for people in the Pacific to move,” she said, noting the PAC visa and labour mobility schemes as examples.

“New Zealand has been leading the way globally in recognising how existing international refugee law and human rights work,” she added.

That includes influential tribunal decisions examining how climate impacts intersect with refugee and human rights law, even where claims ultimately failed.

In 2023, Pacific leaders endorsed the Pacific Regional Framework on Climate Mobility, the first regional document to formally acknowledge climate-related migration and commit states to cooperate on safe and dignified pathways.

Dr Yates said New Zealand was “furiously involved” in shaping the framework.

“The framework is the first time, put down on paper, that people are migrating because of climate-related reasons,” she said.

However, the document is non-binding.

“It means our government is ready to take this seriously. But I wouldn’t say they are taking this seriously, yet.”

She added a dedicated, rights-based climate mobility visa is needed that can account for a wide-range of people, including those with disabilities and others disproportionately affected.

RNZ Pacific approached the Immigration Minister Erica Stanford’s office for comment on whether New Zealand immigration law does explicitly recognise climate change or climate-induced displacement as grounds for special protection or a dedicated visa category.

We were advised Foreign Affairs Minister Winston Peters was the appropriate person to comment on the issue.

However, a spokesperson for Peters told RNZ Pacific the specific issue “would be a question for the Minister of Immigration, or the Climate Change Minister”.

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

Fiji’s former Prime Minister Voreqe Bainimarama and ex-police commissioner Sitiveni Qiliho are out on bail after appearing in court, charged with inciting mutiny.

The pair appeared for a first call before the Suva Magistrates Court yesterday and were granted bail under strict conditions.

Magistrate Yogesh Prasad also issued a stop departure order, meaning they cannot leave Fiji.

• READ MORE: Former PM Bainimarama and Qiliho charged with inciting mutiny
• Other Fiji politics reports

The state requested time to provide a full set of disclosures to the defence and the matter was adjourned until March 5.

Prosecutors allege that in 2023 the two encouraged senior military officers to arrest and overthrow their commander, Ro Jone Kalouniwai.

They are alleged to have spoken with high-ranking military officers during a meeting and “grog session” in July that year at Bainimarama’s Suva home.

Bainimarama also faces a second charge relating to text messages he allegedly sent between January and July 2023 to Brigadier General Manoa Gadai urging him to take command.

Night behind bars
The long-serving former prime minister, who is also a former head of Fiji’s military, spent Wednesday night behind bars with Qiliho before their court appearance.

They were arrested, handcuffed and driven to Totogo police station following lengthy questioning that day.

The Opposition leader Inia Seruiratu said the timing of their arrest suggested it was politically-motivated.

The former FijiFirst MP claims Bainimarama is still a threat to Sitiveni Rabuka’s coalition government.

“Political opponents, of course Bainimarama and [Aiyaz Sayed-] Khaiyum and a few others are a big threat to the current government.

There may be political reasons behind this because of the elections in 2026.” Seruiratu said.

Party rebranded
The opposition leader has rebranded the deregistered FijiFirst party and set up a new political party, People First, to contest the general election.

Seruiratu said he had hoped Bainimarama would back the new party, but he did not.

He still believes Bainimarama has political currency.

“Although people may think they [Bainimarama and Sayed-Khaiyum] are just minor players, they can be involved to some extent, given their past achievements and popularity. They still have support, they still have sympathisers, Seruiratu said.

RNZ Pacific has sought comment from military spokesperson Lieutenant-Colonel Eroni Duaibe and the government’s information director Samisoni Pareti.

Serious allegations
Fiji Labour party leader, Mahendra Chaudhry is questioning why it took the government so long to deal with the allegations.

“The charges and allegations are serious. If such attempts were made to incite mutiny, they should have been investigated much earlier and disposed of, rather than coming right toward the end of the term of the current government.”

Seruiratu added that their arrest reflects well on Fiji.

“No-one is above the law, this is the rule of law in action. Of course everyone, regardless of who you are in society, is answerable to the law and it is happening in Fiji right now.”

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

Fiji President Ratu Naiqama Lalabalavu has urged legislators not to sow seeds of “fear and division” as the country moves towards a general election later this year.

Speaking at the opening of the fourth and final session of Parliament before the polls, Ratu Naiqama called on political leaders and their supporters to engage constructively and respect the rule of law before, during and after the elections.

Fijians are expected to head to the polls anytime between August 7 (earliest) this year and 6 February 2027 (latest).

• READ MORE: Fiji president opens final session of Parliament with call for unity
• Other Fiji politics reports

In an almost hour-long speech, which mentioned the word “unity” 17 times and covered a wide range of topics, Ratu Naiqama also confirmed the coalition government had commenced a review of the 2013 Constitution.

“The Constitution Amendment Bill, like all other Bills, will be made public and undergo an extensive consultation process with robust public debate and input before it is tabled to Cabinet and Parliament,” he said.

AI will have ‘detrimental effect on governance’
Other topics focused from unity in diversity to climate change and the threats posed by artificial intelligence.

Ratu Naiqama said he was at pains to underline factors which created division, noting the threat of false information.

On media and artificial intelligence, he said information was being disseminated at unprecedented speed but with little regard for accuracy.

“The misuse of artificial intelligence is an emerging threat that will have a detrimental effect on governance, national unity and peace,” he said.

“While freedom of expression remains a cornerstone of our democracy, it carries with it a grave responsibility.”

Fiji’s multicultural society is one of its greatest strengths, he said. However, unity did not arise automatically from diversity, he added.

“Unity must be consciously built through fair laws, inclusive policies, respectful leadership, and a shared commitment to the common good.”

Flagged Truth Commission
Ratu Naiqama flagged the Truth and Reconciliation Commission process as important to fostering unity, inclusivity and mutual understanding across all communities, saying its “findings and recommendations should be approached with maturity, guiding practical measures that strengthen reconciliation, institutional learning, and lasting social cohesion”.

The president described climate change as “the defining challenge of our time” and that Fiji would remain a global leader in climate advocacy, “while acting decisively at home”.

Looking at the region, Ratu Naiqama said Pacific nations were navigating complex geostrategic dynamics, while striving to preserve peace, cooperation and their sovereignty.

He reiterated the importance of the Ocean of Peace concept reinvigorated by Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka at last year’s Pacific Forum leaders’ summit.

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

Several small Pacific countries regularly vote in support of Israel at the United Nations in spite of overwhelming opposition for the Zionist state in the Middle East over its genocide in Gaza.

Why?

In this AJ+ video short, senior presenter/producer Dena Takruri sets out to explain the Pacific backing for Tel Aviv, including from Fiji which is understood to be supplying peacekeepers for US President Donald Trump’s International Stabilisation Force (ISF) for Gaza due to be announced this week.

• WATCH: The AJ+ shorts video How Israel won the Pacific
• READ MORE: 600 Australians, 50 Kiwis fighting for Israeli military during Gaza genocide
• Indonesian protesters slam Prabowo over ‘peacekeeping’ troops for Gaza

Israel has been building religious and diplomatic connections with the Pacific Islands, as six nations voted with it on the Gaza ceasefire issue.

“Israel is left standing alone with the backing of the US . . . and the South Pacific,” says Takruri.

“As Israeli’s biggest financial and military backer, the US makes sense.

“But why is a region in the Global South, on nearly the complete opposite side of the globe, co-signing genocide and apartheid?

Evangelical identity
“To understand the Pacific Islands countries, you have to understand the region’s identity. And that’s mostly Christian, like 90 percent Christian.

“And that’s because European missionaries in the 19th century focused on proselytising tribal leaders. Once their chiefs were swayed, their tribes would go with them.”

Christians in the Pacific took a very literal reading of the Bible, a feature of evangelicism.

For example, in Fiji, which has just opened an embassy in Jerusalem, one in four people identify as evangelicals – Christian Zionists.

To take advantage of this, Israel has deployed a special identity-based diplomatic “mythmaking” task force presenting Jews in Israel as being “indigenous” people returning to their “homeland”.

This notion clashes with the reality that Zionists settled in Palestine and expelled 750,000 Palestinians during the 1948 Nakba –  “the catastrophe” – at the founding of the state of Israel.

“It’s the latest example of the Global North using the Global South for its own gain,” concludes Takruri.

A preliminary check of the latest Jeffrey Epstein files released by the US Department of Justice identifies several notable appearances of Pacific Island countries.

Where Pacific Islands people or places are mentioned in the deceased convicted pedophile’s emails, they often appear in routine daily news summaries, immigration or visa advice and briefings about offshore financial services in jurisdictions including some of the Pacific’s renowned tax havens.

But amid the bland items there are communications in the files which speak more sharply to Epstein’s way of life, his influential connections and the global nature of his trafficking network.

• READ MORE: Maher Nazzal: The Epstein Files – the real scandal is the silence
• Struggling to navigate the Epstein files? Here is a visual guide
• Other Epstein Files reports

Tahiti is mentioned in various email exchanges involving Epstein, including with people who were actively on the look out for young females.

It features in correspondence with Jean-Luc Brunel, the late French model scout who killed himself in a French prison while awaiting trial for charges including the rape of minors.

“Who is the girl that antoine verglas shot about a month ago [sic],” Brunel asks Epstein on 14 August 2013, “Is it the girl from tahiti”?

In June that same year, the president of the New York Giants, Steve Tisch, asked Epstein about another female from Tahiti who the late pedophile wanted him to meet, enquiring whether she was a “working girl”.

Tisch has not been charged with any wrongdoing connected with Epstein.

Epstein appears to have visited French Polynesia numerous times between 2005 and 2017, sometimes staying in Bora Bora, according to bank statements released by the Department of Justice (DOJ).

The files also show emails with Epstein’s co-conspirator, Ghislaine Maxwell, while she was in Tahiti, in 2009. Maxwell was later found guilty of grooming and trafficking girls as young as 14 years old for him and given a 20-year prison sentence in the US.

‘Fiji Water and candy’
For a time, Epstein was evidently obsessed with Fiji Water, the popular natural artesian water product sourced from Yaqara in Fiji’s main island, Viti Levu.

Bottles of Fiji Water were a common sight in Epstein’s dwellings, as one girl who was employed at an Epstein residence observed in a note book-type entry used as testimony for investigators and now shared on DOJ’s website:

“Kitchen — stacks of fiji water bottles. Woman had bikini bottoms on & had towel walk through. This is how rich people live, beautiful naked people around.”

Other files show people who managed Epstein’s household and travel were often ordering new boxes of Fiji Water — at home or on the go, Fiji Water had to be in supply.

“Principal prefers Fiji water and candy on his vehicles while being transported. Principal prefers finger food snacks with Fiji water in his jets while being transported,” advised one assistant.

Holidays in the sun
Epstein often invited people to visit, and his correspondence in the files is full of instances of him reaching out to fellow global travellers, often to find them already holidaying, in the Pacific:

“Im in santa fe, come visit,” said Epstein to someone named Reid Hoffmann who appears to be Reid Hoffmann, the founder of Linkedln, on 14 August, 2013.

“I am in Papua New Guinea mostly off grid,” Hoffman replied.

There’s a similar exchange with former Microsoft executive, Nathan Myhrvold, who replied on 28 November 2016 that he was in Rarotonga.

There is no suggestion that Hoffmann or Myhrvold are involved in any wrongdoing connected with Epstein.

Crypto and MBS
Epstein was interested in a plan announced by the Marshall Islands government in early 2018 to release its own cryptocurrency to serve as an official legal tender in the Micronesian country.

On March 1 that year he sent information about the Marshalls’ crypto plan in an email to Steve Bannon, the former chief strategist for Donald Trump during his first term as US President.

What is perhaps more interesting is the exchange in the prior emails in the thread.

“MBS coming to wash 19th,” Epstein said to Bannon in reference to the Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed Bin Salman’s upcoming visit to Washington DC.

Bannon was across it and replied “To have breakfast with Jared”, in apparent reference to Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner. Then talk turned to crypto in the Marshalls.

Shipping hassles
On his behalf, Epstein’s assistants purchased some cultural artwork from Papua New Guinea.

An invoice issued in July 2012 from Wewak-based company Pacific Artefacts, and addressed to New Zealander Brice Gordon, who worked for Epstein, listed the artwork as “Kwoma Tribe Painted Bark Panels”, priced at US$6000.

But getting an export permit for the panels from the PNG National Museum proved a lengthy process, as did arranging for the shipping through PNG’s national carrier Air Niugini, according to emails from a clearly frustrated Epstein assistant whose name is redacted.

This person was familiar with Air Niugini, and found its tracking system too inefficient, as per their email from 2 July 2012.

“I have never been able to track a shipment in the ‘system’. Inwards or outwards. I send in donated medical supplies about 4 times a year to a surgeon and it has much of the same frustrating path as this one seems to be having,” he said.

Yachts and Russians
Even after he died, Epstein’s reach was felt in the Pacific, including in relation to a yacht coming to the attention of the FBI while docked in Palau.

Amid the files is an exchange between late 2021 and early 2022 involving FBI officers following a heads-up that “Epstein’s yacht is parked down here in Palau” amid “a possible effort by a Russian oligarch to use Palau as a haven for their yacht”.

“Is our chain of command interested in this information? The Palauan government I previously tried to provide us with information a couple months ago on a yacht they believe had ties to one of the spin off Jeffery Epstein cases where they also demonstrated a willingness to assist USG/DOJ in impounding the vessel.”

It is unclear if the boat — which an attaché for the FBI in Canberra noted was registered in the Marshall Islands — was ever impounded.

But it is one more Pacific connection in the DOJ’s mass collection of files which, when not redacted, shed light on a powerful abuser whose tentacles spread around the globe.

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

Protesters have condemned Indonesia’s plan to take part in the International Stabilisaton Force for Gaza as Israel continues to violate the ceasefire on an almost daily basis.

Carrying placards declaring “Break the siege”, “Gaza is not for sale”, “So, when will the Palestinians get to decide their own future” and crosses over the Israeli flag, protesters marched through streets in Jakarta dressed in keffiyeh and Palestinian flags.

Reports from Jakarta say that the country is preparing to send about 8000 troops to Gaza as part of the so-called peacekeeping force.

• READ MORE: Indonesia to send troops to Gaza: Protesters demand president withdraw his involvement
• Troops without a seat – the Gaza ‘Board of Peace’ and Fiji
• Other Gaza reports

President Prabowo Subianto is due to join a meeting of what US President Donald Trump calls the “Board of Peace” in Washington on Thursday, reports Al Jazeera.

Indonesia’s involvement is controversial with Prabowo facing mounting criticism for the deployment plans.

Many critics are saying the plan could “sideline” the Palestinians and are accusing Subianto of “serving Israel’s goals”.

He has sought to reassure Muslim leaders that Indonesia would withdraw if Palestinian interests in self-determination are not advanced.

Indonesia peecekeeping force plan                       Video: Al Jazeera

Fiji is also facing controversy over reported plans that it may also be deploying troops for the ISF.

However, Fiji’s Defence Minister Pio Tikoduadua has clarified that Fiji has not yet made any commitment to participate, saying six days ago that the country has only received an invitation, reports Pacnews.

In a statement posted on social media, Tikoduadua stressed that no response had been given at this stage.

“Let me be clear: Fiji has only received an invitation to be part of the Gaza international stabilisation force. We have not yet responded,” he said.

Writing for Asia Pacific Report, former Fiji military officer Jim Sanday who commanded Fijian peacekeeping battalions in Lebanon and Sinai, was highly critical of the proposal, saying its United Nations reputation risked being damaged while being “excluded from decision-making”.

In 2025, Sanday led the National Security and Defence Review (NSDR) and co-authored the National Security Strategy that was approved by Cabinet in June 2025.

When peace is being designed, Fiji is not invited into the room.

When peace needs enforcing, Fiji is asked to send soldiers.

That uncomfortable reality is exposed by the emergence of US President Donald Trump’s so-called “Board of Peace” for Gaza.

• READ MORE: Gaza peacekeeping deployment – five clear questions Fiji cannot ignore
• Other Gaza reports

While New Zealand was formally invited to join the Board — and chose to decline — Fiji was not invited at all.

Yet Fiji has reportedly been asked to contribute troops to a proposed “stabilisation force” linked to Gaza.

The contrast is revealing. It highlights how global security is increasingly organised — and where Fiji is positioned within that order.

The Board of Peace is reportedly structured as an exclusive body with a joining fee of around US$1 billion.

That cost alone places participation far beyond the reach of most developing countries.

For Fiji, whose entire national budget is only a fraction of that amount, membership is not simply impractical; it is structurally impossible.

In this model, peace is something designed by those who can afford entry — a “pay to play” arrangement.

Yet although Fiji cannot afford to “play”, its military presence is required.

The peacekeeping paradox: Respected soldiers, limited voice

For decades, Fijian soldiers have served with distinction in peacekeeping missions under the United Nations flag. Their professionalism, discipline and reliability are widely recognised.

But that reputation now risks confining Fiji to a familiar role: valued for its manpower but excluded from decision-making.

This is not partnership. It is subcontracting.

Fiji should not carry the risks of other people’s decisions without having a voice in them.

New Zealand had a choice. Fiji did not.
New Zealand’s refusal to join Trump’s Board of Peace, underscores the imbalance.

Wellington cited concerns about mandate clarity and alignment with international norms.

New Zealand had the opportunity to make that choice.

Fiji did not.

One country was offered a seat at the table; the other was offered boots on the ground.

For Fiji, this raises serious foreign policy questions.

The issue is not opposition to peacekeeping. The issue is peacekeeping without political voice — being asked to assume risk in missions shaped by others and detached from established multilateral oversight.

Alignment with existing policy
These concerns align closely with Fiji’s National Security and Defence Review (NSDR), which recognises that national security includes the adherence to international law, and the maintenance of trust in Fiji’s external engagements.

Central to the NSDR is the requirement that security commitments be legitimate, transparent and accountable, supported by clear civilian oversight.

Being asked to deploy troops into a stabilisation force designed outside the UN system, while being excluded from the political body determining its mandate, sits way outside those espoused principles.

The moral burden on soldiers and the families
Fiji will bear the operational and political risk but has little influence over strategic direction. Fiji will carry the risks without shaping the outcome.

This puts RFMF soldiers in an unclear and fraught position. They — and their families — are the ones who will carry the risk in this venture. It is a morally and ethically unfair burden for the government to place upon them.

This moment therefore calls for clarity and restraint by the decision makers in Fiji’s Parliament and Cabinet.

The question is not whether Fiji can contribute troops — history shows that it can and has done so with honour.

The question is whether such contributions serve Fiji’s national interest and upholds international legitimacy.

Honouring our legacy
Fiji’s peacekeeping legacy should not be used to justify accepting deployments where authority, accountability and purpose are unclear.

Peacekeeping without representation is not partnership.

Fiji has earned international respect as a contributor to global peace. It should not accept a future in which it is always invited to serve but never invited to decide.

No soldier should be sent into harm’s way without clear purpose, lawful authority, and their nation’s voice at the table.

Jim Sanday was a commissioned military officer in the pre-coup Royal Fiji Military Forces (RFMF) and commanded Fijian peacekeeping battalions in Lebanon and Sinai. In 2025, he led the National Security and Defence Review (NSDR) and co-authored the National Security Strategy that was approved by Cabinet in June 2025. This article was first pubished by the Fiji Sun and is republished by Asia Pacific Report with the author’s permission.

A new Pacific Media research publication and outlet for academics and community advocates has now been added to the Informit database for researchers.

Two editions of the new journal, published by the Aotearoa-based independent Asia Pacific Media Network (APMN) and following the traditions of Pacific Journalism Review, have been included in the database’s archives for institutional access.

Most university and polytech journalism schools in Australia, New Zealand and the Pacific subscribe to Informit which delivers expert-curated and extensive information from sectors such as health, engineering, business, humanities, science and law — and also journalism and media.

• READ MORE: New journal warns Pacific media near breaking point amid revenue collapse and political pressure

Informit also offers an Indigenous Collection with a broad scope of scholarship related to Indigenous culture, health, human geography in Australia, New Zealand and the Pacific.

Pacific Media offers journalists, journalism academics and community activists and researchers an outlet for quality research and analysis and more opportunities for community collaborative publishing in either a journal or monograph format.

While associated with Pacific Journalism Review, the new publication series provides a broader platform for longer form research than has generally been available in the PJR, featured here at ANU’s Development Policy Centre. The full 30-year archive of PJR is on the Informit database.

Earlier editions of Pacific Journalism Monographs have included a diverse range of journalism research from media freedom and human rights in the Asia-Pacific to Asia-Pacific research methodologies, climate change in Kiribati, vernacular Pasifika media research in New Zealand, and post-coup self-censorship in Fiji.

Managing editor Dr David Robie, who founded both the PJR and PM, welcomed the Informit initiative and also praised the Tuwhera DOJ platform at AUT University.

“There is a real need for Pacific media research that is independent of vested interests and we are delighted that our APMN partnership developed with Informit is continuing with our new Pacific Media journal,” he said

The first edition, themed on “Pacific media challenges and futures”, was partnered with the The University of the South Pacific and edited by Associate Professor Shailendra Singh and Dr Amit Sarwal and published last year.

The second edition, themed on “Media construct, constructive media”, was partnered with the Asian Congress for Media and Communication (ACMC) and edited by Khairiah A Rahman and Dr Rachel E Khan, and was also recently published.

A court ruling in favour of Fiji’s dismissed anti-corruption chief has “embarrassed” Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka, a New Zealand-based Fiji politics academic says.

University of Canterbury distinguished professor Steven Ratuva told RNZ Pacific Waves that while the Fiji High Court decision on Barbara Malimali offered “clarity” on the separation of powers, it added “to the weight of responsibilities” piling up under Rabuka’s leadership.

On Monday, the court ruled that Malimali’s dismissal was unlawful — a decision she said “vindicated” her. Rabuka immediately announced that he would be appealing the decision, but later told local reporters that he would “consider” resigning if the appeal failed.

• READ MORE: Other Fiji politics reports

“[Resignation] is an option,” he said.

Despite this, Rabuka’s Information Minister Lynda Tabuya told reporters on Tuesday that the prime minister had the full support of the cabinet.

“It was a resounding sentiment in cabinet that we would not accept his resignation,” she said in a post-cabinet press briefing on Tuesday, adding that Rabuka had “unanimous support . . .  to continue to lead this country and continue to lead us.”

Rabuka had not admitted to any wrongdoing and reports in the media “need to be corrected,” Tabuya said.

Fiji military commander Major-General Jone Kalouniwai also weighed in on the turn of events, telling local media that the army is maintaining “a [situational] awareness of what is happening” given that the country was heading into an election period.

“It’s important for us to understand what’s happening. Looking at it from a security perspective, things can cascade into a different situation,” he told The Fiji Times.

Dr Ratuva said all the issues Rabuka was having to deal with were “leading him to breaking point”.

“The fact that he has signalled his willingness to resign if the appeal doesn’t come through, is something which only [Rabuka] himself will have to decide,” he said.

“A lot of people have been asking for his resignation in the last few months for different reasons, particularly in relation to the way some of these complex challenges have been handled by the government.

“So it depends very much on what’s going to happen after the appeal, and the process might go on for some time . . .  even the election might come in between.”

Fiji is expected to head to the polls anytime between August 7 (earliest) this year and 6 February 2027 (latest).

Dr Ratuva said Fijian opposition parties will try to use some of these issues faced by Rabuka as part of campaigning.

“Anything can be leveraged as a means of manoeuvring your opposition, so certainly it is something which will arise during the election campaigns,” he said.

He said other issues such as the cost of living, health, infrastructure, rising crime, drugs, would become campaign issues during the election.

The government under Rabuka, he said, would be on the defensive in terms of making sure that they would be re-elected.

“But then that depends very much on how they are able to handle these issues, and of course, the choice of the voters ultimately,” Dr Ratuva said.

“The number of scandals and the number of crisis, which have defined the rule of this particular coalition has diverted attention away from the real issues on the ground, so they have to live with it and the consequences are going to be felt in the next election.”

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

An invitation from a distant warzone landed in Suva earlier this month. The United States, with Israel’s endorsement, has asked Fiji to send troops to join a proposed International Stabilisation Force in Gaza.

For a nation proud of its United Nations peacekeeping legacy, this whispers of global recognition. Yet, it is a dangerous siren’s call, urging Fiji toward a perilous mission that risks betraying a far more urgent duty at home.

This force would swap impartial peacekeeping for coercive enforcement, serving great-power ambition over principle.

• READ MORE: Gaza peacekeeping deployment – five clear questions Fiji cannot ignore
• United Israel Appeal – Australian charity channels tax free donations direct to IDF soldiers
• Israeli plans for Rafah ‘camp’ in Gaza slammed as continuation of genocide
• Other Gaza reports

Simultaneously, Australia faces its own costly summons, involving a bill of up to US$1 billion, to take up a permanent seat on a controversial “Board of Peace” overseeing Gaza.

With no Palestinian voice and critics decrying it as a “transactional colonial solution”, this board aims not for peace but to sideline the UN, cementing a donor-driven world order.

For Oceania, these parallel invitations present a defining choice: expend finite resources on a flawed project thousands of kilometres away, or assert true regional independence by confronting the clear and present danger eroding our own communities — the transnational crime and drug epidemic.

The Gaza plan is architecturally unsound. The force Fiji is asked to join is not a traditional UN mission deployed with consent; it is a peace enforcement body expected to demilitarise a shattered, hostile territory — a task requiring overwhelming force and unambiguous political will, neither of which is guaranteed.

Designed for dysfunction
The Board of Peace itself is designed for dysfunction, acting as a parallel structure to the UN Security Council where influence is bought, not earned.

For Australia, the billion-dollar question is stark: is this investment in distant geopolitical theatre wiser than addressing the existential crisis in its primary sphere of influence?

This moment mirrors a recent lesson from Europe. When President Trump targeted Greenland, European nations stood collectively on the principle of territorial integrity, forcing a retreat.

Their unity demonstrated that defending sovereignty collectively is the only way smaller states are protected from the predatory actions of larger ones.

For the Pacific, the lesson is clear: our security lies in collective regional resolve, not in subsidising external power plays that undermine the very multilateral rules that protect us.

This dynamic exposes the core hypocrisy of the new transactional order. It invites regions like ours to help manage conflicts born of imperial histories and great-power rivalries, while the same powers show a willingness to disregard the sovereignty of smaller states when it suits their strategic whims.

The Greenland episode is not an isolated fantasy; it is a blueprint. If economic coercion can be levelled against a NATO ally for territory, what guarantees exist for nations in the Pacific, whose strategic waterways and exclusive economic zones are equally coveted?

Enshrines coercion
The Board of Peace model enshrines this very coercion, asking nations to pay for a voice in a system that inherently devalues the sovereign equality that the UN Charter promises.

While Gaza beckons with false prestige, a real war is destroying our social fabric. Fiji’s National Security Strategy identifies the methamphetamine epidemic as a top-tier threat (p. 19). Record drug busts reveal not success, but the staggering scale of invasion.

This crisis fuels violence, overwhelms health systems, corrupts leaders and drains state resources.

To even contemplate diverting military and political focus to Gaza is to declare this domestic war secondary. It begs a foundational question: what is the ultimate purpose of sovereignty if not to deliver safety and security to one’s own people first?

This is the primary duty of any state. When institutions are eroded by cartels while security forces look abroad, that duty has failed.

This crisis is the true test of our regional architecture. The traffickers’ networks are transnational, exploiting fragmented governance and weak maritime surveillance. Their success is a direct result of our collective vulnerability.

To confront them requires a consolidation of sovereignty, not its diversion. Every police officer, intelligence analyst and naval patrol boat committed to a quagmire overseas is a resource stripped from guarding our own shores.

Diplomatic minefield
The political capital spent navigating the diplomatic minefield of Gaza is capital not spent rallying the Pacific Islands Forum (PIF) to adopt a wartime footing against a clear, shared enemy. We cannot allow the spectre of one crisis to blind us to the substance of another.

The strategic response lies not in the Middle East, but in our own waters. Australia must make up its mind. That US$1 billion — a sum that could transform regional security — could and should be the cornerstone of a bold, coordinated campaign against the drug crisis, championed through the Forum.

I am not arguing for a return to failed, militarised prohibition. I propose a holistic, regional compact built on:

• Integrated policing: A permanent regional Task Force with real-time intelligence fusion to disrupt trafficking syndicates and their finances;
• Community resilience: Co-designed programs creating economic alternatives for youth and supporting rehabilitation to erode the cartels’ demand; and
• Institutional integrity: Major initiatives to shield judiciaries and border services from corruption, ensuring the rule of law is an asset.

In a world of transactional great-power politics, Australia must consciously encircle the Pasifika. This means investing politically and financially in the PIF, respecting its priorities and heeding its calls.

Addressing this crisis would be an act of enlightened self-preservation for Australia, and a lifeline for the region. The model exists in our history: the Regional Assistance Mission to Solomon Islands, known as RAMSI, succeeded because it blended Australian resources with Pasifika personnel and local knowledge. We must summon that spirit again for a more complex fight.

The invitations to Gaza are a test of strategic identity. For Fiji, it is a test of resisting the seductive glare of distant drama for the sober duty of safeguarding the homeland.

Choice for Australia
For Australia, it is a choice: to fund a board that undermines global order or to invest in a sovereign regional compact against a shared existential threat.

True leadership is demonstrated not by saying a reflexive “yes” to powerful patrons, but by having the wisdom to say “no” when their wishes conflict with fundamental principles of multilateralism and life-and-death needs at home.

Europe showed that collective defence of sovereignty is how smaller states secure their future. For the Pasifika, our path to security and independence does not run through the rubble of Gaza. It runs through the strengthened, cooperative spirit of our own Blue Continent.

Choosing this closer, harder path is the mark of a region that truly knows where it belongs. It is the only choice that builds a legacy of genuine security, leaving our children a future defined not by the crises we attended elsewhere, but by the community we fortified here.

Ro Naulu Mataitini is a Fijian high chief of Rewa Province. A founding member of the People’s Alliance Party, he now serves as an apolitical member of Fiji’s Great Council of Chiefs and is the chairman of Rewa Provincial Holdings Company Limited. He is a retired security executive with the United Nations. This article appeared first on the Devpolicy Blog from the Development Policy Centre at the Australian National University and is republished under Creative Commons.

“You want a friend in Washington? Get a dog.” Although made in an American context, this observation by President Harry S. Truman has universal appeal.

It highlights the unpredictable and treacherous nature of politics, whether it’s the chameleon-like antics of politicians or the fickleness of voters. The precariousness of politics was felt most acutely in Suva as recently as October 2025.

Few anticipated that two of Fiji’s three deputy prime ministers, elected with much fanfare in December 2022, would be forced to resign over allegations of failure of ministerial integrity.

• READ MORE: Other Fiji reports

The Fiji Independent Commission Against Corruption (FICAC) is an autonomous body, at least constitutionally, but Dr Biman Prasad and Manoa Kamikamica’s indictments still sparked speculation about political conspiracies and high-level skulduggery.

This political earthquake was far removed from the euphoria of the People’s Alliance Coalition election victory over the FijiFirst government — on the promise of a fresh start.

Led by Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka, the People’s Alliance Party’s partnership with the National Federation Party and the Social Democratic Liberal Party secured electoral victory on a show of unity and a set of vote-winning pledges: cost-of-living relief, curbing government wastage and greater media freedom.

Restoring media freedom was relatively straightforward, perhaps because it was cost-free, and it was implemented almost immediately through the repeal of the draconian Media Industry Development Act.

Other pledges more difficult
Other pledges — such as addressing the national debt and the budget deficit — proved far more difficult, in part because of global economic conditions, as did the challenge of resisting the urge to increase parliamentary salaries, which went up by 130–138 percent.

Additional benefits were thrown in for good measure: tax-free vehicle purchases for cabinet ministers, increased overseas travel allowances for the prime minister and president, and non-taxable duty allowances, business-class travel, and enhanced life insurance coverage for MPs.

In comparison to other jurisdictions, the salary increases may not, in themselves, be unreasonable. The core problem, as noted by some observers, is that Parliament should not be determining its own benefits.

The approval of the benefits also stunned many because of the Coalition’s longstanding criticism of FijiFirst over pay levels, and its pre-election pledges to slash them.

Moreover, there were questions of affordability given Fiji’s ballooning debt and deficit situation, which the Coalition had pledged to address as part of its plan to eliminate what it considered were the excesses of the previous FijiFirst government.

Increasing parliamentary benefits seemed an odd way of honouring those commitments.

There is also the question of whether taxpayers are getting what they are paying for. But perhaps the increase in benefits should not have been entirely surprising, since such outcomes are often consistent with the realities of politics in Fiji, and elsewhere.

Lying could cost politicians
So much so that Wales, for example, is considering becoming the world’s first country to introduce laws that would mean politicians could lose their jobs for deliberate lying during election campaigns.

Fijian voters, who may be disillusioned, are not entirely powerless. With elections scheduled for next year, they may well turn the tables on their representatives by springing a few surprises of their own at the ballot box.

Governance, after all, is a shared responsibility between the government and the governed. Voters usually get the government they vote for, and recent experiences would be a reminder of the importance of informed participation in politics, and the prudent use of voting power.

Especially when, as a nation, Fiji has a long and arguably worsening experience with unfulfilled or broken promises, whether by politicians or coup leaders.

Fiji’s coup culture and its fallout are a reminder of the saying, “The road to hell is paved with good intentions.”

The 1987 and 2000 coups were carried out by political and military elites claiming to represent indigenous iTaukei interests, while the 2006 coup was justified on the grounds of good governance, equality and national unity.

It is safe to assume that none of these utopian promises have fully materialised. The country appears more divided than ever, and too many people still remain trapped in poverty.

Costs of elite power struggles
According to World Bank estimates, of the roughly 258,000 people (29.9 percent) in poverty, about 75 percent are iTaukei, which underscores how ordinary communities bear the costs of elite power struggles rather than benefit from them.

Coup instigators’ rhetoric is one thing, but what is more troubling is that our elected leaders increasingly seem unbothered by going back on their word — even by their own low standards of keeping election promises.

Granted, structural pressures typical of a young, transitional democracy like Fiji can make reforms around debt and budget deficits quite complex and difficult to achieve.

However, successive governments are failing even when it comes to basic good governance policies and practices, which are often the pillars of sustainable development.

As part of its self-proclaimed “clean-up campaign”, the ousted FijiFirst government promised many things, including merit-based appointments to boards and other government positions.

Instead, appointments were frequently made on the basis of offspring, as at the Fiji Sports Council; siblings, as at the Fiji Broadcasting Corporation; and in-laws and cronies in various other institutions.

This was rightly criticised ad nauseam by the Coalition when in opposition, with the promise to address it once in power. But has the Coalition honoured its word, or are we just seeing more of the same?

Disproportionately marginalised
Some observers have argued that under the FijiFirst Government, appointments made in the name of merit had disproportionately marginalised iTaukei representation in certain areas.

Against this backdrop, the Coalition’s approach to appointments has been described by some as a form of “rebalancing” by prioritising iTaukei candidates.

The concern now being raised is whether the pendulum may have swung too far in the other direction, and whether appointments continue to be made largely based on family ties, clanship, kinship and friendship.

These questions are not just about due process: appointments to key positions also shape the country’s long-term progress and development. In this context, merit should not become an afterthought, nor should appointments result in any form of blatant exclusion, as both can undermine confidence in the system, with the risk of exacerbating Fiji’s brain drain dilemma across all ethnicities, including among qualified iTaukei.

This possibility was obliquely raised recently by none other than the Chair of the Great Council of Chiefs (GCC), Ratu Viliame Seruvakula, who stated that Fiji needed other races to progress.

“If every other race left Fiji, we’d be doing exactly what we were doing to cause more pain to the country,” he said.

As Truman noted, politics can be a dirty game. To make politics cleaner, politicians must be accountable, with a longer-term vision for the country.

Punishing at the polls
One way to make politicians take voters seriously is to punish them at the polls if they fail to keep their promises.

This is the path to a healthier, performance-based political system that facilitates development — driven by the fear of and respect for the voter’s power. This depends not only on politicians, but also on an engaged, ethical and informed electorate that votes on issues, rather than on the basis of race, religion, party or personality.

As the country entered 2026, Prime Minister Rabuka offered a welcoming and constructive New Year’s message, emphasising teamwork, unity and inclusiveness: “Fijians must work together with faith, hope, and shared responsibility to overcome challenges and build a stronger, united nation.”

The Prime Minister reminded the country that the Coalition government was elected on a “promise of integrity, inclusion and reform”. Since these virtues were the Coalition’s mantra and its winning formula in the 2022 elections, the government would do well to apply this thinking consistently in its day-to-day decisions and long-term vision for the country.

The bottom line, as alluded to by the GCC chair, is that indigenous leadership now plays a central role in shaping Fiji’s political direction. With that power comes a duty to build a country that works for future generations of iTaukei while also ensuring that ethnic minorities continue to feel included and valued as equal stakeholders in a shared future.

Shailendra B. Singh is associate professor of Pacific journalism at The University of the South Pacific, based in Suva, Fiji, and a member of the advisory board of Pacific Media. This article appeared first on Devpolicy Blog, from the Development Policy Centre at The Australian National University.

The recent announcement by Fiji’s Minister of Defence and Veterans Affairs that Fiji will consider contributing troops to a proposed international stabilisation force in Gaza imposes a responsibility on all of us to ask the hard questions before the decision is finalised by Cabinet.

At the outset, let’s all be clear on one thing — Gaza is not a routine peacekeeping environment. It is a highly contested battlespace where the legitimacy, consent, and enforceability of any international force remain uncertain.

Before Fiji government commits its soldiers to Gaza, the public deserves clear answers to a number of questions about the risks such a deployment would pose to those on the ground.

• READ MORE:  ‘Board of Peace’: Trump is running Gaza, and the world, like a mafia boss — Middle East Eye editor-in-chief David Hearst
• Feet dragging, division and obstruction: What Israel really wants for Gaza
• Fiji considers Israeli invitation for Gaza
• Security Council authorises International Stabilisation Force in Gaza, adopting Resolution 2803 (2025)
• Other Gaza reports

1: Is there genuine consent?
The most fundamental issue is the explicit rejection of the stabilisation force concept by Hamas, the dominant armed actor in Gaza.

Peacekeeping doctrine rests on consent, impartiality, and limited use of force. When one principal party openly rejects a mission, the cornerstone of consent collapses.

Without consent, Fijian soldiers in Gaza will not be seen as neutral interposers. They risk being perceived as a hostile occupying force, regardless of intent.

For troops on the ground, this dramatically elevates the risk.

Patrols, checkpoints, convoys, and static positions become potential targets — not because Fijian and other soldiers in the stabilisation force have failed, but because their presence itself is rejected.

Fiji’s peacekeepers have historically operated where communities accepted their role.

Gaza would represent a fundamentally different operational reality.

2: How clear and limited is the mandate?
Public reporting suggests the proposed force would support public order, protect humanitarian operations, assist in rebuilding Palestinian policing, and potentially contribute to the demilitarisation of armed groups.

Each of these tasks carries different — and escalating — levels of risk.

Protecting aid corridors is one thing. Being perceived as assisting disarmament or security restructuring against the wishes of the dominant armed faction in Gaza, is quite another.

Without a narrow, realistic mandate and clear rules of engagement, Fijian soldiers in Gaza risk mission creep — sliding from stabilisation into enforcement.

History shows that unclear mandates expose peacekeepers to rising hostility while leaving them politically constrained in how they respond.

The Fiji public deserves to know exactly what its soldiers would be authorised — and expected — to do if confronted by armed resistance.

3: Are troops being deployed into an urban conflict?
Gaza is one of the most complex operating environments in the world: dense urban terrain, extensive tunnel networks, armed groups embedded within civilian populations, and a society traumatised by prolonged conflict.

If Hamas and other factions do not accept the force, Fijian soldiers will find themselves operating in conditions closer to low-intensity urban warfare.

In such environments, visibility offers no protection. Uniforms do not deter improvised explosive devices, snipers, or politically motivated attacks.

The Fiji public are entitled to know whether its sons and daughters are being sent to stabilise a peace — or to operate amid an unresolved conflict where peace does not yet exist.

4: What does Fiji’s own experience tell us?
Fiji’s long service with UNIFIL in Lebanon offers an important point of comparison.

Fijian troops operated there with a clear UN mandate, within defined areas of responsibility, and — crucially — with working relationships with local communities that largely accepted their presence. Even then, the environment was never risk-free.

Gaza would be more volatile.

Unlike southern Lebanon, Gaza involves an armed group that openly rejects the very concept of an international force.

That distinction matters profoundly for force protection and operational viability.

5: What is the duty of care?
Ultimately, the central issue is the Fiji government’s duty of care to its soldiers and their families.

Courage is not the same as recklessness.

Pride in service must be matched by a rigorous assessment of the risks; whether the mission is lawful, achievable, adequately resourced and grounded in a good dose of political reality.

Before any deployment, the government owes the public clear answers:

• Is there genuine consent from all major parties on the ground?
• Is the mandate limited, realistic, and enforceable?
• Are the rules of engagement robust enough if consent collapses?
• And is Fiji being asked to stabilise a peace — or to substitute for one that does not yet exist?

Asking these questions is not an act of disloyalty. It is the standard that has protected Fijian soldiers and their reputation in past deployments.

Our peacekeeping legacy was built on disciplined judgment, not on repeating the narrative of The Charge of the Light Brigade — where unquestioned courage and noble intentions led to a fatal advance born of strategic ambiguity, and soldiers paid the price for a lack of clarity.

Fiji’s peacekeeping reputation was earned through disciplined judgment and respect for human life, not by placing soldiers in harm’s way where there is no peace to keep.

Jim Sanday was a commissioned military officer in the pre-coup Royal Fiji Military Forces (RFMF) and commanded Fijian peacekeeping battalions in Lebanon and Sinai. In 2025, he led the National Security and Defence Review (NSDR) and co-authored the National Security Strategy that was approved by Cabinet in June 2025. This article was first pubished by the Fiji Sun and is republished by Asia Pacific Report with the author’s permission.

From heavy visa bonds to suspended applications to straight-up travel bans, the United States has implemented or announced sweeping restrictions on Pacific travel in just the first two weeks of 2026.

Confirmed on Thursday, Fiji is among a list of 75 countries for which the US will suspend the issue of migration visas next week from January 21.

The suspension does not apply to non-immigrant visas, such as for tourism or business.

• READ MORE: Pacific Beat: US travel restrictions in force for Tonga
• Pacific travellers face high costs and strict rules under US visa bond expansion
• Other US travel reports

At the same time, many Pacific Island countries will now have to pay bonds of up to US$15,000 to enter the country on a temporary visa.

And two weeks ago, The Guardian reported a complete freeze on all visa applications for Tongan citizens had come into force, impacting a community of around 79,000 Tongan Americans, according to latest estimates.

What happened?
A leaked State Department memo said the government was targeting nationalities more likely to require public assistance while living in the US.

“The Trump administration is bringing an end to the abuse of America’s immigration system by those who would extract wealth from the American people,” the US State Department said in a statement reported by the Associated Press.

“Immigrant visa processing from these 75 countries will be paused while the State Department reassess immigration processing procedures to prevent the entry of foreign nationals who would take welfare and public benefits.”

In terms of travel restrictions, it puts these pacific island nations in league with the likes of Afghanistan, Iran, Russia, Somalia, and even Venezuela.

Fijian Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka has gone as far as to tell the Fiji Sun on Friday that his nation “brought it on ourselves.”

“We rank very highly. They are illegal immigrants. They are there without authority and must be dealt with according to the law of the United States.” Rabuka said.

“We have to take the bull by the horns and make sure we comply with the new rules that will be placed on us.”

Who has been impacted?
Fijians, Tongans, Tuvaluans and Ni-Vans. Tongans most of all.

The suspension took out B-1 (Business), B-2 (Tourist), F (Student), M (Vocational), and J (Exchange Visitor) visas, but it left the door open for existing holders, as well as these exceptions:

• Immigrant visas for ethnic and religious minorities facing persecution in Iran
• Dual nationals applying with a passport of a nationality not subject to a suspension
• Special Immigrant Visas (SIVs) for some US government employees
• Participants in certain major sporting events
• Existing Lawful Permanent Residents (LPRs)

Though the US State Department has remained tight-lipped about its reasons for targeting Tonga in particular, White House releases have pointed to high overstay rates, and concerns around Citizenship By Investment (CBI) passport schemes that lack secure background checking.

This would implicate Tonga, which may be developing a CBI scheme of their own, along with countries like Vanuatu and Nauru.

As for Fiji, immigration visas are off the table, but visitor visa categories are still open.

The two countries, alongside Tuvalu and Vanuatu, are on a list of countries included in the new US Visa Bond Pilot Programme, requiring a US$10,000 visa bond, a significant personal cost for a developing state.

Those bonds could be increased or decreased per application based on personal circumstances, with a cap of US$15,000.

What’s the logic?
Core to the Trump Administration’s philosophy towards migration is that those who enter the US (legally, that is) need to be able to pay their own way.

Based on social media activity, one of the many benchmarks for this standard could be the extent to which migrant households depend on US institutions, such as welfare, healthcare and other forms of support.

In a post on Truth Social on January 7, Trump released a chart detailing how often these households receive welfare and public assistance in the US.

Several Pacific nations featured highly on Trump’s chart, with the Marshall Islands ranking fourth on the list at 71.4 percent.

Other Pacific countries include Samoa at 63.4, Federated States of Micronesia at 58.1, Tonga at 54.4, and Fiji at 40.8.

American Samoa, a US territory, featured at 42.9 percent.

By the numbers
All the same, Pacific Islanders make up a relatively minor percentage of the immigrant population. The US Migration Policy Institute estimates that, as of 2023 there are 166,389 immigrants currently in the US who were born in Oceania (other than Australia and New Zealand).

On those estimates, islanders would make up 0.3 percent of foreign-born Americans. So while Trump’s figures may create the impression of big-league dole bludging, it is really a fraction of the overall picture.

All the same, it is not as though the US is not guilty of sweeping up Pacific states onto migrant ban lists that ought not be there.

Take Tuvalu for instance: in July they were included on a list of countries where visa bans were being strongly considered . . . by accident.

The microstate sought and obtained written assurance from the US that this was a mistake, to which the US pointed to “an administrative and systemic error on the part of the US Department of State”.

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

Pacific media are facing one of their most challenging reporting environments in their history, marked by governance issues, political instability, geopolitical pressures and escalating climate threats, while simultaneously grappling with declining revenue streams and threats to their financial survival.

This is highlighted in the inaugural edition of the Pacific Media academic journal, by co-editors, associate professor and head of the University of the South Pacific (USP) Journalism Programme, Dr Shailendra Singh, and co-founder of The Australia Today, Dr Amit Sarwal.

In their editorial, Dr Singh and Dr Sarwal say Pacific media systems — already vulnerable due to their small scale — continue to be hit by the collapse of traditional advertising models that once kept legacy media afloat.

• READ MORE: Inaugural edition of Pacific Media
• Second edition of Pacific Media
• Pacific Media website

They point out that although small and geographically isolated, the regional media have not been spared the ravages of digital disruption, which continues to pose a threat to the media’s traditional advertising-based revenue model. This was compounded by losses from the covid-19 pandemic.

These issues, and more, re-surfaced at the 2024 Pacific International Media Conference in Suva, Fiji. The conference, the first of its kind in 20 years, was hosted by the USP’s School of Pacific Arts, Communication and Education (Journalism), in partnership with the Pacific Islands News Association (PINA), the United States Embassy in Suva and Asia Pacific Media Network.

Selected blind peer reviewed conference papers published in Pacific Media highlight how Pacific news reporting is becoming increasingly complex and contentious, even as newsrooms face unprecedented financial and editorial pressures.

A key question explored at the conference, and a recurring theme in the journal, is how Pacific media are responding to and reporting on the overlapping challenges in the region, which have compounded the long-standing struggles to achieve sustainable development.

In his paper, Frontline media faultlines: How critical journalism can survive against the odds, the journal’s production and managing editor, veteran Pacific journalist and educator Dr David Robie warned that Pacific media face a “plethora of emerging and entrenched problems” — from collapsing business models to the rise of fake news, leadership failures, and political corruption.

Despite reporting on these issues for decades, little progress has been made even as new challenges emerge.

In The History of the Pacific Islands News Association (PINA) 1972–2023, Marsali Mackinnon and Kalafi Moala, while paying tribute to the region’s media pioneers, explore enduring questions about the state of Pacific media, especially in the context of digital disruption and revenue losses. They ask whether the industry has lost its vitality and if journalists and media workers still uphold core values like freedom of speech and impartial reporting.

The article, based on their forthcoming book chronicling PINA’s 50-year history, looks at the challenges facing Pacific media — economic, political, technological, and cultural pressures — and examines whether the principles established by postcolonial pioneers in the 1970s have been compromised.

Another paper, Women’s political empowerment in the Asia-Pacific region: The role of social media, by associate professor Baljeet Singh, Dr Singh, Nitika Nand and Shasnil Chand, examines how social media positively influences women’s political empowerment across 20 Asia-Pacific countries. Based on their findings, the authors recommend that regional governments and development partners prioritise improved connectivity and online access in deprived areas as a key strategy to empower women and strengthen their participation in politics and political leadership.

In his paper, Reporting the nuclear Pacific: Facing new geopolitical challenges, journalist and researcher Nic Maclellan revisits the Pacific’s nuclear testing legacy, highlighting the crucial role of journalists in preserving survivors’ stories. He argues that the nuclear threat in the Pacific is far from over and has re-emerged in new forms, requiring sustained media attention and critical reporting.

In his commentary, Behind the Mic: How Sashi Singh’s Talking Point helped shape Fiji’s political landscape, Sashimendra Singh reflects on the impact of his Sydney-based podcast in the lead-up to Fiji’s 2022 General Election. The former Fiji-based broadcaster interviewed key political figures, including Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka and the three Deputy Prime Ministers, while they were still in opposition.

Singh’s podcast tackled issues that Fiji’s suppressed national media were reluctant to address and went on to attract a large following. The article demonstrates the growing importance of diaspora media and new media technologies, showing how social media can positively circumvent censorship imposed by national authorities.

In The “Coconut Wireless”: Ways that community news endures and spreads in a news desert, Krista Rados and Brett Oppegaard address the concept of “news deserts” in the Pacific — areas where communities urgently need local information but lack trustworthy sources. This paper highlights the enduring strengths of social media in fostering journalism in remote, sparsely populated, and underdeveloped communities.

Pacific Media, launched last year, succeeds the long-running Pacific Journalism Review, which began at the University of Papua New Guinea in 1994 and was archived after 30 years of publication. PJR is now a public database for research.

The journal is designed by Del Abcede and the series editor is Khairiah A Rahman.

This inaugural edition is a collaboration between USP, the Asia Pacific Media Network (APMN), and Tuwhera Open Access platform, aimed at documenting the rapid transformations shaping journalism in the region — and how Pacific media can navigate an increasingly turbulent future.

Some other key papers include:

• Weaponising the partisan WhatsApp group: The circulation of disinformation and artificial intelligence (AI) content in the 2024 Indonesian presidential election by Mochamad Achir Taher. The paper examines the spread of disinformation partisan messages within a politically aligned WhatsApp group during Indonesia’s 2024 Presidential Election. The study finds that presidential candidates used social media platforms to distribute biased and misleading content to influence voters.
• Blood on the Tracks: Countering symbolic violence — A case study in reciprocal investigative journalism practice by Bonita Mason. In this paper, she examines a six-year investigation by Australian journalist and First Nations man Allan Clarke into the suspicious death of First Nations teenager Mark Haines. Haines’s family never accepted police claims of suicide. On the 25th anniversary of the death, Clarke, moved by the injustices suffered by the dead man’s family, reignited the investigation.
• Your weather: Digital weather producer WeatherWatch NZ and its Pacific coverage by Melissa Beattie. The paper situates WeatherWatch within the broader digital journalism landscape and then examines its Pacific-focused weekly forecasts in Melanesia and Polynesia.

This article was first published by Wansolwara News and is republished by Asia Pacific Report as a collaboration between the University of the South Pacific and Asia Pacific Media Network.

Internationally, we are marking the 2025 Human Rights Day at a time of extraordinary retreat from human rights protection across the World. Every human right, every breach of human right and every advance in the protection of human rights must matter equally to us.

The frameworks for human rights protection are well established internationally reflecting the genesis of the international system in the horrors of the Second World War. Social, cultural, political, women’s, indigenous, children’s, and all fundamental human rights are well protected in international laws that have evolved since then.

What may seem like a paralysis in protection of fundamental human rights internationally today does not arise from the absence of protections in international law but from the fractures that characterise the international interstate system in a phase of severe disruption.

• READ MORE: How climate change is threatening human rights
• Climate change demands a step up on human rights protection

The significant advances in protection of human rights internationally arose from a rare postwar geopolitical consensus. That global consensus is dead.

Though the UN Charter and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights have their origins in this context, it was not until 2008 that the UN made an explicit resolution on human rights and climate change stating that climate change posed a real and substantial threat to the full enjoyment of human rights.

The Pacific’s human rights story
When the Blue Pacific discusses human rights impacts of climate change, it is shaped by our lived realities. The fundamental right to life in the Pacific is persistently harmed by heat stress.

It is estimated that more than 1200 deaths annually are now attributed to heat stress.

The fundamental right to health is eroded by growing illnesses and diseases arising from rising temperatures. Across the Pacific, well in excess of 1000 deaths are already attributed to climate change related illnesses annually.

The fundamental right to water faces worsening pressures arising from sea water intrusion into ground water, more frequent and prolonged droughts and sewage contamination of water systems as a result of floodings.

The fundamental right to food is persistently harmed by rising surface and ocean temperatures and experienced through failed crops, subsistence farms destroyed by winds and rains, collapse of coral reef systems and with that oceanic foods.

Indigenous people’s rights are similarly persistently harmed as communities across Melanesia undertake climate change induced migration without corresponding transfer of land and other social and cultural rights.

In Tuvalu and atoll states these are likely to lead to more unsettling outcomes as their small and culturally compact communities get thinly dispersed across larger countries such as New Zealand, Australia and Fiji.

Policy choices are needed to respond to worsening human rights protection that are a consequence of climate change.

Climate change and human rights in Pacific education
The right to education is one of foundational rights in international law. Having access to continuous, safe and quality education is the foundation for the enjoyment of this right.

Every time a student misses school because the river that she crosses is flooded or at risk of flooding, that student is denied the full enjoyment of this right. Learning days lost are increasing in Fiji and Melanesia generally. This has lifelong consequences.

The more painful reality is that learning loss is felt so unevenly. It is often people in our poorest households who stay in most flood-prone areas.

In Fiji’s case it is also the case too many I-Taukei settlements/villages are in flood prone areas or in areas more likely to be cut off from school access roads and bridges.

The average day time surface temperatures has increased between 1-3 degrees Celsius across the Pacific within a space of four decades. It may be much higher in schools in urban areas. The safe classroom temperatures for children are 24-26 degrees Celsius at the upper end.

In many schools, classroom temperatures are well above 30C for days on end. The health impacts of prolonged exposure to these temperature are seen through general weaknesses, fainting, headaches and fatigue.

I know of no school that systematically monitors classroom temperatures. I have heard of schools closing down for a day or two when the risks of flooding are high. I have not heard of schools being closed when temperatures are in the mid-30s during periods of high humidity.

Quite shockingly, school building and major repairs are still being carried out in so many schools in exactly the same way as they were done 4-5 decades ago.

The human rights context in education is profoundly gendered. Some of these simply arise from the fact that decisions are made by male leaders.

When reconstruction of several schools in Vanua Levu happened a few years back, boys’ and girls’ hostels needed to be rebuilt following one of the recent cyclones.

The boys’ hostels were reconstructed within a year of two back-to-back cyclones. A 100 percent of the hostel boys were back in school.

The girl’s hostel took another year to be up and running. Only one girl returned to school from those who were resident in hostels during the cyclone year.

A whole generation of girls in the middle to high schools from one of the most disadvantages regions of our country and from some of the most economically disadvantaged communities had simply dropped out of school.

This is a story that repeats itself in so many ways each across the Pacific.

Health, human rights and climate change
As with education, universal access to the sufficient health care constitutes yet another core human right.

One of the worst and least understood aspects of the health and climate change interface in the Pacific is its impacts on mental health.

Following extreme weather events — mental health consequences linger for long periods and most intensely among young children. When winds pick up ever so slightly, many children in schools get frightened — scared — quietly reliving their trauma in full view of teachers who are poorly trained to understand what is happening.

But the health consequences of climate change are far broader. Influenza, dengue including in off seasons, leptospirosis are profoundly impacting our communities. Loss of concentration, performance and worsening learning outcomes are some of these harsh trendlines inside classrooms.

Growing food insecurity
The right to food is a core part of our global human rights architecture. A few years back I had the great pleasure of visiting several schools in Vanua Levu.

I have taught in Fiji’s high schools. I know what I am talking about in a deeply personal way. Nothing prepared me for this.

The numbers/percentages of children who came to schools without lunch was just shocking. Nearly a third of students in one the classes that I visited came to school without lunch that morning.

Rates of stunting rates of children in primary schools (in peri and urban areas) in Fiji can be as high as 10 percent. Stunting rates are much higher in PNG at nearly 50 percent — one of the highest in the world.

Nutritional deprivation leads to delayed cognitive development and over time harms performance. Damage from stunting has life long and intergenerational consequences.
How does climate change feature in this?

The most obvious one is that global warming impacts on our coral reef systems. There is a near collapse of oceanic foods across so many Pacific’s coastal communities.

Equally on the high lands of PNG, delayed precipitation, prolonged rains and droughts harm and overtime irreversibly erode food security. This has widespread consequences.

Food insecurity, gender violence and inter-community conflict are a growing part of the Blue Pacific’s climate story.

Human rights, climate change and cultural and political rights
Nowhere does climate change demonstrate the scale of its destructiveness as in our closest atoll state neighbour.

Tuvalu may be uninhabitable within 4-6 decades even with the adaptation measures underway. It is forced to contemplate the real prospects of near total loss of land. The state has taken protective measures by amending its constitution to preserve sovereignty under any scenario.

Fiji and fellow PIF members have undertaken to respect its sovereignty under any climate scenario.

Compared with PNG, Solomon Islands and Fiji where communities are being relocated, the human rights and climate story of Tuvalu is of a different order altogether. Land rights, cultural rights are rooted and grounded. They do not move when communities are relocated. Relocations are deeply disrespectful of all rights — including cultural, social rights.

It is indeed possible that its whole populations in time may come to be dispersed outside of Tuvalu — in Australia through the Falepili Treaty, in Fiji and in New Zealand. Small and dispersed communities will over time lose their language. They are over time likely to lose many elements of their Tuvaluan identity.

Indigenous and cultural rights are rooted to land and oceans in such deep ways. These rights are recognised as fundamental human rights internationally. Global warming and rising seas treat these rights with callous disregard.

From a 1.5 to 2.8C world
The Blue Pacific has to fight the battle of our lives to return the planet to a 1.5C pathway. No one will do this for us. All our economic forecasting today are based on 1.5C  temperature increase. But the reality is that we are on course for a 2.8C or perhaps even a post 3.0C world.

The consequences of a 3.0C future on human rights of people across the Pacific Islands are unimaginable. For a start, most of the existing infrastructure, school buildings , health centres, data centers are simply not built to withstand 450 km/h winds.

Most of the Pacific’s towns and settlements are coastal. Our entire tourism infrastructure is barely a few metres above sea level. In Melanesia alone there are more than 600 schools that need to be relocated and/or rebuilt.

Several hundred health centres need to be moved. These are estimates based on 1.5C — not twice that. The near total collapse of coastal fisheries is almost a foregone conclusion at anywhere above 2.0C. The silliest thing we can do as a region and as a people is to not prepare for a 3.0C world.

Shaping our story of hope
On the 2025 Human Rights Day, I have reflected on the broad and deep impacts on human rights that directly result from climate change. Ours is a story of hope.

On this day, then let me celebrate the extraordinary leadership shown by Pacific’s students who took the world to court — to the International Court of Justice (ICJ) and won.

We owe such an extraordinary gratitude to Fiji’s Vishal Prasad, Cynthia Houniuhi, Solomon Yeo from Solomon Islands and that small group of university students at USP who decided to take on the world. We celebrate Vanuatu’s leadership on all our behalf. Collective action matters.

We make a difference as individuals. We make a difference as a people and as large ocean states. I urge that we deepen our shared understanding of the unfolding universe of elevated human rights vulnerabilities across the Pacific.

Sharing our stories, deepening our understanding of interlinkages between human rights and global warming and beginning honest conversations about things taboo are foundational starting points.

In universities, this may mean adding climate change and human rights legal studies so that graduates leave with a firmer understanding of the world they will enter into.

At medical schools, this means integrating climate change into how human health is studied and researched.

In social science schools, that means advancing our understanding of the rapid evolution of kinship, leadership and culture in traditional Fijian and Pacific societies in a climate changed context.

In communications and journalism programmes, this may mean preparing students to communicate climate crisis with humility, sensitivity and empathy.

As responsible employers, we may be able to lead by ensuring that human rights protection arising from climate change are as mainframed as is possible. Being able to provide the level of sociopsychological support to students and staff bearing the silent scars of slow onset or climate catastrophes would be another great start.

This may include, as well, the simplest of things such as allowing paid compassionate leave for staff to recover from climate change related extreme weather events. In the longer term, the employment laws of Pacific Island states will need to catch up.

I have advised many Pacific island countries to take a hard look at even their school calendar. Few schools measure class room temperatures today.

Our colonial legacy has shaped the school year. We today subject our students to their final examinations when the temperatures inside class rooms are the highest. We today pressure students to prepare for their exams in the months when the chances of catastrophic events are the highest and the chances of illness that are climate change induced are the highest.

A school calendar that is climate informed and that protects human rights in the education context is more likely to commence the school year in September (third term) and conclude exams by August (end of second term).

All of these things are within our gift. We do not need international conferences or even international assistance to do all of these as the changes needed are so simple and so basic.

Building blocs for advancing human rights in a climate changed world:

• First is that individual and communities need to know how their fundamental rights are impacted by climate change. This is a task for all of us — not governments alone.
• Across the region, so many laws and legislative frameworks need to be revised to reflect how climate change and human rights play out. How many hours should an agricultural worker or road construction worker be working when temperatures are higher than 1.5C.
• For employers and service providers, what are the human rights obligations in a climate changed context? What does the waiting room in a health care facility look like in a 1.5C temperature increase and in a 3.0 degree world? They surely cannot be the same.
• National human rights and legal settings need to pay systematic attention to human rights and climate change. This means ensuring that national human rights agencies and courts build up their capabilities to provide the necessary jurisprudence; and our citizens both supported and empowered to approach courts and relevant agencies.
• Internationally, the Pacific Island states including Pacific Islands Forum (PIF) are well advised to ramp up their presence internationally. The next decade must be the decade when the region pushes the boundaries of international law. The decade following that may just be too late.

A Pacific Pre-COP31
I am delighted to have been invited to deliver my remarks so soon after COP30 and well in time for reflections for Pacific’s preparations for Pre-COP31. This climate conference to be held in the Pacific next year will be a great opportunity to bring a consolidated understanding of how fundamental human rights are being harmed by runaway climate change.

Shape this well — together, respectfully and with humility. We can present our agenda for advancing human rights protection in the Pacific powerfully at this Pre-COP.

As a region, we need to begin to win the argument about climate change in the theatres of international public opinion. Lobbyists and interests groups — including much of the global mainstream media — so wedded to petro interests appear to be winning.

We need to tell our stories with clarity and with impact. We need to back that with strategic bargains in all our international relations. A Pre-COP in the Pacific gives us a real chance of doing so.

Thank you for marking the 2025 International Human Rights Day in this way.

This speech about climate change and human rights was delivered by Dr Satyendra Prasad, the climate lead at Abt Global and Fiji’s former ambassador to the United Nations, during the 2025 Human Rights Day on December 10 at the University of Fiji. It is republished from Wansolwara News as part of Asia Pacific Report’s collaboration with the University of the South Pacific Journalism Programme.

REVIEW: By Amit Sarwal of The Australia Today

Forty years after the bombing of the Greenpeace flagship Rainbow Warrior in Auckland Harbour, award-winning journalist and author David Robie has revisited the ship’s fateful last mission — a journey that became a defining chapter in New Zealand’s identity as a nuclear-free nation.

Robie’s newly updated book, Eyes of Fire: The Last Voyage and Legacy of the Rainbow Warrior, is both a historical record and a contemporary warning.

It captures the courage of those who stood up to nuclear colonialism in the Pacific and draws striking parallels with the existential challenges the region now faces — from climate change to renewed geopolitical tensions.

• READ MORE: Other Rainbow Warrior reports
• Information about the Eyes of Fire book

“The new edition has a completely new 40-page section covering the last decade and the transition in global emphasis from ‘nuclear to climate crisis survivors’, plus new exposés about the French spy ‘blunderwatergate’. Ironically, the nuclear risks have also returned to the fore again,” Robie told The Australia Today.

“The book deals with a lot of critical issues impacting on the Pacific, and is expanded a lot and quite different from the last edition in 2015.”

In May 1985, the Rainbow Warrior embarked on a humanitarian mission unlike any before it. The crew helped 320 Rongelap Islanders relocate to a safer island after decades of radioactive contamination from US nuclear testing at Bikini and Enewetak atolls.

Robie, who joined the ship in Hawai’i as a journalist, recalls the deep humanity of that voyage.

Humanitarian voyage
“The fact that this was a humanitarian voyage . . .  helping the people of Rongelap in the Marshall Islands, it was going to be quite momentous,” he told Pacific Media Network News.

“It’s incredible for an island community where the land is so much part of their existence, their spirituality and their ethos.”

The relocation was both heartbreaking and historic. Islanders dismantled their homes over three days, leaving behind everything except their white-stone church.

“I remember one older woman sitting on the deck among the remnants of their homes,” Robie recalls.

“That image has never left me.”

Their ship’s banner, Nuclear Free Pacific, fluttered as both a declaration and a demand. The Rainbow Warrior became a symbol of Pacific solidarity, linking environmentalism with human rights in a region scarred by the atomic age.

On 10 July 1985, the Rainbow Warrior was docked at Auckland’s Marsden Wharf when two underwater bombs tore through its hull. The explosions, planted by French secret agents, sank the vessel and killed Portuguese-Dutch photographer Fernando Pereira.

Bombing shockwaves
The bombing sent shockwaves through New Zealand and the world. When French Prime Minister Laurent Fabius finally admitted that his country’s intelligence service had carried out the attack, outrage turned to defiance. New Zealand’s resolve to remain nuclear-free only strengthened.

Former New Zealand Prime Minister Helen Clark contributes a new prologue to the 40th anniversary edition, reflecting on the meaning of the bombing and the enduring relevance of the country’s nuclear-free stance.

“The bombing of the Rainbow Warrior and the death of Fernando Pereira was both a tragic and a seminal moment in the long campaign for a nuclear-free Pacific,” she writes.

“It was so startling that many of us still remember where we were when the news came through.”

Clark warns that history’s lessons are being forgotten. “Australia’s decision to enter a nuclear submarine purchase programme with the United States is one of those storm clouds gathering,” she writes.

“New Zealand should be a voice for de-escalation, not for enthusiastic expansion of nuclear submarine fleets in the Pacific.”

Clark’s message in the prologue is clear: the values that shaped New Zealand’s independent foreign policy in the 1980s — diplomacy, peace and disarmament — must not be abandoned in the face of modern power politics.

Geopolitical threats
Robie adds that the book also explores “the geopolitical threats to the region with unresolved independence issues, such as the West Papuan self-determination struggle in Melanesia.”

Clark’s call to action, Robie told The Australia Today, resonates with the Pacific’s broader fight for justice.

“She warns against AUKUS and calls for the country to ‘link with the many small and middle powers across regions who have a vision for a world characterised by solidarity and peace, which can rise to the occasion to combat the existential challenges it faces — including of nuclear weapons, climate change, and artificial intelligence.’”

When Eyes of Fire was first published, it instantly became a rallying point for young activists and journalists across the Pacific. Robie’s reporting — which earned him New Zealand’s Media Peace Prize 40 years ago — revealed the human toll of nuclear testing and state-sponsored secrecy.

Today, his new edition reframes that struggle within the context of climate change, which he describes as “the new existential crisis for Pacific peoples.” He sees the same forces of denial, delay, and power imbalance at play.

“This whole renewal of climate denialism, refusal by major states to realise that the solutions are incredibly urgent, and the United States up until recently was an important part of that whole process about facing up to the climate crisis,” Robie says.

“It’s even more important now for activism, and also for the smaller countries that are reasonably progressive, to take the lead.”

For Robie, Eyes of Fire is not just a history book — it’s a call to conscience.

“I hope it helps to inspire others, especially younger people, to get out there and really take action,” he says.

“The future is in your hands.”

The Rainbow Warrior returned to Aotearoa in July to mark the 40th anniversary of the bombing. Forty years on, the story of the Rainbow Warrior continues to burn — not as a relic of the past, but as a beacon for the Pacific’s future through Robie’s Eyes of Fire.

• Eyes of Fire: The Last Voyage and Legacy of the Rainbow Warrior, by David Robie. (Little Island Press, 2025, 245 pages).

Protesters in Fiji and Aotearoa New Zealand kicked off the UN Day of Solidarity with the Palestinian People today as Israel faced global condemnation over more “war crimes” against Palestine, Lebanon and Syria.

At least 13 people, including two children, were killed and 25 were wounded as Israel launched another incursion into Syrian territory in the Damascus countryside, according to state media.

The Syrian Foreign Ministry condemned “the criminal attack carried out by an Israeli occupation army patrol in Beit Jinn”.

• READ MORE: Syria calls Israeli incursion, strikes that killed 13 a ‘war crime’
• No, there is no ceasefire in Gaza
• Israel attacks three countries
• Other Gaza reports

At Albert Park in Fiji’s capital Suva today, members of Fijians for Palestine Solidarity Network (F4PSN) defied police repression and gathered to celebrate Solidarity Day.

They issued a statement declaring:

“On the 48th anniversary of this day, we must be clear: Fiji cannot claim to stand for human rights while aligning itself with GENOCIDE, APARTHEID and OCCUPATION.

“We refuse to let our government speak in our name while supporting systems of colonial oppression.”

Fiji ‘not on side of Palestine justice’
The statement went on to state that in 1977, the UN General Assembly had called for the annual observance of November 29 as the International Day of Solidarity with the Palestinian People.

But now, Palestinians faced dispossession, military occupation, forced displacement, and the systematic destruction of their homes and lives. More than 70,000 Palestinians have been killed, including at least 20,000 children, in the Israeli war on Gaza, report the last Gaza statistics.

“The world is watching genocide unfold in Gaza — entire families wiped out, children buried under rubble, hospitals bombed, and civilians starved — while governments continue to fund Israel’s genocidal campaign and shield it from accountability,” the network said.

Fiji was not on the side of justice and humanity, added the network. These were some of the reasons why:

• Fiji has repeatedly abstained or voted against resolutions protecting Palestinian rights at the United Nations, including resolutions calling for humanitarian ceasefires;
• Fiji voted against renewing support for Palestinian refugees under UNRWA;
• Fiji abstained on a resolution supporting a two-state solution;
• Fiji was the only country to publicly support Israel’s illegal occupation of Palestine and land annexation at the International Court of Justice; and
• Fiji has opened an embassy in Jerusalem, in Occupied Palestine.

“This is not foreign policy — this is complicity,” said the network.

“And we say loudly from Fiji: End occupation. End apartheid. End genocide. Free Palestine — from the River to the Sea.”

Powerful speeches in NZ
In New Zealand’s Te Komititanga Square beside Auckland city’s main transport hub, protesters heard several powerful speakers before marching up the Queen Street shopping precinct to Aotea Square and raised the Palestinian flag.

Journalist and videographer Cole Martin, of Aotearoa Christians for Peace in Palestine who recently returned from six months bearing witness in the occupied West Bank, gave a harrowing account of the brutality and cruelty of daily life under Israeli military control.

Describing the illegal destruction of Palestinian homes by Israeli military bulldozers in one village, Martin said: “They [villagers] put up tents. And they Israeli military returned because the tents, they say, didn’t have the correct permits, just like their homes.

“And so they demolished them.

“But when Palestinians apply for permits, they are pretty much never granted them. It is an impossible system.”

Speaking for Amnesty International Aotearoa, people power manager Margaret Taylor described the US President Trump-brokered “ceasefire” in Gaza as “dangerous” because it gave the illusion that life in Gaza was returning to normal.

“We here today are aware that the ‘normal’ for the people of Gaza is the ongoing genocide perpetrated against them by Israel.

“Earlier this week Amnesty international again came out saying, ‘yes, it is still genocide’.

“‘It is still genocide. It is still genocide.” It continues unabated.

“We had to do that because world leaders have denied that it is genocide and are using this alleged ceasefire.”

Gaza flotilla plans
Gaza Sumud Flotilla activist Youssef Sammour, who was also rally MC, brought the crowd up-to-date with plans for another flotilla to attempt to break the Israeli siege around the Gaza enclave.

About 30 other protests are happening across New Zealand this weekend over the Gaza genocide.

Global news media reports described Israel’s brutal attacks on Gaza, West Bank, Lebanon and Syria, although little was reported in New Zealand media.

Several Israeli soldiers were also reported wounded in clashes at the town of Beit Jinn.

The Syrian Foreign Ministry condemned “the criminal attack carried out by an Israeli occupation army patrol in Beit Jinn”.

Al Jazeera reports that Israeli military incursions have become more brazen, more frequent and more violent since Israel expanded its occupation of southern Syria.

Several Israeli soldiers were also reported wounded in clashes at the town of Beit Jinn when local people fought back against the Israeli incursion.

Meanwhile, the UN has condemned an incident in Jenin in the occupied West Bank as another “apparent summary execution” and warned that killings in the Occupied West Bank were surging “without accountability”.

Footage from Jenin showed Israeli forces shooting two Palestinian men in the back after  they had raised their hands to surrender. They were unarmed.

As New Zealand pro-Palestinian protesters prepared for demonstrations across the country today to mark the UN International Day of Solidarity with the Palestinian People, they awoke to news of Israel attacking three countries in the Middle East — Palestine, Lebanon and Syria.

This is the 112th consecutive week that the Palestine Solidarity Network Aotearoa (PSNA) has held protests over the Israeli genocide in Gaza, and Fijians for Palestine Solidarity Network has also held frequent rallies in defiance of Fiji police restrictions.

At least 13 Syrians have been killed and others wounded during an Israeli ground incursion and air strikes on the town of Beit Jinn, southwest of Syria’s capital Damascus.

• READ MORE: Israel strikes Palestine, Lebanon, Syria threatening stability
• Other Gaza reports

Palestine’s Foreign Ministry is demanding action from the international community to halt Israel’s “war crime” as it continues its large-scale military assault on the occupied West Bank.

Ibrahim Olabi, Syria’s representative to the UN, has condemned Israel’s latest attack on the southern town of Beit Jinn, saying it further exposes Israel’s disregard for international law and reflects its fear of a strengthening Syria.

The incident is “yet another indication to the world of which country in the region is the one abiding by international law and which isn’t,” Olabi told Al Jazeera.

It highlights “who really wants a peace deal, a security agreement — who wants to be able to get the region into stability — and who doesn’t,” he said.

Israel is acting out of anxiety over Syria’s trajectory and its growing “regional and international prominence” he said.

‘Israel is terrified’
“Israel is terrified by a strong and prosperous and stable Syria. We are heading in that direction no matter what.”

Olabi described Israel’s latest assault as a signal aimed not only at Syria, but also at its allies.

The attack indicated Israel was “running out of options”.

Since the declaration of a ceasefire in the Gaza Strip on October 10, Israel has violated the agreement many times with near-daily attacks, killing hundreds of people.

The Government Media Office in Gaza said Israel shot at civilians 142 times, raided residential areas beyond the “yellow line” 21 times, bombed and shelled Gaza 228 times, and demolished people’s property on 100 occasions.

Israeli forces have also detained 35 Palestinians in Gaza over the past month, and continue to block vital humanitarian aid and destroy homes and infrastructure across the Strip.

Last night, New Zealand photojournalist Cole Martin spoke of daily life in the occupied Palestine Territories as he experienced Israeli brutality during six months based in Bethlehem in an inspiring public kōrero at Saint Matthew-in-the-City Cathedral, Auckland, and offered a “what now?” prescription of hope for the future.

He is also speaking at today’s UN solidarity rally in Te Komititanga Square at 2pm and will give another kōrero at 7pm tonight at Cityside Baptist Church, 8 Mt Eden Road.

List of AoNZ’s peaceful, family-friendly events for Palestine for week 1⃣1⃣2⃣
(North to South): https://t.co/BcbWFD7cnD
(by time & date): https://t.co/mJDjQxkbHr pic.twitter.com/fvXcLNF8tG

— Bruce King (@CrowdvBank) November 27, 2025

Sitiveni Rabuka, the instigator of Fiji’s coup culture, took to the witness stand for the first time today — fronting the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) in Suva.

The TRC was set up by Rabuka’s coalition government with the aim of promoting truth-telling and reconciliation regarding political upheavals dating back to 1987.

The five-member TRC began its work earlier this year. It was led by Dr Marcus Brand, who was appointed in January, and has reportedly already finished his role.

• READ MORE: Other Fiji Truth and Reconciliation Commission reports

Rabuka had stated earlier this year he would “voluntarily appear” before the commission and disclose names of individuals involved in his two racist coups almost four decades ago.

The man, often referred to as “Rambo” for his military past, has been a permanent fixture in the Fijian political landscape since first overthrowing a democratically elected government as a 38-year-old lieutenant-colonel.

But now, at 77, he has a weatherbeaten face yet still carries the resolute confidence of a young soldier. He faced the TRC commissioners, wearing a tie in the colours of the Fiji Army, to give a much-anticipated testimony by Fijians locally and in the diaspora.

He began by revisiting his childhood and the influences in his life that shaped his worldview. He fundamentally accepted the actions of 1987 were rooted in his racial worldview.

Protecting Indigenous Fijians
He acknowledged those actions were a result of his background, being raised in an “insulated” environment (i.e. village, boarding school, military), and it is his view that he was acting to protect Indigenous Fijians.

Asked if the coups had served their purpose, Rabuka said: “The coups have brought out more of a self-realisation of who we are, what we’re doing, where we need to be.”

“If that is a positive outcome of the coup, I encourage all of us to do that. Let us be aware of the sensitivity of numbers, the sensitivity of a perceived imbalance in the distribution of assets, or whatever.”

But perhaps the most important response from him came toward the end of the almost 1hr 50min submission to a question from the facilitator and veteran journalist Netani Rika, who asked Rabuka: “Do you see the removal of immunity for coup perpetrators from the [2013] Constitution as a way towards preventing a repeat of these incidents [coups]?”

“There should be [a] very objective assessment of what can be done,” Rabuka replied.

“There are certain things that we cannot do unless we all agree [to] leave the amendment to the [2013] Constitution open to the people. If that is the will of the people, let it be.

“At the moment our hands are tied,” confirming indirectly that the removal of immunity for coup perpetrators is off the table as it stands.

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

Fiji marked the International Day for the Elimination of Violence Against Women and Girls  this week with the government saying the day is a reminder that for too many women and girls violence is a daily reality — not a headline or a statistic.

The day also kicked off 16 days of activism against gender-based violence — a worldwide UN campaign running from November 25 to December 10.

The country’s Minister for Women, Children and Social Protection Sashi Kiran told Parliament violence against women and girls was not limited to the private sphere — “it permeates every dimension of society”.

“Addressing this issue is therefore not only a woman’s matter; it is a national priority — requiring engagement from every sector, every institution and every leader in our country.

“It manifests in various forms including physical, emotional, sexual and economic abuse as well as harmful practices such as trafficking.”

She said the cost of violence against females was estimated to be equivalent to seven percent of Fiji’s gross domestic product (GDP), affecting families, the health system, productivity and the nation’s development.

“The cost of violence is not only emotional — it is national.”

She pointed out several statistics, including that around 60 percent of Fijian women had experienced some form of violence in their lifetime; girls as young as 13 remained the most vulnerable to sexual assault; and from 2020-2024, more than 4000 child sexual offences were reported — most involving young girls.

“Our response must be survivor-centred, and above all accessible to everyone — including women and girls with disabilities and those from diverse sexual orientations and gender identities.”

In the World Health Organisation’s (WHO) Western Pacific Region, more than a quarter of girls and women experience some form of intimate partner or sexual violence.

But WHO said in several Pacific island countries and areas, the prevalence of lifetime intimate partner violence is as high as one in two women.

WHO’s western Pacific director, Dr Saia Ma’u Piukala, said governments and communities must use data to drive stronger policies, scale up prevention efforts, and invest in health system readiness, “so every girl is protected and woman is empowered”.

WHO said while the numbers were grim, a survey on “health system readiness to respond to interpersonal violence” pointed to an encouraging policy environment.

“Many countries are integrating strategies to prevent violence against women and girls into their national multisectoral plans, and acknowledging the key role that health systems must play in tackling this societal problem.

“However, the survey also highlights challenges in implementing these strategies.”

It is not all bad news in the region though — Cook Islands police have reported a decrease in the number of assault cases against women this year.

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

The global civil society alliance Civicus has called on eight Pacific governments to do more to respect civic freedoms and strengthen institutions to protect these rights.

It is especially concerned over the threats to press freedom, the use of laws to criminalise online expression, and failure to establish national human rights institutions or ratify the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR).

But it also says that the Pacific status is generally positive.

• READ MORE: Civicus reports in the Pacific

Nauru, Papua New Guinea, Samoa and Solomon Islands have been singled out for criticism over press freedom concerns, but the brief published by the Civicus Monitor also examines the civic spce in Fiji, Kiribati, Tonga and Vanuatu.

“There have been incidents of harassment, intimidation and dismissal of journalists in retaliation for their work,” the report said.

“Cases of censorship have also been reported, along with denial of access, exclusion of journalists from government events and refusal of visas to foreign journalists.”

The Civicus report focuses on respect for and limitations to the freedoms of association, expression and peaceful assembly, which are fundamental to the exercise of civic rights.

Freedoms guaranteed
“These freedoms are guaranteed in the national constitutions of all eight countries as well as in the ICCPR.

“In several countries — including Fiji, Kiribati, Nauru, PNG and Samoa — the absence of freedom of information laws makes it extremely difficult for journalists and the public to access official information,” the report said.

Countries such as Samoa, Tonga and Vanuatu, continued to enforce criminal defamation laws, creating a “chilling environment for the media, human rights defenders and anyone seeking to express themselves or criticise governments”.

In recent years, Fiji, PNG and Samoa had also used cybercrime laws to criminalise online expression.

“Governments in the Pacific must do more to protect press freedom and ensure that journalists can work freely and without fear of retribution for expressing critical opinions or covering topics the government may find sensitive,” said Josef Benedict, Civicus Asia Pacific researcher.

“They must also pass freedom of information legislation and remove criminal defamation provisions in law so that they are not used to criminalise expression both off and online.”

Civicus is concerned that at least four countries – Kiribati, Nauru, Solomon Islands and Tonga – have yet to ratify the ICCPR, which imposes obligations on states to respect and protect civic freedoms.

Lacking human rights bodies
Also, four countries — Kiribati, Nauru, Solomon Islands and Vanuatu — lack national human rights institutions (NHRI).

Fiji was criticised over restricting the right to peaceful assembly over protests about genocide and human rights violations in Palestine and West Papua.

In May 2024, “a truckload of police officers, including two patrol cars, turned up at a protest at the premises of the Fiji Women’s Crisis Centre against human rights violations in Gaza and West Papua, in an apparent effort to intimidate protesters”.

Gatherings and vigils had been organised regularly each Thursday.

In PNG and Tonga, the Office of the Ombudsman plays monitor and responds to human rights issues, but calls remain for establishing an independent body in line with the Paris Principles, which set international standards for national human rights institutions.

“It is time all Pacific countries ratify the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and ensure its laws are consistent with it,” said Benedict.

“Governments must also to establish national human rights institutions to ensure effective monitoring and reporting on human rights issues. This will also allow for better accountability for violations of civic freedoms.”

• More about Civicus

The Fijian Media Association (FMA) has demanded better police protection after a  journalist working for the state broadcaster Fiji Broadcasting Corporation (FBC) was violently attacked outside a courthouse

In a statement today, the FMA again called for police to be more vigilant in managing security and threats outside the Suva High Court in the capital after another Fijian journalist was violently attacked by a convicted murderer leaving under police guard.

Journalist Apenisa Waqairadovu of the FBC suffered injuries to his arms and hands after he was attacked by Sairusi Ceinaturaga, who had just been convicted of murdering the one-year-old child of his de facto partner, the FMA stated.

• READ MORE: Convicted killer attacks FBC journalist outside Suva High Court
• Other Fiji media freedom reports

After his conviction, Ceinaturaga walked out of the courtroom in handcuffs, followed a metre or two behind by a police officer who was outrun and scrambled to catch up when Ceinaturaga chased the journalist.

Ceinaturaga threatened Waqairadovu, swore and ran after him before pushing him down the stairs.

“This has been happening too often to journalists outside the courtroom, and we do not see any improved process despite our repeated calls for stronger security and protection,” the FMA stated.

“We have been consistently calling for urgent action from police to protect media workers — even after another convicted murderer Tevita Kapawale tried to attack journalists outside the courthouse in August.

‘Physical threats every year’
“Journalists have faced physical threats every year while covering court cases, and the Fiji Police Force’s repeated failure to provide adequate security for media personnel is unacceptable.

“The media plays a vital role in ensuring transparency and accountability in our justice system. Journalists have the right to report on matters of public interest without fear of violence or intimidation.”

The FMA is now demanding the Fiji Police Force immediately implement proper security protocols for court proceedings, including secure perimeters during prisoner transport and adequate police presence to protect journalists from violent offenders — the same call it made following the August incident.

The FMA says police must do better and relook at how they provide security at the courthouse.

“In the past officers would surround the accused person and escort him out, not let them just walk out with officers strolling at the back.

#Fiji: Apenisa Waqairadovu, a reporter for the public broadcaster #FBC, was physically assaulted today by a convicted individual after a court hearing — a recurring problem in the country. We call on the authorities to strengthen protection measures for journalists at courthouses.

— RSF (@rsf.org) November 25, 2025 at 6:36 PM

“In this case the journalist kept their distance but was still chased down and attacked and this is totally unacceptable.”

The FMA said reporters covered court stories in order to inform the public and to ensure that justice was served under the law.

“We are again urging the public to appreciate and understand the role journalists play in providing the coverage of how justice and the rule of law is administered in this country.”

Entrepreneurs, professionals, families and community leaders from across Aotearoa New Zealand came together last night for the inaugural Fiji Business Awards NZ, reports Webfit News.

Hosted by the Fiji Business Network (NZ) at Auckland’s Remuera Club and backed by platinum sponsor Bunnings Trade, the evening was a reminder that many Fiji businesses in New Zealand have started from humble beginnings — often with little capital but a determined drive.

And these businesses are now creating jobs, mentoring others and giving back to the community on both sides of the Pacific.

• READ MORE: Other Fiji business reports

The Fiji Business Network is a not-for-profit group of business owners and professionals with links to Fiji.

“Its focus is simple but powerful,” said one of the organisers. “Help members connect, share referrals, support start-ups, and invest back into Aotearoa New Zealand, Fiji, and the wider Pacific.”

Network president Atesh Bhej, managing director of the Biz Group of companies, told participants that many in the Fiji business community had arrived in New Zealand with  little money, worked long hours, and slowly built something strong for their families and communities.

“For many guests, this awards night was not only about trophies,” said network secretary Nik Naidu. “It was also about seeing their journeys recognised in public.”

Naidu and the network’s committee pulled together an impressive range of finalists and a strong judging panel, including former All Black Keven Mealamu (MNZM) and board member of several organisations such as Fit60 HQ Training and NZ Rugby.

Winners included Trivision Entertainment Ltd (Small Business of the Year) and Feroz Aswat of Auckland Copiers and Solutions Ltd (Business Leader of the Year).

• Full report at Webfit News

Fiji Business Awards NZ 2025.           Video: Webfit News

Regional student journalists at the University of the South Pacific have condemned the Samoan Prime Minister’s ban on the Samoa Observer newspaper, branding it as a “deliberate and systemic attempt to restrict public scrutiny”.

The Journalism Students’ Association (JSA) at USP said in a statement today it was “deeply
concerned” about Samoan Prime Minister La’aulialemalietoa Leuatea Schmidt’s ban on the Samoa Observer from his press conferences and his directive that cabinet ministers avoid responding to the newspaper’s questions.

“The recently imposed suspension signals not merely a rebuke of one newspaper, but a more deliberate and systemic attempt to restrict robust public scrutiny,” the statement said.

• READ MORE: Samoa editor says media freedom under attack in response to PM’s ban
• Samoa Observer: The PM’s wish and our promise – editorial
• Samoan PM bans nation’s only newspaper from government access
• JAWS quiet on ban, concerned over media control
• The PM’s wish and our promise – Samoa Observer editorial
• Samoan PM back home as journalist alleges assault outside his residence
• Other Samoa media reports

The statement, signed by JSA president Riya Bhagwan and regional representative Jean–Marc ‘Ake, said that equally worrying was a public declaration by the Journalists Association of Samoa’s (JAWS) executive who wished the Samoa Observer editor’s face “had been disfigured” during an assault outside the Prime Minister’s residence last Sunday.

“We also note reports of physical confrontations involving journalists outside the Prime Minister’s residence, which are deeply troubling. This is an alarming trend and signals a reverse, if not decline in media rights and freedom of speech, unless it is dealt with immediately,” the JSA said.

“With its long-standing dedication to reporting on governance, human rights, and social
accountability issues, the ban on the Samoa Observer strikes at the heart of public discourse and places journalists in a precarious position.

Not an isolated case
“It risks undermining their ability to report freely and without the fear of reprisal.”

Sadly, said the JSA statement, this was not an isolated case.

“Earlier this year, the JAWS president Lagi Keresoma faced defamation charges under Samoa’s libel laws over an article about a former police officer’s appeal to the Head of State.

“Samoa’s steep decline in the 2025 World Press Freedom Index further highlights the ongoing challenges confronting Samoan media.”

JAWS’ recent statement highlighting government attempts to control press conferences through a proposed guide, further added to the growing pattern of restrictions on press freedom in Samoa.

“These recent incidents, coupled with the exclusion of the Samoa Observer, send a chilling
warning to Samoan journalists and establish a dangerous precedent for media subservience at the highest levels,” said JSA.

“Journalists must be able to perform their work safely, without intimidation or assault,
as they carry out their responsibilities to the public. These incidents raise serious
questions about the treatment of media professionals and respect for journalistic work.

“As a journalism student association with many of our journalists and alumni working in
the region, we are committed to empowering the next generation of journalists.

“The JSA is especially concerned that these attacks are eroding youth confidence in the
profession.

“We believe strongly in defending a space where young people can enter a field that is critical to democratic accountability, public oversight, and civic engagement.”

University of the South Pacific’s Associate Professor Shailendra Singh, who edited the inaugural edition of Pacific Media journal along with co-editor Dr Amit Sarwal, has responded to the publication with a Q and A.

The new journal has replaced the Pacific Journalism Review, which was founded by Professor David Robie at the University of Papua New Guinea and published for 30 years.

This new publication, supported by Tuwhera Open Access at Auckland University of Technology, was also founded by Dr Robie and the Asia Pacific Media Network and it is hoped that it will offer greater community media access and flexibility.

• READ MORE:  New Pacific media research journal launched
• The inaugural edition of Pacific Media

What does this new publication, Pacific Media, signal?

Dr Shailendra Singh: It signals an ongoing commitment to research on Pacific media, development, and democracy — just when such research is most urgently needed to understand the impact of multiple forces reshaping the region. These include artificial intelligence, misinformation and disinformation, the intensifying geopolitical contest between China and the West, the drugs and HIV epidemic, and the existential threat of climate change. With the world on track for a three-degree Celsius temperature rise, some reports describe this as a “death sentence” for Pacific reefs, food security, and livelihoods.

Yet, even as Pacific media confront one of the most complex and challenging reporting environments in history, they remain financially fragile, due to the impacts of digital disruption and covid-19.

The 2024 Pacific Media International Conference was quite an innovative step — bringing media academics and the industry together. How has that helped the region?

It created greater awareness of the challenges facing Pacific news media and exposed some of the industry’s structural weaknesses. Importantly, it fostered a better understanding — and hopefully, greater empathy — among the public toward the difficult conditions under which Pacific journalists operate. The conference underscored the importance of ongoing research, provided direction for future studies, and demonstrated the power of regional collaboration by amplifying Pacific voices and ideas.

How does the partnership between the USP Journalism Programme and the Pacific Media publishers, Asia Pacific Media Network, contribute to journalism excellence in the region?

Research on Pacific media is as scarce as it is vital for the development of Pacific journalism. The USP Journalism Programme and the Asia Pacific Media Network are the only two entities consistently conducting dedicated research on Pacific media, democracy, and development. Historically, both have been vocal about threats to media freedom and the welfare of journalists. They have documented the impact of coups and other forms of repression, while advocating for journalist safety, ethical standards, and media independence through awareness and education.

What next?

The next step is to consolidate and expand research, and training and development. This means deepening partnerships between academia and industry, mentoring a new generation of Pacific media researchers and journalists, and securing sustainable funding for long-term studies.

It also involves strengthening regional collaboration so that Pacific voices lead the global conversation about the region — rather than being spoken to and for. Ultimately, the goal is to ensure that Pacific media remain resilient, independent, and equipped to serve their communities in the face of profound social, technological, and environmental change.

The next edition of Pacific Media, edited by Khairiah A Rahman and Dr Rachel Khan, will also be published shortly.

Republished from Pacific Media journal’s website.

An Israeli minister touring the Pacific to discuss defence and cooperation says Fiji and Papua New Guinea are “great friends”.

Israeli Deputy Foreign Minister Sharren Haskel recently visited the two countries and RNZ Pacific spoke with her during a brief stop in Auckland.

She said the main goal of her trip was to thank PNG and Fiji for their support, including the opening of embassies in Jerusalem.

• READ MORE: PSNA slams Israeli politician over ‘sneaking into NZ’ during Pacific friendship trip
• Why most Pacific governments stand with Israel in spite of UN votes
• Israeli forces kill three in Gaza as settlers attack in occupied West Bank
• Other Israel in the Pacific reports

Israeli Minister Haskel speaks to RNZ on Pacific visit     Video: RNZ

“It was an important message for our people and it was a great opportunity for me to thank them in person and to see how we can strengthen our friendship.”

The countries were “strategic allies” who worked together in the areas of agriculture, water technology and cybersecurity, Haskel said.

She pointed to the agricultural industry in PNG.

“They used to import almost all of their products, vegetables, fruits,” she said.

Agricultural help
“There are a few Israeli companies that went into the industry, developing a lot of the agricultural aspect of it to the point where all of the products they’re eating are local and they’re even exporting some of these products.”

Israeli farms there had also helped with the growth of the local dairy industry, she said.

“This is part of the collaboration that we want to do,” she said. “I came with a delegation of businessmen coming from those industries to see how can continue and develop it, it’s a win-win situation.”

An agreement with Fiji has been expanded to see more agricultural students sent to Israel for an 11-month paid internship.

Also while in Fiji, Haskel signed a memorandum of understanding on cybersecurity.

She said that came after three hacking attacks on the Fiji government’s system.

“[The MOU] starts a dialogue between our cybersecurity agency and between the proper agencies in Fiji as well,” she said.

Cybersecurity experience
““This is something that they’re starting to build, we’ve got a lot of experience with it and I think the dialogue can give them and lot of advice and also to connect them to quite a few Israeli companies.”

A representative from Israeli defence and security company Elbit was among the delegation.

“They have a lot of cybersecurity systems so it’s a start of a building of a relationship,” Haskel said.

Israel’s relationships with PNG and Fiji had been going for many decades, and were not about the amount of aid given, she said.

“Israel is not a major economic power that has a lot of money to spend, especially during times of war,” she said.

“It’s not about the amount of money that we can invest but the quality and the things and how it affects the people.”

Commitments honoured
Asked about aid projects that had been cancelled, Haskel said Israel had honoured any commitments it made. It was not responsible for changes to United States policy that had seen trilateral agreements cut, she said.

“There were many projects that were committed in many different countries, together Israel and the Americans, some are continuing and some are cancelled,” she said.

“This is part of [US President Donald] Trump’s policy. We can’t predict that.”

Haskel also met with people from indigenous, Christian and farming communities while in Fiji and PNG and she said Israel is also hoping to become and observer of the Pacific Islands Forum next year.

The PNG government said it continued to regard Israel as a valuable partner in advancing shared development goals.

Meanwhile, Fiji’s government said the “historic” visit between the nations would foster continued cooperation, innovation and friendship.

‘Strategic step’
Prime Minister Rabuka said the cybersecurity agreement was “a strategic step forward to strengthen Fiji’s security framework and promote deeper cooperation across sectors”.

Israel’s influence in the Pacific has been under the microscope recently, including around the United Nations vote supporting Palestinian statehood.

It follows years of wrangling between superpowers China and the United States over aid and influence in the region.

Oliver Nobetau, a Papuan development expert at the Australian Lowy Institute, told RNZ Pacific that Israel wanted to lock in UN support for the future.

“I think they have demonstrated their support, but also may have an ability to sort of sway between votes,” he said.

“We’ve seen it, between the switching from recognition from China to Taiwan. And this can be another instance now where they can be persuaded to vote in a different way.”

On aid, Nobetau said there would now be a hope that Israel increased its aid to the region.

“I would say there’s an expectation on Israel to carry on or fill in that funding gap,” she said.

“The question now falls on the Pacific governments themselves, if this is something that’s worth pursuing . . .  they would prefer, if the USA are now is out of the picture, if Israel can continue to fill that.”

Nobetau expected Israel to look at bringing its military and intelligence services closer to the Pacific.

“From what I recall, when I was working with the government, there were institutional exchanges with the Mossad: internal capabilities to collect intelligence is something that’s that’s needed within Pacific countries,” he said.

“So I think that could be another area as well.”

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

Pacific Media, a new regional research journal, made its debut today with a collection of papers on issues challenging the future, such as independent journalism amid “intensifying geostrategic competition”.

The papers have been largely drawn from an inaugural Pacific International Media conference hosted by The University of the South Pacific in the Fiji capital Suva in July last year.

“It was the first Pacific media conference of its kind in 20 years, convened to address the unprecedented shifts and challenges facing the region’s media systems,” said conference coordinator and edition editor Dr Shailendra Singh, associate professor in journalism at USP.

• READ MORE: The Pacific Media portal
• Pacific Journalism Review
• Pacific Media 2024 conference reports

“These include pressures arising from governance and political instability, intensifying geostrategic competition—particularly between China and the United States—climate change and environmental degradation, as well as the profound impacts of digital disruption and the COVID-19 pandemic.”

Topics included in the volume include “how critical journalism can survive” in the Pacific; “reporting the nuclear Pacific”; “Behind the mic” with Talking Point podcaster Sashi Singh, the “coconut wireless” and community news in Hawai’i,; women’s political empowerment in the Asia Pacific; “weaponising the partisan WhatsApp group in Indonesia; and “mapping the past to navigate the future” in a major Pacific Islands News Association (PINA) publishing project.

Other contributors include journalists and media academics from Australia and New Zealand featuring a “Blood on the tracks” case study in investigative journalism practice, and digital weather media coverage in the Pacific.

This inaugural publication of Pacific Media has been produced jointly by The University of the South Pacific and the New Zealand-based Asia Pacific Media Network (APMN), with Dr Amit Sarwal, one of the conference organisers, joining Dr Singh as co-editor.

Designer is Pacific Journalism Review’s Del Abcede.

APMN managing editor Dr David Robie welcomed the new publication, saying “this journal will carry on the fine and innovative research mahi (work) established by Pacific Journalism Review during a remarkable 30 years contributing to the region”.

It ceased publication last year, but is still ranked as a Q2 journal by SCOPUS.

The new journal will open up some new doors for community participation.

Both the PJR and PM research archives are in the public domain at the Tuwhera digital collection at Auckland University of Technology.

Khairiah A Rahman has been appointed by APMN as Pacific Media editor and her first edition with a collection of papers from the Asian Congress for Media and Communication (ACMC) conference in Vietnam last October will also be published shortly.

Published with permission from Asia Pacific Media Network.

Pacific civil society groups say 2025 has been a big year for the ocean.

Development Alternatives with Women for a New Era (DAWN) representative Maureen Penjueli said the Pacific Ocean was being hyper-militarised and there was a desire for seabed minerals to be used to build-up military capacity.

“Critical minerals, whether from land or from the deep ocean itself, have a military end use, and that’s been made very clear in 2025,” Penjueli said during the Pacific Network on Globalisation (PANG) 2025 State of the Ocean webinar.

• READ MORE: Other Pacific Ocean militarisation reports

“They’re deemed extremely vital for defence industrial base, enabling the production of military platforms such as fighter aircraft, tanks, missiles, submarines.

“2025 is the year where we see the link between critical minerals on the sea floor and use [in the] military.”

PANG’s Joey Tau said one of the developments had been the increase in countries calling for a moratorium or pause on deep sea mining, which was now up to 40.

“Eight of which are from the Pacific and a sub-regional grouping the MSG (Melanesian Spearhead Group) still holds that political space or that movement around a moratorium.”

Deep-sea mining rules
Tau said it came as the UN-sanctioned International Seabed Authority tried to come to an agreement on deep-sea mining rules at the same time as the United States is considering its own legal pathway.

“It is a bad precedent setting by the US, we hope that the ISA both assembly and the council would hold ground and warn the US.”

He said unlike US, China spoke about the importance of multilateralism and it for global partners to maintain unity within the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) agreement which has not been ratified by the United States.

Also in February was the deep sea minerals talanoa, where Pacific leaders met to discuss deep sea mining.

“Some of our countries sit on different sides of the table on this issue. You have countries who are sponsoring and who are progressing the agenda of deep-sea mining, not only within their national jurisdiction, but also in the international arena,” Tau said.

In May, UN human rights experts expressed concern about the release of treated nuclear wastewater.

Japan’s government has consistently maintained the release meets international safety standards, and monitoring by the International Atomic Energy Agency shows there is no measurable impact beyond Japan’s coastal waters.

Legal and moral problem
However, Ocean Vision Legal’s Naima Taafaki-Fifita said as well as being an environmental issue, it was also a legal and moral problem.

“By discharging these radioactive contaminants into the Pacific, Japan risks breaching its obligations under international law,” she said.

“[The UN special rapporteurs] caution that this may pose grave risks to human rights, particularly the rights to life, health, food and culture, not only in Japan, but across the Pacific.”

Taafaki-Fifita said it was a “deeply personal” issue for Pacific people who lived with the nuclear legacy of testing.

In September, what is known as the “High Seas Treaty” received its 60th ratification which means it will now be legally effective in January 2026.

The agreement allows international waters — which make up nearly two-thirds of the ocean — to be placed into marine protected areas.

Taafaki-Fitita said it was important that Pacific priorities were visible and heard as the treaty became implemented.

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

A Pacific people’s mission to Kanaky New Caledonia was repeatedly confronted with a “profound sense of distrust” in the French state’s role in the decolonisation process, a new report released this week has revealed.

“This scepticism, articulated by Kanak representatives, is rooted in the belief that France is not a neutral arbiter but a key actor in perpetuating the conflict,” said the mission, which concluded that the French management of the territory continued to undermine the Kanak right to self-determination and breached international commitments on decolonisation.

As one speaker cited in the report explained:”France is acting like a referee, but instead they are the main perpetrator.”

• READ MORE: People’s mission to Kanaky warns over ‘broken trust’ in France about decolonisation
• Other Kanaky New Caledonia reports
• The full Pacific People’s Mission to Kanaky New Caledonia report

The mission — led by the Pacific Network on Globalisation (PANG), the Pacific Conference of Churches (PCC) and the Protestant Church of Kanaky New Caledonia (Église protestante de Kanaky Nouvelle-Calédonie, EPKNC) — was conducted on April 10-19 this year following invitations from customary and church leaders.

Its findings, released last Wednesday by PANG, reveal persistent inequality, systemic discrimination, and political interference under the French administration. The report said that France’s role in Kanaky’s long-delayed decolonisation process had deepened mistrust and weakened the foundations of self-rule.

“The Pacific Mission in Kanaky New Caledonia is a reminder of our Pasifika connection with our families across the sea,” said Pastor Billy Wetewea of the EPKNC.

“It shows that we never exist alone but because of others, and that we are all linked to a common destiny. The journey of the Kanak people toward self-determination is a journey shared by every people in our region still striving to define their own future.”

The delegation included Anna Naupa (Vanuatu — the mission head), Lopeti Senituli (Tonga), Dr David Small (Aotearoa New Zealand), Emele Duituturaga-Jale (Fiji), with secretariat support by PANG and Kanak partners.

The team met community leaders, churches, women’s groups and youth networks across several provinces to document how the effects of French rule continue to shape Kanaky’s political, economic and social life.

Key findings
The Pacific Peoples’ Mission Report identifies four main areas of concern:

• France is not a neutral actor in the transition to independence. The state continues to breach commitments made under the Accords through election delays, political interference and the transfer of Kanak leaders to prisons in mainland France.
• Widening socio-economic inequality. Land ownership, employment, and access to public resources remain heavily imbalanced. The 2024 unrest destroyed more than 800 businesses and left 20,000 people unemployed.
• A health system in decline. About 20 percent of medical professionals left after the 2024 crisis, leaving rural hospitals and clinics under-resourced and understaffed.
• Systemic bias in the justice system. Kanak youth now make up more than 80 percent of the prison population, a reflection of structural discrimination and the criminalisation of dissent.

Kanak writer and activist Roselyne Makalu said the report documented the lived experiences of her people.

“This support is fundamental because, as the Pacific family, we form one single entity united by a common destiny,” she said.

“The publication of this report, which constitutes factual evidence of human-rights violations and the denial of the Kanak people’s right to decide their future, comes at the very moment the French National Assembly has voted, against popular opinion, to postpone the provincial elections.

“This Parisian decision is nothing short of a blatant new attack on the voice of the Caledonian people, intensifying the political deadlock.”

Tongan law practitioner and former president of the Tonga Law Society, Lopeti Senituli, who was a member of the mission, said the findings confirmed a deliberate system of control, adding that “the deep inequalities faced by Kanak people — from land loss and economic marginalisation to mass incarceration — are not accidents of history”.

“They are the direct outcomes of a system designed to keep Kanaky dependent,” he added.

‘Politics of revenge’
Head of mission Anna Naupa said France could not act as both referee and participant in the decolonisation process.

“Its repeated breaches, political interference and disregard for Kanak rights expose a system built to protect colonial interests, not people,” she said.

“The mission called for immediate action — the release of political prisoners, fair provincial elections, and a Pacific-led mediation process to restore trust and place Kanaky firmly on the path to self-determination and justice.”

The mission also confirmed that the May 2024 crisis was an uprising by those most affected by France’s flawed governance and economic model.

It described France’s post-crisis policies — including scholarship withdrawals, fare increases, and relocation of public services — as “politics of revenge” that had further harmed Kanak and Oceanian communities.

Recommendations
The mission calls for:
• Free and fair provincial elections under neutral international observation;
• A new round of negotiations to be held to find a new political agreement post Nouméa Accord; and
• Pacific-led mediation through the Melanesian Spearhead Group (MSG) and the Pacific Islands Forum (PIF).

The report further urges Pacific governments to ensure Kanaky remains on the United Nations list of Non-Self-Governing Territories and to revitalise regional solidarity mechanisms supporting self-determination and justice.

“The world is already in the fourth international decade of decolonisation,” the report concludes.

“Self-determination is an inalienable right of colonised peoples. Decolonisation is a universal issue — not a French internal matter.”

• The full report, Pacific Peoples’ Mission to Kanaky New Caledonia, is available here through the Pacific Network on Globalisation.

COMMENTARY: By Dr Satyendra Prasad

As Pacific’s leaders and civil society prepare for the United Nations Climate Conference in Brazil (COP30) next week, they also need to keep a line of sight to the subsequent Pacific’s COP31.

As they engage at COP30, they will have in their thoughts the painful and lonely journey ahead in Jamaica and across the Caribbean as they rebuild from Hurricane Melissa.

The Blue Pacific needs to build a well-lit pathway to land Pacific’s priorities at COP30 and COP31. The cross winds are heavy and the landing zone could not be hazier.

• READ MORE: EU waters down climate target in last-ditch deal before COP30 in Brazil
• Other COP30 reports

At the recent Pacific Islands Forum Meeting in Honiara, Pacific leaders called for accelerating implementation of programmes to respond to climate change. They said that finance and knowhow remained the binding constraints to this.

The Pacific’s leaders were unanimous that the world was failing the Pacific.

Climate-stressed infrastructure
Pacific leaders spoke about their infrastructure deficit. The region today needs well in excess of $500 million annually to maintain infrastructure in the face of rising seas and fiercer storms.

There are more than 1000 primary and secondary schools, dozens of health centres across coastal areas in Solomon Islands, PNG, Vanuatu and Fiji that need to be repaired rehabilitated or relocated.

The region needs an additional $300-500 million annually over a decade to build and climate proof critical infrastructure — airports, wharves, jetties, water and electricity and telecommunications.

The Blue Pacific’s infrastructure distress is a cocktail that poisons its human development progress. This has lethal consequences for our elderly, for children and the most vulnerable.

As a region has fallen short in convincing the international community that the region’s infrastructure distress is quintessentially a climate distress. This must change.

The constant cycle of catastrophe, recovery and debt are on autoplay repeat across the world’s most climate vulnerable region. The heart-braking images coming out of Jamaica and the Caribbean in the wake of Hurricane Melissa makes this same point.

The Blue Pacific as a region attracts a woefully insufficient share of existing climate finance. Less than 1.5 percent of the total climate finances reaches the world’s most climate vulnerable region today. This is unacceptable of course.

Is our planet headed for a 3.0C world?
At COP30, the world will see what the new climate commitments (NDCs) add up to. Our best estimates today suggest that the planet is headed for a 3.0C plus temperature rise. Anything above 1.5C will be catastrophic for the Blue Pacific.

Life across our coral reef systems will simply roast at 3.0C temperature increase. The regions food security will be harmed irreparably. This will have massive consequences for tourism dependent economies. Bleached reefs bleach tourism incomes.

The health consequences arising from climate change are set to worsen rapidly. As will the toll on children who will fall further behind in their learning as schools remain inaccessible for longer periods; or children spend long hours in hotter classrooms.

For Pacific’s women, the toll of runaway temperature increase will be heavy — on their health, on their livelihoods and on their security. It will be too heavy.

A deal for the Pacific at COP30
The world of climate change is becoming transactional. Short termism and deal making have become its norm.

As Pacific leaders, its civil society, its science community and its young engage at COP30 in Brazil, they are reminded that the Blue Pacific needs more than anything else, a settled outlook climate finance that will be available to the region. Finance must be foremostly predictable.

The region should not feel like it is playing a lottery — as is the case today. Tonga must know broadly how much climate finance will be available to it over the next five years and so must Papua New Guinea.

At Bele’m, the world will need to agree to a road map for how the climate financing short fall will be met. This is a must to restore trust in the global process.

The weight on the shoulders of host Brazil is extraordinarily heavy. Brazil is the home of the famous Rio Conference in 1992 where the small island states first succeeded in placing climate change, biodiversity loss on the global agenda.

The Small Islands States grouping is chaired by Palau. President Whipps Jnr will lead the islands to Brazil. He will no doubt remind the host that the world has failed the small states persistently since that moment of great hope at the Rio Conference in 1992.

Pace of climate finance
There are three principal reasons why climate finance must flow to the Pacific at speed.

First, is that most countries in our region have less than a decade to adapt. Farms and family gardens, small businesses, tourist resorts, villages and livelihoods need to adapt now to meet a climate changed world.

Second, if adaptation is pushed into the future because of woefully insufficient finances — the window to adapt will close.

As more sectors of our economy fall beyond rehabilitation, the costs of loss and damage will rise. Time is of the essence. And on top of that loss and damage remain poorly funded. This too must change.

The Pacific needs to do many things concurrently to build its resilience. Everything for the Blue Pacific rests on a decent outcome on financing.

The region needs to make its clearest argument that its share of climate finance must be ring-fenced. That its share of climate finance will remain available to the region even if demand is slow to take shape.

The Pacific’s rightful share of climate finance over the next decade is between 3-5 per cent of the total across all financing windows. This is fundamentally because based the adaptation window is so short in such a uniquely specific way.

This should mean that the Blue Pacific has access to a floor of US$1.5 billion annually through to 2035. This is very doable even if global currents are choppy.

TFFF and Brazil’s leadership
Brazil has already demonstrated that it can forge large financing arrangements through its leadership and creativity. It will launch the Tropical Forest Forever Facility (TFFF) at COP. PNG’s Prime Minister has played an important role on this. We hope that forested Pacific states will be able to access this new facility to expand their conservation efforts with much higher returns to landowners.

Beyond Bele’m
COP30 in Brazil is an opportunity for the Pacific to begin to frame a larger consensus — well in time for COP31. It is my hope that Australia and Pacific’s leaders will have done enough to secure the hosting rights for COP31.

A ‘circuit-breaker’ COP31
Fiji’s former Deputy Prime Minister Biman Prasad and Australia’s Climate Minister Chris Bowen recently said that COP31 must be “a circuit breaker moment” for the Blue Pacific.

The reversals in our development story arising from the climate chaos have become too burdensome. Repeated recoveries means that every next recovery becomes that much harder.

Ask anyone in Jamaica and Caribbean today and you will hear this same message. Their finance ministers know too well that in no time they will be back at the mercy of international financial institutions to rebuild roads and bridges that have been washed away and water systems that have been destroyed by Hurricane Melissa.

Climate finance by its very nature therefore must involve deep changes to the architecture of international development and finance. The rich world is not yet ready to let go of privilege and power that it wields through an archaic financial international system.

But fundamental reform is a must. Fundamental reform is necessary if small states are to reclaim agency and begin to drive own destinies.

Future proofing our societies
The risks arising from climate change are so multi-faceted that economic, social and political stability cannot no longer be taken for granted.

Conflicts over land lost to rising seas, the strain on education, health and water infrastructure, deepening debt stress take their toll on institutions through which stability is maintained in our societies.

The Blue Pacific needs to work with this elevated risk of fragility and state failure. This reality must shape the Blue Pacific expectations from a Pacific COP.

Building on the excellent work underway in climate ministries in Fiji, Vanuatu, Samoa, PNG and across the region through the SPC, SPREP, OPOC, I have outlined what the Pacific’s expectations could be from a Pacific COP31.

COP31 must be about transformation and impact. The Blue Pacific’s leaders should seek a consensus that includes both the rich industrial World and large developing countries such as China and India in support of a Pacific Package at COP31.

A Pacific COP 31 package
The core elements of a Pacific package at COP31 are:

1. Ensuring that the Loss and Damage Fund has become fully operational with a pipeline of investment ready projects from across the Blue Pacific.
2. Securing the Pacific Regional Infrastructure Facility (PRIF) as a fully funded and disbursement ready financing facility with a pipeline of investment ready projects.
3. Securing ring-fenced climate finance allocations for the Blue Pacific at the Green Climate Fund (GCF) and across international financial institutions.
4. Securing support for Blue Pacific’s “lighthouse” multi-country (region wide) transformative programs to advance marine and terrestrial biodiversity protection and promote sustainability across the Blue Pacific Ocean.
5. A COP decision that is unambiguous on quality and speed of climate and ocean finance that will be available to small states for the remainder of the decade.
6. Securing sufficient resources that can flow directly to communities and families to rapidly rebuild their resilience following disasters and catastrophes including through insurance and social protection vehicles.
7. Ensuring that knowhow, resources and mechanisms for disaster risk reduction are in place, are fully operational and are sustainable.

An Ocean of Peace for a climate changed world
Fiji’s Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka has championed the Blue Pacific as an Ocean of Peace. Its acceptance by Pacific leaders opens up opportunities for the region’s climate diplomacy.

The Pacific’s leaders accept that the Ocean of Peace anchors its stewardship of our marine environment to the highest principles of protection and conservation. An Ocean of Peace super-charges the Pacific’s efforts to take forward transboundary marine research and conservation, end plastic and harmful waste disposal, end harmful fisheries subsidies and decarbonise shipping.

It boosts the Pacific’s efforts to main-frame the ocean-climate nexus into the international climate change frameworks by the time a Pacific COP31 is convened.

A window of hope
Between COP30 and COP31 lies a rare window of hope. The Blue Pacific must leverage this.

Both a Brazilian and an Australian Presidency offer supportive back-to-back opportunities and spaces to take forward the regions desire to project a solid foundation of programs that are necessary to secure its future.

Uniquely the ball may be in the Pacific’s court on how successfully we can harness this rare opening in the international environment.

Dr Satyendra Prasad is a Non-Resident Senior Fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace and Fiji’s former ambassador to the UN. He is the Climate Lead for About Global. This article was first published by Wansolwara Online and is republished by Asia Pacific Report in partnership with USP Journalism.

A People’s Mission to Kanaky New Caledonia says the French Pacific territory remains in a fragile political and social transition nearly three decades after the signing of the Nouméa Accord.

It says the pro-independence unrest in May last year has “left visible scars” — not only in a damaged economy but in trust between the territory’s institutions and the communities being served.

The mission is launching its report at a media event in the Fiji capital Suva tomorrow.

• READ MORE: Pacific Peoples’ Mission exposes harsh realities of injustice under French rule in Kanaky New Caledonia
• The full People’s Mission to Kanaky report
• Other Kanaky New Caledonia reports

“France cannot act as both referee and participant in the decolonisation process. Its repeated breaches and political interference have eroded trust and prolonged Kanaky’s dependency,” said mission head Anna Naupa, a Pacific policy and development specialist, in a pre-launch statement.

“The Pacific must now take a principled stand to ensure the right to self-determination is fulfilled.”

The mission — organised by Pacific Network on Globalisation (PANG), Eglise Protestante de Kanaky Nouvelle-Calédonie (EPKNC) and the Pacific Conference of Churches (PCC) — said regional observers had noted that the situation now hinged on whether France and Pacific leaders could “re-establish credible dialogue” that genuinely included Kanak perspectives in shaping the territory’s future.

Five key findings
According to the report, the Pacific Peoples’ Mission to Kanaky New Caledonia had identified five interlinked findings that defined the current crisis:

• Political trust has collapsed. Communities no longer view the decolonisation process as impartial, citing France’s dual role as both administrator and arbiter;
• Reconciliation remains incomplete. Efforts to rebuild unity after the 2024 unrest are fragmented, with limited Kanak participation in recovery planning;
• Youth exclusion is fuelling instability. Young Kanaks describe frustration over limited education, employment, and representation opportunities;
• Economic recovery lacks equity. Reconstruction support has disproportionately benefited urban and non-Kanak areas, widening social divisions; and
• Regional leadership is missing. Pacific solidarity has weakened, leaving communities without consistent regional advocacy or oversight.

Together, said the mission, these findings underlined an urgent need for a renewed, Pacific-led dialogue that would restore confidence in the independence process and focus on  Kanak agency.

A New Zealand academic and activist who was part of the mission, Dr David Small, said: “What we witnessed in Kanaky is not instability; it is resistance born from decades of broken promises.

“The international community must stop treating this as an internal French matter and
recognise it for what it is — an unfinished decolonisation process.”

• The People’s Mission report will be launched at the Talanoa Lounge, Itaukei Trust Fund Board, Nasese, Suva, 3-5pm, Wednesday, November 4. More information.

A feature story authored by a student journalist highlighting the harm plastic pollution poses to human health in Fiji — with risks expected to rise significantly if robust action is not taken soon — has won the Online category of the 2024 Vision Pasifika Media Awards — Cleaner Pacific.

Riya Bhagwan, a Fiji national studying journalism at The University of the South Pacific (USP), won the prize with her Wansolwara story, titled Behind the stalled progress in Fiji’s plastic pollution battle, reports the Secretariat of the Pacific Regional Environment Programme (SPREP).

USP student journalists won two out of four categories in the awards.

• READ MORE: The 2024 Vision Pasifika Media Award winners

Launched during the 7th Pacific Media Summit by Niue’s Prime Minister, Dalton Tagelagi, the awards celebrate excellence in environmental news reporting across the Pacific Island region.

The theme, Cleaner Pacific, spotlights the urgent need to tackle plastic pollution, one of the triple planetary crises threatening the planet, alongside climate change and biodiversity loss.

A story titled Managing Solid Waste in Gizo, a tough task, by award-winning Solomon Islands journalist, Moffat Mamu, of the Solomon Star, and also a USP graduate, won the Print category.

Coverage of the Vatuwaqa Rugby Club’s efforts to keep their community clean, by Fijian journalist Joeli Tikomaimaleya of Fiji TV, picked up the Television category.

Student award winner
The Student Journalism Award was won by Niko Ratumaimuri, of USP, for his story in Wansolwara highlighting a call by young Fijians to keep the country plastic free.

The 2024 Vision Pasifika Media Awards is a partnership facilitated by SPREP with the Australian government through support for Pacific engagement in the INC on plastic pollution and the Pacific Ocean Litter Project (POLP), Office of the Pacific Ocean Commissioner (OPOC) and the Pacific Islands News Association (PINA).

SPREP Director-General Sefanaia Nawadra said: “We are drowning under a sea of waste! The Pacific media is critical in ensuring we in the Pacific understand the challenges of waste and pollution and share ways we can work towards its effective management.

“Many of our waste issues originate from outside our region and our Pacific media must help our countries advocate for global action on waste especially plastic.”

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.

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.

You can wake up one morning in Fiji and feel like you’re living in a totally different country.

Overnight we have lost two of our three Deputy Prime Ministers — by many accounts these were the two who were perhaps among the most influential and pivotal in the running of this government.|

Just like that. No longer in cabinet.

• READ MORE: 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

For days news of Biman’s impending arrest was being posted about in advance — clearly leaked by people inside Fiji Independent Commission Against Corruption (FICAC). So it did not come as a total surprise.

But reading the reactions on social media — what has surprised, unnerved and confused many — especially government supporters, is how and why does a government charge their own when many in the previous government they wanted to be held accountable continue to walk free?

Why did charges against the two DPM’s take priority?

Is that a sign of how divided they are — or how upright and full of integrity they are?

Charges seem small
The charges brought against the two DPM’s seem small when compared to the significant impact of their removal from cabinet. PM Sitiveni Rabuka, when he was SODELPA leader in 2018, was charged with more or less the similar offence DPM Biman is being charged with — inaccurate declaration of assets and liabilities under the Political Parties Act.

Rabuka was acquitted on the eve of the 2018 election.

Many thought then the whole charge was nothing more than the former Bainimarama government trying to take out its main competitor ahead of the 2018 elections. There was a strong anti-FICAC sentiment then by those now in power.

The main gripe of the coalition parties coming in was that FICAC was being used by those in power for their political agenda — and needed to be disbanded and come under the Police Force.

Rabuka said as much to me in a 2022 interview.

Inevitably, many are now openly wondering if the same thing FijiFirst was accused of doing is happening here, and if this is a machiavellian political strategy for power. To take out a potential internal challenger and clear out a coalition partner so PAP can fight the next elections on its own and focus on winning it outright.

With the support of some former FijiFirst MP’s — PAP has more than enough numbers — and not as reliant on NFP and SODELPA any more.

Coalition has been great
The coalition has been great — but it has been a headache keeping everyone together and managing everyone’s competing interests.

However, the PM has grounds to argue that he is just following the process and maintaining the integrity of FICAC’s fight against corruption — that was severely compromised with the appointment of Barbara Malimali as per the Commission of Inquiry report.

That all he is practising are the principles of transparency, accountability and good governance. Nothing more, nothing less.

That matter is being heard in court with the ruling to be delivered by 23 January 2026 — three months away.

Rabuka has stated that “no one is above the law” and seems confident of weathering any political storm.

But the dark political clouds are forming. Expect more thunder and lightning strikes as more influential people in key positions are expected to be arrested, putting the political and judicial landscape in turmoil.

Forecast is uncertain.

Many storms before
Rabuka has been through many storms like this before. He says he continues to have the support of everyone on his side, including the two DPM’s recently charged.

For now he remains firmly in charge.

But what was once just whispers of internal dissent and division that many of us once dismissed as rumours is starting to grow, as politicians weigh their options.

Whether it turns into a split or full on rebellion, or everyone realise they have no choice but to fall in line, we shall wait and see.

Could we see a repeat of 1994 when Rabuka’s government was brought down from within but he managed to win enough in the elections and form a coalition with the GVP to remain in power?

As of now many in politics are trying to work out which way the wind will blow.

Stanley Simpson is director of Mai TV, general secretary of the Fiji Media Association (FMA) and a media commentator. This is an independent commentary first published on his Facebook page and republished with permission.

United States top diplomat Marco Rubio says the United Nations agency for Palestinian refugees (UNRWA) “is not going to play any role” in aid delivery in Gaza, reports Al Jazeera.

He also rejected the possibility of Hamas being involved in any future governance of the besieged enclave.

Speaking during a news conference while on a visit to Israel yesterday, the US Secretary of State claimed UNRWA had become “a subsidiary of Hamas”, echoing an Israeli government line that has been discredited by the International Court of Justice (ICJ).

• READ MORE: Fiji’s stance on Israel and new embassy stirs revived condemnation
• Cole Martin: The Gaza ceasefire isn’t the end – what six months in Palestine showed me
• Other Gaza genocide reports

In response, UNRWA insisted that its presence “remains vital to meeting urgent humanitarian needs” across the bombarded and starved enclave, where a deadly Israeli offensive has killed more than 68,000 Palestinians in two years.

In a statement posted on X, the agency also highlighted that the ICJ had recognised that “no organisation can replace the UNRWA’s role in supporting the people of Gaza”.

Farhan Haq, the deputy spokesperson for the UN Secretary-General, also dismissed Rubio’s characterisation.

“You’ve already heard us talk about how UNRWA is not linked to Hamas,” he told reporters at the UN. “UNRWA is the backbone of our humanitarian operations in Gaza.”

Israel banned the agency from operating after accusing some of its staff of taking part in the October 7, 2023, Hamas-led attack without providing evidence.

Al Jazeera’s Nour Odeh said the proclamation by Rubio that UNRWA was a Hamas “subsidiary” was “quite shocking” and “devastating” for UNRWA and all who were involved in Gaza.

UNRWA exonerated by ICJ
UNRWA was not only exonerated by the ICJ and two separate commissions of inquiry, but also had the largest, most extensive aid mechanism in Gaza, Odeh said.

“It has thousands of employees, it has the data to distribute aid to Palestinians with dignity and in an orderly fashion,” she said.

“Nobody has that kind of infrastructure and history in Gaza.”

PRESS RELEASE: The #ICJ delivers its Advisory Opinion on the Obligations of Israel in relation to the Presence and Activities of the United Nations, Other International Organizations and Third States in and in relation to the Occupied Palestinian Territory https://t.co/uMXJBTcJq6 pic.twitter.com/YuTGwDzPwP

— CIJ_ICJ (@CIJ_ICJ) October 22, 2025

Despite a US-mediated ceasefire that took effect earlier this month, Israel has continued launching attacks across Gaza. At least two people were killed in shelling east of Deir el-Balah in central Gaza yesterday, a source at Al-Aqsa Martyrs Hospital told Al Jazeera Arabic.

Israel has also kept the Rafah crossing near Egypt sealed, blocking large-scale aid deliveries that were stipulated in the truce agreement.

In his remarks on Friday, Rubio voiced hope of soon putting together an international security force to police the ceasefire in Gaza and said Israel, which opposes including Turkiye, could veto participants.

In Suva, The Fiji Times reports that Israel says Fiji’s “neutral and highly skilled military” could play a valuable role in future peacekeeping efforts once negotiations on Gaza’s next phase were complete.

The indication came as Deputy Foreign Minister Sharren Haskel said discussions between Israel, the United States and Arab nations would determine the structure and participants of any peacekeeping arrangement.

“I have to say that we do trust the Fijian forces,” Haskel said during a joint press conference with Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka before she left for her controversial visit to New Zealand.