Securing essential healthcare services for US military veterans from three North Pacific nations remains a persistent challenge.

Despite the US Congress specifically authorising in-country services by the US Veterans Administration for veterans of the Marshall Islands, the Federated States of Micronesia (FSM), and Palau, the Trump administration over a year ago suspended ongoing talks to implement services.

All three island nations have been lobbying for years to get action for their hundreds of military veterans who, unlike American veterans, do not have easy, or any, access to Veterans Administration services — unless they move to the United States.

• READ MORE: Other US Pacific military veterans’ health care reports

Marshall Islands Foreign Minister Kalani Kaneko, himself a US Army veteran, has been at the forefront of pushing US authorities to begin implementing healthcare for island veterans.

“Most importantly, the Compact legislation approved by the United States Congress specifically mandates the provision of VA services to the Freely Associated States,” he said in an interview this week.

“This was not intended to be a symbolic commitment, but a practical obligation reflecting the unique relationship between our nations,” Kaneko said.

Islanders from the three Freely Associated States (FAS) are allowed by the treaties with the US to enlist in the US Armed Forces and do so at per capita rates generally higher than those of Americans.

‘Served honourably’
“Marshallese citizens have served honourably in the United States Armed Forces for generations, often at one of the highest per-capita rates of military service in the world,” Kaneko said.

“The United States military continues to recruit in the Marshall Islands, and with that recruitment comes a shared responsibility to ensure veterans can access the care and benefits they earned through their service.”

Kaneko said the discussions that the Veterans Administration halted over a year ago have not yet started.

“Formal discussions have not fully resumed, and we have not yet received a definitive timeline from the US government regarding next steps,” he said. But, he added, the government was continuing to advocate for its veterans “to ensure this issue remains a priority.”

In comments issued last month to the US Government Accountability Office, FSM’s ambassador to the US, Jackson Soram, said based on the US Congress-approved Compact legislation, the “Freely Associated States had been in dialogue with the Veterans Administration on increased access to healthcare for FAS veterans”.

“In April 2025, after negotiations were underway, the Department of Veterans Affairs unexpectedly suspended the discussions that had been authorised by the US Congress.”

Soram said all three FAS governments want to resume discussions on this. “This is a fundamentally important goal of the FAS,” Soram added.

Kaneko confirms this sentiment.

‘Serious concerns’
“The RMI continues to engage the United States government regarding the implementation of VA services under the 2023 Amended Compact,” Kaneko said.

“Late March this year, Senator Wilbur Heine and I led an RMI delegation to Washington, DC to meet directly with officials from the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) and other relevant US agencies to address this issue and several other Compact implementation concerns affecting our people.

“During those discussions, we expressed our serious concerns regarding the continued delay in delivering VA services to veterans residing in the Republic of the Marshall Islands.

“The VHA proposed that eligible veterans in the RMI utilize the VA Foreign Medical Program, which allows veterans living abroad to access reimbursement for certain covered medical care received in foreign countries.

“However, we made clear that this approach does not adequately address the realities on the ground in the Marshall Islands.”

Kaneko emphasised the point that the RMI’s healthcare system “lacks many of the specialised services, medical expertise, and support systems required to meet the unique needs of veterans, particularly those with service-related conditions.

“If these services already existed locally, our veterans would not be forced to travel abroad or continue facing significant barriers to care.”

‘Remains firm’
Kaneko said the Marshall Islands “remains firm in its position that veterans residing in the RMI deserve meaningful and accessible VA services consistent with both the letter and spirit of the Compact.

Kaneko was a recruiter for the US Army for much of his time in the military and expresses a feeling of personal responsibility about the provision of healthcare services.

“As a retired US Army soldier who personally recruited many Marshallese men and women into military service, this issue is deeply personal to me,” he said.

“Our government will not sit idle while our veterans continue to face barriers to the benefits they were promised and earned through sacrifice and service.

“This is not simply a policy matter; it is a matter of trust, fairness, and honouring the enduring partnership between the Republic of the Marshall Islands and the United States.”

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

Palau’s Supreme Court has denied an application by the Senate for a stay order on the government’s plan to take third country nationals deported from the United States.

President Surangel Whipps’ has agreed for Palau to take up to 75 people, with the US to give Palau US$7.5 million in development funds.

However, the Senate — the upper house of the Palau National Congress (Olbiil era Kelulau) — and a citizens group went to court arguing the deal is unlawful and not in Palau’s interests, but their motion has been denied.

• READ MORE: Other Pacific deportees reports

While the Senate earlier tried to block the deal through legislation, the House of Delegates did not approve.

The President has said Palau will decide on a case by case basis which deported people are accepted.

A source within the government said it was likely that the first group of deported people to arrive in Palau would number about 10.

Whipps’ office said the Senate and traditional leaders have declined attempts to meet for discussions about the issue.

The Senate is pushing for a referendum on the issue, as indicated in a vote on the issue last month.

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.

The United States has designated two high-profile public office holders from Palau and the Marshall Islands for “significant corruption”, the US Department of State says.

Palau’s Senate president Hokkons Baules has been designated “for his involvement in significant corruption on behalf of China-based actors,” while the former mayor of the Kili/Bikini/Ejit community in the Marshall Islands Anderson Jibas has been designated “for his involvement in significant corruption and misappropriation of US provided funds during his time in public office”, the department said in a news release.

The designations render Baules, Jibas, and their immediate family members ineligible for entry into the US.

According to the State Department, Baules abused his public position by accepting bribes in exchange for providing advocacy and support for government, business, and criminal interests from China.

“His actions constituted significant corruption and adversely affected US interests in Palau.”

Baules has dismissed the allegations, telling news media last April he was the target of a smear campaign aimed at ruining his name.

The department said Jibas abused his public position “by orchestrating and financially benefiting from multiple misappropriation schemes involving theft, misuse, and abuse of funds from the US-provided Bikini Resettlement Trust”.

Stolen funds
It added Jibas’ actions resulted in most of the funds being stolen from the Kili/Bikini/Ejit people who are survivors and descendants of survivors of nuclear bomb testing in the 1940s and 1950s.

“The theft, misuse, and abuse of the US-provided money for the fund wasted US taxpayer money and contributed to a loss of jobs, food insecurity, migration to the United States, and lack of reliable electricity for the Kili/Bikini/Ejit people.

“The lack of accountability for Jibas’ acts of corruption has eroded public trust in the government of the Marshall Islands, creating an opportunity for malign foreign influence from China and others.”

US laws allow the government to name foreign nationals and their close family if there is strong evidence they were involved in serious corruption or human rights violations.

The designations come at a time of intense strategic competition between the US and China over influence in the Pacific.

Both Palau and the Marshall Islands have Compacts of Free Association (COFA) with the US, which grant the US exclusive military access in exchange for economic aid.

“The United States will continue to promote accountability for those who abuse public power for personal gain and steal from our citizens to enrich themselves. These designations reaffirm the United States’ commitment to countering global corruption affecting US interests,” the State Department said.

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

The death earlier this month of a 26-year veteran of the US Army from the Micronesian island of Kosrae, who was an ardent advocate for healthcare benefits for island veterans, highlights the ongoing lack of promised US healthcare support for those who served in the US armed forces.

Kosraen Robson Henry, who died earlier this month at age 66 in Kosrae, spent nearly half his life in the US military and was part of the initial invasion of Iraq in 2003.

A huge issue for Marshallese, Micronesian and Palauan members of the US Armed Forces is that once they get out of the military and return home, there are no Veterans Administration health services available to them as there are in the US and other international locations for American veterans.

• READ MORE: Other Island Soldier film and veterans reports

To access medical care, island veterans must fly at their own expense to Honolulu, Guam or the US mainland where VA hospitals are located.

Despite the US Congress in the past several years adopting increasingly explicit legislation directing the US Veterans Administration to initiate systems for providing care to the hundreds of veterans of these three US-affiliated island nations, services have yet to materialise.

The Compact of Free Association (COFA) that became part of US law in 2024 “included provisions to have this healthcare available in our islands — as this Congress emphasised in November’s Continuing Resolution and December’s National Defense Authorisation Act,” Marshall Islands Ambassador to the US Charles Paul told a US House Committee on Veterans’ Affairs, Subcommittee on Health hearing in January.

However, he said the Department of Veterans Affairs had not acted to make the healthcare available.

‘Actively advocating’
“Robson has been actively advocating to extend veteran benefits to COFA citizens since at least 2008-09, when I first met him,” said filmmaker Nathan Fitch, who directed the award-winning film Island Soldier that tracked the lives of Kosraeans in the US Army — from Middle East war zones to their isolated and tranquil island home in the North Pacific.

Fitch said the Kosraean veteran had been active for the longest time advocating for services for veterans.

“Any progress on benefits for COFA veterans has to be part of Robson’s legacy,” Fitch said.

Still, despite ongoing advocacy by veterans like Henry and Marshall Islands Foreign Minister Kalani Kaneko, a 20-year veteran of the US Army, services mandated by US Congressional legislation remain in limbo.

Henry was also one of the first Micronesians to join the US Army when he entered on 13 October 1987 — just a year after implementation of the first COFA that allowed citizens of the three freely associated states to join the US military.

Henry stayed in the Army until October 2013, a total of 26 years, through which he was posted to locations around the world and saw tours of duty in various Middle East battle zones.

His story is not atypical, as many islanders who join the US military remain in the US armed forces for decades.

Higher enlistment
The US military “enlists our citizens at rates that are higher than the enlistment of US citizens in most US States,” noted Paul in his testimony at the hearing in Washington.

Paul told the House Veterans Committee members that healthcare for returning military veterans “was a major issue in the renegotiation of our free association, which culminated in the enactment of the Compact of Free Association Amendments Act of 2024. The law was intended to resolve the issue”.

But he said the Veterans Administration “has acted contrary to what we negotiated, and Congress has said is the intent of the law. The government of the Marshall Islands, therefore, strongly supports the enactment of legislation to ensure that our veterans can receive the care if they return home.”

Meanwhile, a small section at the end of the over 3000 page National Defense Authorisation Act passed by the US Congress in December sets out a timetable for action by the Veterans Administration.

The US Defence spending law requires the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to provide the US Congress with updates within 30 days of the passage of the law and monthly thereafter on the implementation of provisions relating to services for military veterans in the freely associated states.

The defence law includes provisions requiring the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to develop plans and costs for providing health services for veterans from the freely associated states. This includes the requirement of:

• Engagement with the three island governments;
• A projected timeline for island veterans to receive hospital care and medical services; and
• An estimate of the cost to implement these services.

‘Served honourably’
“For many years, Marshallese and other Freely Associated States veterans have served honourably in the United States Armed Forces, often at higher per capita rates than many States, yet without full and equal access to veterans’ benefits,” Foreign Minister Kalani Kaneko was quoted by the Marshall Islands Journal in its January 9 edition.

“Addressing that inequity has always been about fairness, dignity, and recognition of service not politics.”

Kaneko said that while the language of the US legislation passed in December is “encouraging . . .  the most important phase now is implementation.”

He said the Marshall Islands government is ready to “work constructively with US agencies to support that process. This moment represents progress, but it is also a reminder that our partnership works best when commitments made in law are carried through in practice”.

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

Pacific climate leaders are disappointed that Australia has lost the bid to host the United Nations Climate Conference, COP31, in 2026.

Palau’s President Surangel Whipps Jr said he was “deeply disappointed” by the outcome.

Australia had campaigned for years for the meeting to be held in its country, and it was to happen in conjunction with the Pacific.

• READ MORE:  COP30: ‘Ego manoeuvring’ behind scenes at UN climate talks, says Pacific delegate
• ‘Our land is not for sale’: Indigenous people protest at COP30 in Brazil
• Other COP30 reports

The new agreement put forward by Australia’s Climate Minister Chris Bowen is for Bowen to be the COP president of negotiations and for a pre-COP to be hosted in the Pacific, while the main event is in Türkiye.

Bowen told media at COP30 in Belém, Brazil, the new proposal would allow Australia to prepare draft text and issue the overarching document of the event, while Türkiye will oversee the operation side of the meeting.

In a statement, Whipps said the region’s ambition and advocacy would not waver.

“A Pacific COP was vital to highlight the critical climate-ocean nexus, the everyday realities of climate impacts, and the serious threats to food security, economies and livelihoods in the Pacific and beyond,” he said.

“Droughts, fires, floods, typhoons, and mudslides are seen and felt by people all around the world with increasing severity and regularity.”

No resolution with Türkiye
Australia and the Pacific had most of the support to host the meeting from parties, but the process meant there was no resolution from the months-long stand-off with Türkiye, the default city of Bonn in Germany would have hosted the COP.

It would also mean a year with no COP president in place.

Bowen said it would have been irresponsible for multilateralism, which was already being challenged.

“We didn’t want that to happen, so hence, it was important to strike an agreement with Turkiye, our competitor,” he said.

“Obviously, it would be great if Australia could have it all. But we can’t have it all. This process works on consensus.”

Greenpeace Australia Pacific’s head of Pacific campaigns Shiva Gounden said not hosting the event is going to make the region’s job, to fight for climate justice, harder.

“When you’re in the region, you can shape a lot of the direction of how the COP looks and how the negotiations happen inside the room, because you can embed it with a lot of the values that is extremely close to the Pacific way of doing things,” he said.

Gounden said the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) process had failed the Pacific.

“The UNFCCC process didn’t have a measure or a way to resolve this without it getting this messy right at the end of COP30,” Gounden said.

“If it wasn’t resolved, it would have gone to Bonn, where there wouldn’t be any presidency for a year and that creates a lot of issues for multilateralism and right now multilateralism is under threat.”

No safe ‘overshoot’
Pacific Islands Climate Action Network (PICAN) international policy lead Sindra Sharma said the decision on the COP31 presidency in no way shifts the global responsibility to deliver on the Paris Agreement.

“There is no safe ‘overshoot’ and every increment of warming is a failure to current and future generations.

“We cannot afford to lose focus. We are in the final hours of COP30 and the outcomes we secure here will set the foundation for COP31.

“We need to stay locked in and ensure this COP delivers the ambition and justice frontline communities deserve.”

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

Palau’s leader says the world needs to be working toward reducing emissions and “not dropping targets”, in response to New Zealand slashing its methane reduction goals.

Last month, the New Zealand government announced it would cut biogenic methane reduction targets to 14-24 percent below 2017 levels by 2050. The previous target was a reduction of 24-47 percent.

Palauan President Surangel Whipps Jr, who is in Brazil for the annual United Nations climate change conference, COP30, said more work needed to go into finding solutions.

• READ MORE: Climate change minister defends weakened methane emissions target ahead of COP30
• COP30: NZ must commit to buying offshore credits to meet Paris target, climate experts say
• Pacific leaders to push 100 percent renewable energy plan at COP30 in Belém
• Indigenous activists storm COP30 climate summit in Brazil, demanding action
• Other COP30 reports

“[It’s] unfortunate because we all need to be working toward reduction, not dropping targets,” Whipps said.

“Countries struggle because it’s about making sure that their people have their jobs and maintain their industry. I can see the reason why maybe those targets were dropped, but that means we just need to work harder.”

Whipps said it probably meant the government needed to “step up” and help farmers reduce emissions.

Tuvalu’s climate minister also told RNZ Pacific he was disheartened by the new goal.

New Zealand Climate Minister Simon Watts previously told RNZ Pacific in a statement that methane reduction was limited by technology and the only alternative would have been to cut agriculture production.

“New Zealand has some of the most emissions-efficient farmers in the world, and we export to meet global demand,” Watts said.

“If we cut production to meet targets, we risk shifting production to countries who are not as emissions-efficient, which would add to global warming and have a greater impact on the Pacific.”

NZ ‘doesn’t care about Pacific’ – campaigner
Pacific Islands Climate Action Network campaigner Sindra Sharma said she wanted to know what scientists Watts spoke with.

“I’d like to see what the data is behind New Zealand having the most emissions-efficient farmers. It blows my mind that that is something he would say.”

Sharma said it was especially disappointing given New Zealand was a member of the Pacific Islands Forum.

“I think the signal that sends is extremely harmful. It shows we don’t care about the Pacific.”

Speaking to RNZ Morning Report on Thursday, Watts said the country had not weakened its ambitions on climate change.

“We’ve actually delivered upon what has been asked of us. We’ve submitted our NDC (Nationally Determined Contributions) plan for 2035 on time,” he said.

“We’ve done what we believe is possible in the context of our unique circumstances.

“We’ve taken a position around ensuring that we are ambitious with balancing that with economic challenges.”

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

As Israel expands its relationships with Pacific Island nations, an activist is criticising the region for its “dreadful response” to the Israel-Palestine conflict.

The Israeli-Palestinian conflict, rooted in the 1948 Nakba and decades of seized land and expelled indigenous people, escalated after Hamas’ attacks on 7 October 2023.

Since then, Israel’s assault on Gaza has killed more than 62,000 Palestinians, mostly civilians, according to Gaza health officials.

• READ MORE: UN declares man-made famine in Gaza; 2 people starve to death in 24 hours
• Israel announces official visit to Pacific region to ‘broaden partnerships’
• Other Pacific and Israel reports

John Minto, co-chair of the Palestine Solidarity Network Aotearoa (PSNA). says the Pacific has failed to show adequate support to Palestine and should be “ashamed”.

In an interview with William Terite on Radio 531pi Pacific Mornings, Minto said the Pacific was one of the few areas in the world where support for the Palestinians was diminishing.

“I think this is a real tragedy,” he said.

“They are coming under pressure from the US and from Israel to try and bolster support for Israel at the United Nations. For this part of the world, that’s something we should be ashamed of.”

Minto said several island countries, including Fiji, Nauru, Palau, and Tonga, had refused to recognise Palestinian statehood. But bigger Pacific nations like Papua New Guinea — and Fiji — had recently established an embassy in Jerusalem.

Fiji and Israel established diplomatic relations in 1970 and have developed partnerships in security, peacekeeping, agriculture, and climate change.

Watch John Minto’s full interview

In a statement on X, formerly known as Twitter, Israel’s Foreign Ministry announced its commitment to diplomacy in the Pacific.

Israeli Deputy Foreign Minister Sharren Haskel will lead a delegation to the Pacific to discuss strengthening Israel-Pacific relations.

In a statement on X, formerly known as Twitter, Israel’s Foreign Ministry announced its commitment to diplomacy in the Pacific.

Israeli Deputy Foreign Minister Sharren Haskel will lead a delegation to the Pacific to discuss strengthening Israel-Pacific relations.

The Pacific region has been one of Israel’s strategic development partners, through numerous projects and training programmes led by MASHAV, Israel’s International Development Agency,” the statement read.

“This forthcoming visit, and the broader diplomatic effort accompanying it, reflects Israel’s profound appreciation for the Pacific Island states and underscores Israel’s commitment to strengthening cooperation with them.”

Minto highlighted the irony in the support for Israel from small Pacific nations, given their reliance on principles of international law in view of their own vulnerability.

“I’m sure there’s a lot of things that happen behind closed doors that should be happening out in the public,” he told Terite.

“The people of Sāmoa, Tonga, Fiji should be involved in developing their foreign policy. I think if they were, then we would have much stronger support for Palestine.”

Republished from Pacific Media Network (PMN) with permission.

Palau’s President Surangel Whipps Jr says it is “a missed opportunity” not to include partners at next mont’s Pacific Islands Forum (PIF) leaders’ summit.

However, Whipps said he respects the position of the Solomon Islands, as hosts, to exclude more than 20 countries that are not members the regional organisation.

The Solomon Islands is blocking all external partners from attending the PIF leaders’ week in Honiara from September 8-12.

• READ MORE: Other China-Taiwan relationship reports

The decision means that nations such as the United States and China (dialogue partners), and Taiwan (a development partner), will be shut out of the regional gathering.

Whipps Jr told RNZ Pacific that although he has accepted the decision, he was not happy about it.

“These are Forum events; they need to be treated as Forum events. They are not Solomon Islands events, [nor] are Palau events,” Whipps said.

“It is so important for any Pacific [Islands] Forum meeting that we have all our partners there. It is a missed opportunity not to have our partners attending the meeting in the Solomon Islands, but they are the host.”

‘Space’ for leaders
Last week, Solomon Islands Prime Minister Jeremiah Manele said the decision gave leaders space to focus on a review of how the PIF engaged with diplomatic partners, through reforms under PIF’s Partnership and Engagement Mechanism.

Solomon Islands opposition MP Peter Kenilorea Jr said that the move was about disguising the fact that the Manele administration was planning on blocking Taiwan from entering the country.

“The way I see it is definitely, 100 percent, to do with China and Taiwan,” he said.

Kenilorea said he was concerned there would still be bilateral meetings on the margins, which would be easy for countries with diplomatic missions in Solomon Islands, like China and the US, but not for Taiwan.

“There might be delegations coming through that might have bilaterials that make a big deal out of it, the optics and the narratives that will be coming out of those, if they do happen [they] are out of the control of the Pacific Islands Forum architecture, which is another hit to regionalism.”

Palau, Tuvalu and Marshall Islands are the remaining Pacific countries that have ties with Taiwan.

The Guardian reported that Tuvalu was now considering not attending the leaders’ summit.

Tuvalu disappointed
Tuvalu Prime Minister Feleti Teo said he would wait to see how other Pacific leaders responded before deciding whether to attend. He was disappointed at the exclusion.

New Zealand Prime Minister Christopher Luxon said he was concerned.

“We have advocated very strongly for the status quo. That actually the Pacific Islands Forum family countries come together, and then the dialogue partners, who are from all over the world can be present as well.”

President Whipps said all would be welcome, including China, at the Pacific Islands Forum next year hosted in Palau.

He said it was important for Pacific nations to work together despite differences.

“Everybody has their own sovereignty, they have their own partners and they have their reasons for what they do. We respect that,” he said.

“What’s most important is we find ways to come together.”

Know the reason
Kenilorea said other Solomon Islands MPs knew the deferral was about China and Taiwan but he was the only one willing to mention it.

Solomon Islands switched diplomatic ties from Taiwan to China in 2019. In 2022 the island nation signed a security pact with China.

“If [the deferral] had happened earlier in our [China and Solomon Islands] relationship, I would have thought you would have heard more leaders saying how it is.

“But we are now six years down the track of our switch and leaders are not as vocal as they used to be anymore.”

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

Leaders of the three Pacific nations with diplomatic ties to Taiwan are united in a message to the Pacific Islands Forum that the premier regional body must not allow non-member countries to dictate Forum policies — a reference to the China-Taiwan geopolitical debate.

Marshall Islands President Hilda Heine, in remarks to the opening of Parliament in Majuro yesterday, joined leaders from Tuvalu and Palau in strongly worded comments putting the region on notice that the future unity and stability of the Forum hangs in the balance of decisions that are made for next month’s Forum leaders’ meeting in the Solomon Islands.

This is just three years since the organisation pulled back from the brink of splintering.

• READ MORE: Other Pacific Islands Forum unity articles

Marshall Islands, Palau and Tuvalu are among the 12 countries globally that maintain diplomatic ties with Taiwan.

At issue is next month’s annual meeting of leaders being hosted by Solomon Islands, which is closely allied to China, and the concern that the Solomon Islands will choose to limit or prevent Taiwan’s engagement in the Forum, despite it being a major donor partner to the three island nations as well as a donor to the Forum Secretariat.

China worked to marginalise Taiwan and its international relationships including getting the Forum to eliminate a reference to Taiwan in last year’s Forum leaders’ communique after leaders had agreed on the text.

“I believe firmly that the Forum belongs to its members, not countries that are non-members,” said President Heine yesterday in Parliament’s opening ceremony. “And non-members should not be allowed to dictate how our premier regional organisation conducts its business.”

Heine continued: “We witnessed at the Forum in Tonga how China, a world superpower, interfered to change the language of the Forum Communique, the communiqué of our Pacific Leaders . . . If the practice of interference in the affairs of the Forum becomes the norm, then I question our nation’s membership in the organisation.”

She cited the position of the three Taiwan allies in the Pacific in support of Taiwan participation at next month’s Forum.

“There should not be any debate on the issue since Taiwan has been a Forum development partner since 1993,” Heine said.

Heine also mentioned that there was an “ongoing review of the regional architecture of the Forum” and its many agencies “to ensure that their deliverables are on target, and inter-agency conflicts are minimised.”

The President said during this review of the Forum and its agencies, “it is critical that the question of Taiwan’s participation in Forum meetings is settled once and for all to safeguard equity and sovereignty of member governments.”

United States military veterans in the Marshall Islands, Federated States of Micronesia and Palau received increased attention during the Biden Administration after years of neglect by the US Veterans Administration.

That progress came to a halt with the incoming Trump Administration in Washington in January, when the new Veterans Administration put many programmes on hold.

Marshall Islands Foreign Minister and US military veteran Kalani Kaneko said he is hopeful of resuming the momentum for veterans living in the freely associated states.

• READ MORE: Other US veterans reports

Two key actions during the Biden administration helped to elevate interest in veterans living in the freely associated states:

• The administration’s appointment of a Compact of Free Association (COFA) Committee that included the ambassadors to Washington from the three nations, including Marshall Islands Ambassador Charles Paul, and US Cabinet-level officials.
• The US Congress passed legislation establishing an advisory committee for the Veterans Administration for Compact veterans.
• Kalani Kaneko was appointed as chairman to a three-year term, which expires in September.

Kaneko said he submitted a report to the Veterans Administration recently on its activities and needs.

The Foreign Minister said it is now up to the current administration of the Veterans Administration to take next steps to reappoint members of the advisory committee or to name a new group.

Virtually non-existent
Kaneko pointed out that in contrast to its virtually non-existent programme in the Marshall Islands, FSM and Palau, the VA’s programme for veterans is “robust” in Puerto Rico and the US Virgin Islands.

Citizens of the three compact nations enlist in the US military at higher rates per capita than Americans.

But when they leave the service and return home to their islands, they have historically received none of the benefits accorded to US veterans living in the United States.

Kaneko and island leaders have been trying to change this by getting the Veterans Administration to provide on-island services and to pay for medical referrals of veterans when locally available medical services are not available.

Kaneko said the 134-page report submitted in June contained five major recommendations for improved services for veterans from the US-affiliated islands:

• Establish a VA clinic in Majuro with an accredited doctor and nurse.
• Authorise use of the Marshall Islands zip code for US pharmacies to mail medicines to veterans here (a practice that is currently prohibited).
• If the level of healthcare in Marshall Islands cannot provide a service needed by a veteran, they should be able to be referred to hospitals in other countries.
• Due to the delays in obtaining appointments at VA hospitals in the US, the report recommends allowing veterans to use the Marshall Islands referral system to the Philippines to access the US Veterans Administration clinic in Manila.
• Support and prioritise the access of veterans to US Department of Agriculture Rural Development housing loans and grants.

Kaneko said he is hopeful of engagement by high-level Veterans Administration officials at an upcoming meeting to review the report and other reports related to services for Compact nation veterans.

But, he cautioned, because there was nothing about compact veterans in President Trump’s “Big Beautiful Bill” passed recently by the US Congress, it means fiscal year 2027 — starting October 1, 2026 — would be the earliest to see any developments for veterans in the islands.

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

The Micronesian Islands Forum cranks up with officials meetings this week in Majuro, with the official opening for top leadership from the islands tomorrow morning.

Marshall Islands leaders are being joined at this summit by their counterparts from Kiribati, Nauru, Federated States of Micronesia, Guam, Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, and Palau.

“At this year’s Leaders Forum, I hope we can make meaningful progress on resolving airline connectivity issues — particularly in Micronesia — so our region remains connected and one step ahead,” President Hilda Heine said on the eve of this subregional summit.

• READ MORE: Other Micronesian reports

The Marshall Islands and the Federated States of Micronesia have been negotiating with Nauru Airlines over the past two years to extend the current island hopper service with a link to Honolulu.

“Equally important,” said President Heine, “the Forum offers a vital platform to strengthen regional solidarity and build common ground on key issues such as climate, ocean health, security, trade, and other pressing challenges.

“Ultimately, our shared purpose must be to work together in support of the communities we represent.”

Monday and Tuesday featured official-level meetings at the International Conference Center in Majuro. Tomorrow will be the official opening of the Forum and will feature statements from each of the islands represented.

Handing over chair
Outgoing Micronesian Island Forum chair Guam Governor Lourdes Leon Guerrero is expected to hand over the chair post to President Heine tomorrow morning.

Other top island leaders expected to attend the summit: FSM President Wesley Simina, Kiribati President Taneti Maamau, Nauru Deputy Speaker Isabela Dageago, Palau Minister Steven Victor, Chuuk Governor Alexander Narruhn, Pohnpei Governor Stevenson Joseph, Kosrae Governor Tulensa Palik, Yap Acting Governor Francis Itimai, and CNMI Lieutenant-Governor David Apatang.

Pacific Islands Forum Secretary-General Baron Waqa is also expected to participate.

Pretty much every subject of interest to the Pacific Islands will be on the table for discussions, including presentations on education, health and transportation. The latter will include a presentation by the Marshall Islands Aviation Task Force that has been meeting extensively with Nauru Airlines.

In addition, Pacific Ocean Commissioner Dr Filimon Manoni will deliver a presentation, gender equality will be on the table, as will updates on the SPC and Secretariat of the Pacific Region Environment Programme North Pacific offices, and the United Nations multi-country office.

The Micronesia Challenge environmental programme will get focus during a luncheon for the leaders hosted by the Marshall Islands Marine Resources Authority on Thursday at its new headquarters annex.

Bank presentations
Pacific Island Development Bank and the Bank of Guam will make presentations, as will the recently established Pacific Center for Island Security.

A special night market at the Marshall Islands Resort parking lot will be featured Wednesday evening.

Friday will feature a leaders retreat on Bokanbotin, a small resort island on Majuro Atoll’s north shore. While the leaders gather, other Forum participants will join a picnic or fishing tournament.

Friday evening is to feature the closing event to include the launching of the Marshall Islands’ Green Growth Initiative and the signing of the Micronesian Island Forum communique.

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

Palau’s president says the US order to fast-track deep sea mining is not a good idea.

Deep sea mining frontrunner The Metals Company (TMC) has since confirmed it will not apply for a mining licence through the International Seabed Authority (ISA), instead opting to apply through US regulations.

Surangel Whipps Jr. said the high seas belongs to the entire world so everyone must exercise caution.

• READ MORE: Other seabed mining reports

“We should be responsible, and what we’ve asked for is a moratorium, or a temporary pause . . . until you have the right information to make the most important informed decision,” Whipps told RNZ Pacific.

Whipps said it’s important for those with concerns to have an opportunity to speak to US President Donald Trump.

“Because it’s about partnership. And I think a lot of times it’s the lack of information and lack of sharing information.

“It’s our job now as the Pacific to stand up and say, this direction could be detrimental to all of us that depend on the Pacific ocean and the ocean and we ask that you act responsibly for humankind and for the Pacific.”

US seabed policy
Trump’s executive order states: “It is the policy of the US to advance United States leadership in seabed mineral development.”

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) was directed to, within 60 days, “expedite the process for reviewing and issuing seabed mineral exploration licenses and commercial recovery permits in areas beyond national jurisdiction under the Deep Seabed Hard Mineral Resources Act”.

It directs the US Science and Environmental Agency to expedite permits for companies to mine the ocean floor in the US and international waters.

The Metals Company has praised the US deep sea mining licensing pathway.

In a press release, its chief executive Gerard Barron made direct reference to Trump’s order, titled “Unleashing America’s Offshore Critical Minerals and Resources”.

He said he was heartened by its call “for a joint assessment of a seabed benefit-sharing mechanism” and was certain that “big ocean states” like Nauru would continue to play a leading role in the deep sea mining industry.

There are divergent views on deep sea exploration and mining in the Pacific, with many nations, civil society groups, and even some governments advocating for a moratorium or outright ban.

Exploration contracts
However, Tonga, Nauru, Kiribati and the Cook Islands have exploration contracts with mining representatives.

Vanuatu’s Climate Minister Ralph Regenvanu told RNZ Pacific in 2023 that Vanuatu’s position is for no deep sea mining at any point.

“We have a lot to think about in the Pacific. We are the region that is spearheading for seabed minerals,” he said.

The Cook Islands has sought China’s expertise in seabed mining through “high-level” discussions on Prime Minister Mark Brown’s February 2025 trip to China.

Whipps said “you have to give [The Metals Company] credit” that they have been able to get in there and convince Donald Trump that this is a good direction to go.

But as the president of a nation with close ties to the US and Taiwan, and the host of the PIF Ocean’s Commissioner, he has concerns.

“We don’t know the impacts to the rest of what we have in the Pacific — which is for us in the Pacific, it’s tuna [which] is our biggest resource,” Whipps said.

“How is that going to impact on the food chain and all of that?

“Because we’re talking about bringing, first of all, impacting the largest carbon sink that we have, which is the oceans, right? So we say our islands are sinking, but now we want to go and do something that helps our islands sink.

“That’s not a good idea.”

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

The Pacific Islands Forum (PIF) troika leaders have reviewed a list of “eminent persons” with extensive knowledge on Pacific regionalism to lead discussions on regional reforms, the Cook Islands government said yesterday.

The PIF troika is a high-level regional political consultative mechanism made up of the Forum’s immediate past, present, and future chairs.

Solomon Islands is the current chair of PIF, having taken over from Tonga last year. Palau will be the next chair.

• READ MORE: Other Pacific regionalism reports

The Cook Islands Foreign Affairs Ministry said in a statement that Prime Minister Mark Brown had joined the troika leaders on Monday to address pressing regional matters and advance discussions for strengthened regionalism as envisioned in the 2050 Strategy for the Blue Pacific Continent.

It said the leaders reviewed the 2024 troika mission report on New Caledonia and reaffirmed the PIF’s commitment to providing constructive support for the self-determination process in New Caledonia.

They “also considered a shortlist of eminent persons with deep expertise in Pacific regionalism to spearhead consultations with leaders, relevant ministers and senior officials in a talanoa setting on regional governance reforms.

“Upon further deliberation, troika leaders will appoint one representative from each Pacific sub-region to form a gender-balanced High-Level Persons Group that will compile their findings from the consultations into a report for further consideration and endorsement by Forum members.”

Regional governance
The statement said the eminent persons initiative will contribute to the ongoing work for the Review of the Regional Architecture (RRA), which aims to ensure regional governance mechanisms are fit-for-purpose, effective, and responsive to the evolving needs of Pacific Island countries.

“Effective regional governance requires strong collective political leadership, and the troika mechanism is central to ensuring the Pacific Islands Forum remains cohesive, forward-looking, and responsive to the region’s evolving needs,” Cook Islands Foreign Secretary Tepaeru Herrmann said.

He said that as an active member of the troika, the Cook Islands remained committed to providing strategic direction that strengthened Pacific unity and reinforced our shared commitment to regional collective action.

“Through close collaboration, we are shaping regional approaches and initiatives that reflect regional priorities, uphold Pacific-led solutions, and foster deeper cooperation across the Blue Pacific,” he added.

In addition, the PIF troika leaders reaffirmed their commitment to sustaining the momentum, with a follow-up meeting scheduled for next month, as they move toward the Pacific Islands Forum Leaders’ Meeting in Honiara later this year.

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

Marshall Islands defence provisions could “fairly easily” be considered to run against the nuclear-free treaty that they are now a signatory to, says a veteran Pacific journalist and editor.

The South Pacific’s nuclear non-proliferation and disarmament treaty, known as the Treaty of Rarotonga, was signed in Majuro last week during the observance of Nuclear Victims Remembrance Day.

RNZ Pacific’s Marshall Islands correspondent Giff Johnson, who is also editor of the weekly newspaper Marshall Islands Journal, said many people assumed the Compact of Free Association — which gives the US military access to the island nation — was in conflict with the treaty.

However, Johnson said the signing of the treaty was only the first step.

• READ MORE: Seven decades on, Marshall Islands still reeling from nuclear testing legacy
• Marshall Islands signs treaty banning nuclear weapons in the South Pacific
• Four decades after Rongelap evacuation, Greenpeace makes new plea for nuclear justice by US
• Eyes of Fire – the Last Voyage of the Rainbow Warrior archive (Little Island Press)

“The US said there was no issue with the Marshall Islands signing the treaty because that does not bring the treaty into force,” he said.

“I would expect that there would not be a move to ratify the treaty soon . . . with the current situation in Washington this is going to be kicked down the road a bit.”

He said the US military routinely brought in naval vessels and planes into the Marshall Islands.

“Essentially, the US policy neither confirms nor denies the presence of nuclear weapons on board aircraft or vessels or whether they’re nuclear powered.

‘Clearly spelled out defence’
“The US is allowed to carry out its responsibility which is very clearly spelled out to defend and provide defence for the Marshall Islands, the Federated States of Micronesia and Palau.

“So yes, I think you could fairly easily make the case that the activity at Kwajalein and the compact’s defence provisions do run foul of the spirit of a nuclear-free treaty.”

Johnson said the US and the Marshall Islands would need to work out how it would deliver its defence and security including the Ronald Reagan Ballistic Missile Defence Test Site, where weapon systems are routinely tested on Kwajalein Atoll.

Meanwhile, the Greenpeace flagship Rainbow Warrior will be visiting the Marshall Islands next week to support the government on gathering data to support further nuclear compensation.

“What we are hoping to do is provide that independent science that currently is not in the Marshall Islands,” the organisation’s Pacific lead Shiva Gounden told RNZ Pacific Waves.

“Most of the science that happens in on the island is mostly been funded or taken control by the US government and the Marshallese people, rightly so, do not trust that data. Do not trust that sample collection.”

Top-secret lab study
The Micronesian nation experienced 67 atmospheric nuclear tests between 1946 and 1958, resulting in an ongoing legacy of death, illness, and contamination.

In 2017, the Marshall Islands government created the National Nuclear Commission to coordinate efforts to address the impacts from testing.

Gounden said Project 4.1 — which was the top-secret medical lab study on the effects of radiation on human bodies — has caused distrust of US data.

“The Marshallese people do not trust any scientific data or science coming out from the US,” he said.

“So they have asked us to see if we can assist in gathering samples and collecting data that is independent from the US that could assist in at least giving them a clear picture of what’s happening right now in those atolls.”

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

The Trump administration’s decision to eliminate more than 90 percent of the US Agency for International Development (USAID) funding means “nothing’s safe right now,” a regional political analyst says.

President Donald Trump’s government has said it is slashing about US$60 billion in overall US development and humanitarian assistance around the world to further its America First policy.

Last September, the former Deputy Secretary of State Kurt Campbell said that Washington had “listened carefully” to Pacific Island nations and was making efforts to boost its diplomatic footprint in the region.

• READ MORE: Other USAID funding cuts reports

Campbell had announced that the US contributed US$25 million to the Pacific-owned and led Pacific Resilience Facility — a fund endorsed by leaders to make it easier for Forum members to access climate financing for adaptation, disaster preparedness and early disaster response projects.

However, Trump’s move has been said to have implications for the Pacific, which is one of the most aid-dependent regions in the world.

Research fellow at the Australian National University’s Development Policy Centre Dr Terence Wood told RNZ Pacific Waves that, in the Pacific, the biggest impacts of the aid cut are likley to be felt by the three island nations in a Compact of Free Association (COFA) with the US.

He said that while the compact “is safe” for three COFA states – Federated States of Micronesia, Marshall Islands, and Palau – “these are unprecedented times”.

“It would be unprecedented if the US just tore them up. But then again, the United States is showing very little regard for agreements that it has entered into in the past, so I would say that nothing’s safe right now.”

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

Dr Terence Wood speaking to RNZ Pacific Waves.   Video: RNZ Pacific

With the door now shut on 2024, many will heave a sigh of relief and hope for better things this year.

Decolonisation issues involving the future of Kanaky New Caledonia and West Papua –- and also in the Middle East with controversial United Nations votes by some Pacific nations in the middle of a livestreamed genocide — figured high on the agenda in the past year along with the global climate crisis and inadequate funding rescue packages.

Asia Pacific Report looks at some of the issues and developments during the year that were regarded by critics as “betrayals”:

• READ MORE: The hopes and fears of displaced West Papuans as a Prabowo presidency looms
• At ICJ, lawyer for Palestine rips US and Fiji for defending Israel
• Fiji human rights group condemns ‘troubling’ support for Israel at ICJ
• West Papua: Once was Papuan Independence Day, now facing ‘ecocide’, transmigration
• COP29: Pacific climate advocates decry outcome as ‘a catastrophic failure’

1. Fiji and PNG ‘betrayal’ UN votes over Palestine
Just two weeks before Christmas, the UN General Assembly voted overwhelmingly to demand an immediate ceasefire in the Gaza Strip under attack from Israel — but three of the isolated nine countries that voted against were Pacific island states, including Papua New Guinea.

The assembly passed a resolution on December 11 demanding an immediate, unconditional and permanent ceasefire in Gaza, which was adopted with 158 votes in favour from the 193-member assembly and nine votes against with 13 abstentions.

Of the nine countries voting against, the three Pacific nations that sided with Israel and its relentless backer United States were Nauru, Papua New Guinea and Tonga.

The other countries that voted against were Argentina, Czech Republic, Hungary and Paraguay.

Thirteen abstentions included Fiji, which had previously controversially voted with Israel, Micronesia, and Palau. Supporters of the resolution in the Pacific region included Australia, New Zealand, and Timor-Leste.

Ironically, it was announced a day before the UNGA vote that the United States will spend more than US$864 million (3.5 billion kina) on infrastructure and military training in Papua New Guinea over 10 years under a defence deal signed between the two nations in 2023, according to PNG’s Foreign Minister Justin Tkatchenko.

Any connection? Your guess is as good as mine. Certainly it is very revealing how realpolitik is playing out in the region with an “Indo-Pacific buffer” against China.

However, the deal actually originated almost two years earlier, in May 2023, with the size of the package reflecting a growing US security engagement with Pacific island nations as it seeks to counter China’s inroads in the vast ocean region.

Noted BenarNews, a US soft power news service in the region, the planned investment is part of a defence cooperation agreement granting the US military “unimpeded access” to develop and deploy forces from six ports and airports, including Lombrum Naval Base.

Two months before PNG’s vote, the UNGA overwhelmingly passed a resolution demanding that the Israeli government end its occupation of Palestinian territories within 12 months — but half of the 14 countries that voted against were from the Pacific.

Affirming an International Court of Justice (ICJ) opinion requested by the UN that deemed the decades-long occupation unlawful, the opposition from seven Pacific nations further marginalised the island region from world opinion against Israel.

Several UN experts and officials warned against Israel becoming a global “pariah” state over its 15 month genocidal war on Gaza.

The final vote tally was 124 member states in favour and 14 against, with 43 nations abstaining. The Pacific countries that voted with Israel and its main ally and arms-supplier United States against the Palestinian resolution were Federated States of Micronesia, Fiji, Nauru, Papua New Guinea, Palau, Tonga and Tuvalu.

In February, Fiji faced widespread condemnation after it joined the US as one of the only two countries — branded as the “outliers” — to support Israel’s occupation of the Palestinian territory in an UNGA vote over an International Court of Justice (ICJ) advisory opinion over Israel’s policies in the occupied territories.

Condemning the US and Fiji, Palestinian Foreign Minister Riyad al-Maliki declared: “Ending Israel’s impunity is a moral, political and legal imperative.”

Fiji’s envoy at the UN, retired Colonel Filipo Tarakinikini, defended the country’s stance, saying the court “fails to take account of the complexity of this dispute, and misrepresents the legal, historical, and political context”.

However, Fiji NGOs condemned the Fiji vote as supporting “settler colonialism” and long-standing Fijian diplomats such as Kaliopate Tavola and Robin Nair said Fiji had crossed the line by breaking with its established foreign policy of “friends-to-all-and-enemies-to-none”.

2. West Papuan self-determination left in limbo
For the past decade, Pacific Island Forum countries have been trying to get a fact-finding human mission deployed to West Papua. But they have encountered zero progress with continuous roadblocks being placed by Jakarta.

This year was no different in spite of the appointment of Fiji and Papua New Guinea’s prime ministers to negotiate such a visit.

Pacific leaders have asked for the UN’s involvement over reported abuses as the Indonesian military continues its battles with West Papuan independence fighters.

A highly critical UN Human Right Committee report on Indonesia released in May highlighted “systematic reports about the use of torture” and “extrajudicial killings and enforced disappearances of Indigenous Papuan people”.

But the situation is worse now since President Prabowo Subianto, the former general who has a cloud of human rights violations hanging over his head, took office in October.

Fiji’s Sitiveni Rabuka and Papua New Guinea’s James Marape were appointed by the Melanesian Spearhead Group in 2023 as special envoys to push for the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights’ visit directly with Indonesia’s president.

Prabowo taking up the top job in Jakarta has filled West Papuan advocates and activists with dread as this is seen as marking a return of “the ghost of Suharto” because of his history of alleged atrocities in West Papua, and also in Timor-Leste before independence.

Already Prabowo’s acts since becoming president with restoring the controversial transmigration policies, reinforcing and intensifying the military occupation, fuelling an aggressive “anti-environment” development strategy, have heralded a new “regime of brutality”.

And Marape and Rabuka, who pledged to exiled indigenous leader Benny Wenda in Suva in February 2023 that he would support the Papuans “because they are Melanesians”, have been accused of failing the West Papuan cause.

3. France rolls back almost four decades of decolonisation ‘progress’
When pro-independence protests erupted into violent rioting in Kanaky New Caledonia on May 13, creating havoc and destruction in the capital of Nouméa and across the French Pacific territory with 14 people dead (mostly indigenous Kanaks), intransigent French policies were blamed for having betrayed Kanak aspirations for independence.

I was quoted at the time by The New Zealand Herald and RNZ Pacific of blaming France for having “lost the plot” since 2020.

While acknowledging the goodwill and progress that had been made since the 1988 Matignon accords and the Nouméa pact a decade later following the bloody 1980s insurrection, the French government lost the self-determination trajectory after two narrowly defeated independence referendums and a third vote boycotted by Kanaks because of the covid pandemic.

This third vote with less than half the electorate taking part had no credibility, but Paris insisted on bulldozing constitutional electoral changes that would have severely disenfranchised the indigenous vote. More than 36 years of constructive progress had been wiped out.

“It’s really three decades of hard work by a lot of people to build, sort of like a future for Kanaky New Caledonia, which is part of the Pacific rather than part of France,” I was quoted as saying.

France had had three prime ministers since 2020 and none of them seemed to have any “real affinity” for indigenous issues, particularly in the South Pacific, in contrast to some previous leaders.

In the wake of a snap general election in mainland France, when President Emmanuel Macron lost his centrist mandate and is now squeezed between the polarised far right National Rally and the left coalition New Popular Front, the controversial electoral reform was quietly scrapped.

New French Overseas Minister Manual Valls has heralded a new era of negotiation over self-determination. In November, he criticised Macron’s “stubbornness’ in an interview with the French national daily Le Parisien, blaming him for “ruining 36 years of dialogue, of progress”.

But New Caledonia is not the only headache for France while pushing for its own version of an “Indo-Pacific” strategy. Pro-independence French Polynesian President Moetai Brotherson and civil society leaders have called on the UN to bring Paris to negotiations over a timetable for decolonisation.

However, they were disappointed. And their own internal political divisions have not made things any easier.

On the eve of the three-day fact-finding delegation to the territory in October, Fiji’s Rabuka was already warning the local government (led by pro-independence Louis Mapou to “be reasonable” in its demands from Paris.

In other words, back off on the independence demands. Rabuka was quoted by RNZ Pacific reporter Lydia Lewis as saying, “look, don’t slap the hand that has fed you”.

Rabuka and Cook Islands Prime Minister Mark Brown and then Tongan counterpart Hu’akavameiliku Siaosi Sovaleni visited the French territory not to “interfere” but to “lower the temperature”.

But an Australian proposal for a peacekeeping force under the Australian-backed Pacific Policing Initiative (PPI) fell flat, and the mission was generally considered a failure for Kanak indigenous aspirations.

5. Climate crisis — the real issue and geopolitics
In spite of the geopolitical pressures from countries, such as the US, Australia and France, in the region in the face of growing Chinese influence, the real issue for the Pacific remains climate crisis and what to do about it.

Controversy marked an A$140 million aid pact signed between Australia and Nauru last month in what was being touted as a key example of the geopolitical tightrope being forced on vulnerable Pacific countries.

This agreement offers Nauru direct budgetary support, banking services and assistance with policing and security. The strings attached? Australia has been granted the right to veto any agreement with a third country such as China.

Critics have compared this power of veto to another agreement signed between Australia and Tuvalu in 2023 which provided Australian residency opportunities and support for climate mitigation. However, in return Australia was handed guarantees over security.

The previous month, November, was another disappointment for the Pacific when it was “once again ignored” at the UN COP29 climate summit in the capital Baku of oil and natural gas-rich Azerbaijan.

The Suva-based Pacific Islands Climate Action Network (PICAN) condemned the outcomes as another betrayal, saying that the “richest nations turned their backs on their legal and moral obligations” at what had been billed as the “finance COP”.

The new climate finance pledge of a US$300 billion annual target by 2035 for the global fight against climate change was well short of the requested US$1 trillion in aid.

Climate campaigners and activist groups branded it as a “shameful failure of leadership” that forced Pacific nations to accept the “token pledge” to prevent the negotiations from collapsing.

Much depends on a climate justice breakthrough with Vanuatu’s landmark case before the International Court of Justice (ICJ) arguing that those harming the climate are breaking international law.

The case seeks an advisory opinion from the court on the legal responsibilities of countries over the climate crisis, and many nations in support of Vanuatu made oral submissions last month and are now awaiting adjudication.

Given the primacy of climate crisis and vital need for funding for adaptation, mitigation and loss and damage faced by vulnerable Pacific countries, former Pacific Islands Forum Secretary-General Meg Taylor delivered a warning:

“Pacific leaders are being side-lined in major geopolitical decisions affecting their region and they need to start raising their voices for the sake of their citizens.”

Palau’s President Surangel Whipps Jr is inviting US President-elect Donald Trump to “visit the Pacific” to see firsthand the impacts of the climate crisis.

Palau is set to host the largest annual Pacific leaders meeting in 2026, and the country’s leader Whipps told RNZ Pacific he would “love” Trump to be there.

He said he might even take the American leader, who is often criticised as a climate change denier, snorkelling in Palau’s pristine waters.

• READ MORE: 10 reasons why US president-elect Donald Trump can’t derail global climate action
• Trump win, 1.5 C warming breach weigh on UN COP climate finance talks
• US elections: Climate finance negotiations could be harder after Trump’s victory
• Other Pacific climate crisis reports

Whipps said he had seen the damage to the marine ecosystem.

“I was out snorkelling on Sunday, and once again, it’s unfortunate, but we had another heat, very warm, warming of the oceans, so I saw a lot of bleached coral,” he said.

“It’s sad to see that it’s happening more frequently and these are just impacts of what is happening around the world because of our addiction to fossil fuel.”

“I would very much like to bring [Trump] to Palau if he can. That would be a fantastic opportunity to take him snorkelling and see the impacts. See the islands that are disappearing because of sea level rise, see the taro swamps that are being invaded.”

Americans experiencing the impacts
Whipps said Americans were experiencing the impacts in states such as Florida and North Carolina.

“I mean, that’s something that you need to experience. I mean, they’re experiencing [it] in Florida and North Carolina.

“They just had major disasters recently and I think that’s the rallying call that we all need to take responsibility.”

However, Trump is not necessarily known for his support of climate action. Instead, he has promised to “drill baby drill” to expand oil and gas production in the US.

Palau International Coral Reef Center researcher Christina Muller-Karanasos said surveying of corals in Palau was underway after multiple reports of bleaching.

She said the main cause of coral bleaching was climate change.

“It’s upsetting. There were areas where there were quite a lot of bleaching.

Most beautiful, pristine reef
“The most beautiful and pristine reef and amount of fish and species of fish that I’ve ever seen. It’s so important for the health of the reef. The healthy reef also supports healthy fish populations, and that’s really important for Palau.”

University of Hawai’i Manoa’s Dr Tarcisius Tara Kabutaulaka suspects Trump will focus on the Pacific, but for geopolitical gains.

“It will be about the militarisation of the climate change issue that you are using climate change to build relationships so that you can ensure you do the counter China issue as well.”

He believed Trump has made his position clear on the climate front.

“He said, and I quote, ‘that it is one of the great scams of all time’. And so he is a climate crisis denier.”

It is exactly the kind of comment President Whipps does not want to hear, especially from a leader of a country which Palau is close to — or from any nation.

“We need the United States, we need China, and we need India and Russia to be the leaders to make sure that we put things on track,” he said.

For the Pacific, the climate crisis is the biggest existential and security threat.

Leaders like Whipps are considering drastic measures, including the nuclear energy option.

“We’ve got to look at alternatives, and one of those is nuclear energy. It’s clean, it’s carbon free,” he told RNZ Pacific.

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

The Palau Media Council has condemned a political lawsuit against the publisher of the Island Times as an “assault on press freedom” with the Pacific country facing an election on Tuesday.

In a statement yesterday, the council added that the lawsuit, filed by Surangel and Sons Co. against Times publisher Leilani Reklai over her newspaper’s coverage of tax-related documents that surfaced on social media, was an attempt to undermine the accountability that was vital to democracy.

The statement also said the lawsuit raised “critical concerns about citizens’ access to information and freedom of the press.

• READ MORE: Palau newspaper sued by president’s family company ahead of general election
• Media freedom at stake? Palau newspaper faces defamation lawsuit
• Regional Asia Pacific media freedoms

Palau recently topped the inaugural Pacific Media Freedom Index for press freedom.

“This lawsuit, combined with government’s statements endorsing that Island Times reported mis-information on its coverage of the tax related document and the decision to ban Island Times from Surangel and Sons [distribution] outlets, raises critical concerns about citizens’ access to information and the freedom of the press — both of which are cornerstones of a democratic society,” the statement said.

“The council sees this legal action as an assault on press freedom and an attempt to undermine the accountability that is vital to democracy.”

The statement said that Reklai, one of Palau’s senior journalists, was being targeted simply for reporting on documents that were already in the public domain.

“She did not originate the information but responsibly conveyed what these documents suggested, raising questions about the current administration’s narrative on corporate tax contributions,” the council said.

‘Journalistic duty’
“Reporting on such information is a journalistic duty to ensure transparency in tax policies and government incentives impacting the private sector.

“The Island Times, by publishing these documents, has provided a platform for clarifying public understanding of the new PGST tax law’s impact on major corporations and the actual tax contributions of Surangel and Sons.

“These issues are clearly within the public’s right to know, and the council emphasises that media plays a crucial role in reporting such findings and promoting informed debate.

The council said it stood in solidarity with Reklai and all journalists who strived to find and uphold the truth.

“In a healthy democracy, a free and open press is essential for informed citizens and responsible governance.”

Palau’s largest newspaper is being sued for defamation by the company of President Surangel Whipps Jr’s father, just days ahead of general elections in the Pacific nation.

Surangel and Sons alleges “negligence and defamation” by the Island Times and its editor Leilani Reklai for an article published on Tuesday with “false and unsubstantiated allegations,” owner Surangel Whipps Sr said in a press release on Thursday.

Reklai has rejected the company’s allegations and said the “lawsuit is trying to control how media here in Palau tells a story”, a news article about the case in the Island Times reported on Friday.

• READ MORE: Media freedom at stake? Palau newspaper faces defamation lawsuit
• Regional Asia Pacific media freedoms

“I feel like we are being intimidated, we are being forced to speak a certain narrative rather than present diverse community perspectives,” said Reklai, who is also a stringer for BenarNews.

The Micronesian nation of 17,000 people — 650 km north of Papua New Guinea — goes to the polls on November 5. Whipps Jr’s rival is his brother-in-law Tommy Remengesau Jr, who was president from 2001 to 2009 and 2013 to 2021.

The controversy comes after Palau was top of the inaugural 2023 Pacific Media Freedom Index of 14 island countries that highlighted the region’s media facing significant political and economic pressures, bribes and corruption, as well as self-censorship.

Island Times reported on Friday the suit is seeking compensation and punitive damages and that the company asserts the “monetary awards should be substantial enough to prevent similar conduct from the newspaper and Reklai in future”.

Surangel and Sons financial details — leaked from the country’s tax office — were posted on social media last weekend, prompting heated online debate over how much it paid.

A new corporate and goods and services tax system introduced by Whipps Jr’s government is currently being rolled out in Palau and its merits have been a focus of election campaigning.

The company in a statement said its “privacy rights had been violated,” the tax details were obtained illegally, posted online without consent, and some of the figures had been altered.

Motivation ‘confusing voters’
“The motivation behind the circulation of this document is clearly for misinformation and disinformation to confuse voters. In the end Surangel and Sons is not running for office. Unfortunately, it has been victimised by this smear campaign,” the company posted on social media.

Island Times in a 225-word, front-page story headlined “Surangel & Sons condemns tax report leak as privacy violation” reported the company’s statement on Tuesday. It also quoted financial details from the leaked documents and accompanying commentary.

Whipps Jr. in a press conference on Wednesday accused the Island Times of publishing disinformation.

“Island Times continues to print political propaganda, it’s not accurate,” Whipps Jr said, calling for a correction to be published.

The lawsuit against the paper and its editor was served the next day.

Whipps Jr’s spokesperson told BenarNews any questions related to the lawsuit should be directed to the parties involved.

Surangel and Sons was founded in 1980 by Whipps Sr, who also served as Palau’s president briefly in 2005 and for two years from 2007.

Business ‘offers everything’
The privately-owned business “offers everything from housing design and automotive repair to equipment rentals, groceries, and scuba gear” through its import, sales, construction and travel arms, the company’s website says.

Previously as CEO, Whipps Jr transformed the company from a family store to one of Palau’s largest and most diversified businesses, employing more than 700 people.

His LinkedIn profile states he finished as CEO in January 2021, after 28 years in the position and in the month he became president. His spokesperson did not respond to questions from BenarNews about if he still retains any direct financial or other links to the company.

Surangel and Sons said the revelation of sensitive business information threatens their competitive advantage and puts jobs at risk.

Palau’s Minister of Finance Kaleb Udui Jr told the president’s press conference on Wednesday an investigation was underway, a special prosecutor would be appointed and apologized for the leak to the company.

“I would hope the media would make extra effort to help educate the public and discourage misinformation and breaches of privacy of the tax office and any other government office,” Udui said, confirming the tax documents had been altered before being posted on social media.

He said tax office staff have previously been warned about leaks and ensuring data confidentiality, as breaches negatively impact the confidence of foreign investors in Palau.

Explanation rather than leak
Whipps Jr added that the newspaper should have explained the tax system instead of reporting the leaked information.

He also accused Island Times of failure to disclose a paid advertisement in this week’s edition of the paper for his political opponent.

“I’m disappointed in the Island Times, because there was an article that was not an article, a paid advertisement,” Whipps Jr said about a colourful blue and yellow election campaign graphic.

Island Times told BenarNews it was not usual practice to put “Paid Advertisement” on advertisements but it would review its policy for political campaign material.

Reklai fears the lawsuit could have serious consequences for the media in Palau and bankrupt Island Times, the paper reported.

“If I don’t stand up to this, it sends a signal to all journalists that they risk facing claims for damages for powerful companies and government officials while carrying out their work,” she said.

Palau has two newspapers and four radio stations and enshrined in its constitution are protections for journalists, including a guarantee they cannot be jailed for refusing to disclose sources.

Surangel and Sons said they would no longer sell Island Times through their outlets.

Copyright ©2015-2024, BenarNews. Republished with the permission of BenarNews.

The UN General Assembly has overwhelmingly passed a resolution demanding that the Israeli government end its occupation of Palestinian territories within 12 months — but half of the countries that voted against are from the Pacific.

Affirming a recent International Court of Justice opinion that deemed the decades-long occupation unlawful, the opposition from seven Pacific nations further marginalised the region from world opinion against Israel.

Earlier this week several UN experts and officials warned against Israel becoming a global “pariah” state over its almost year-long genocidal war on Gaza.

• READ MORE: UN General Assembly overwhelmingly calls for end of Israeli occupation
• Israel will become a ‘pariah’ over Gaza ‘genocide’, UN rights experts say
• Other Israeli War on Palestine reports

The final vote tally was 124 member states in favour and 14 against, with 43 nations abstaining.

Pacific countries that voted with Israel and its main ally and arms-supplier United States against the Palestinian resolution are Federated States of Micronesia, Fiji, Nauru, Papua New Guinea, Palau, Tonga and Tuvalu.

Kiribati, Samoa and Vanuatu abstained while Marshall Islands and Solomon islands voted yes. Australia abstained while New Zealand and Timor-Leste also supported the resolution.

The Palestine-led resolution, co-sponsored by dozens of nations, calls on Israel to swiftly withdraw “all its military forces” from Gaza and the West Bank, including East Jerusalem.

Palestine is a permanent observer state at the UN and it described the vote as “historic”.

Devastating war
Like the International Court of Justice (ICJ) opinion in July, which found the occupation “unlawful”, the resolution is not legally binding but carries considerable political weight.

The court’s opinion had been sought in a 2022 request from the UN General Assembly.

The UNGA vote comes amid Israel’s devastating war on Gaza, which has killed more than 41,250 Palestinians.

The United Kingdom, which recently suspended some arms export licenses for Israel, abstained from yesterday’s vote, a decision that the advocacy group Global Justice Now (GJN) said shows “complete disregard for the ongoing suffering of Palestinians forced to live under military-enforced racial discrimination”.

However, other US allies such as France voted for the resolution. Australia, Germany, Italy and Switzerland abstained but Ireland, Spain and Norway supported the vote.

“The vast majority of countries have made it clear: Israel’s occupation of Palestine must end, and all countries have a definite duty not to aid or assist its continuation,” said GJN’s Tim Bierley.

“To stay on the right side of international law, the UK’s dealings with Israel must drastically change, including closing all loopholes in its partial arms ban and revoking any trade or investment relations that might assist the occupation.”

NEWS: UN General Assembly adopts resolution demanding that Israel brings to an end its unlawful presence in the Occupied Palestinian Territory without delay and within the next 12 months.https://t.co/Vj0Ve1lLBi pic.twitter.com/2rKKvDNDqd

— United Nations (@UN) September 18, 2024

BDS welcomes vote
The Palestinian-led Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) Movement welcomed passage of the resolution, noting that the UN General Assembly had voted “for the first time in 42 years” in favour of “imposing sanctions on Israel”, reports Common Dreams.

The resolution specifically calls on all UN member states to “implement sanctions, including travel bans and asset freezes, against natural and legal persons engaged in the maintenance of Israel’s unlawful presence in the occupied Palestinian territory, including in relation to settler violence.”

The resolution’s passage came nearly two months after the ICJ, or World Court, the UN’s highest legal body, handed down an advisory opinion concluding that Israel’s occupation of Palestinian territories is illegal and must end “as rapidly as possible.”

The newly approved resolution states that “respect for the International Court of Justice and its functions . . .  is essential to international law and justice and to an international order based on the rule of law.”

The Biden administration, which is heavily arming the Israeli military as it assails Gaza and the West Bank, criticised the ICJ’s opinion as overly broad.

Nihad Awad, national executive director of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), said in a statement that “the Biden administration should join the overwhelming majority of nations around the world in condemning these crimes against the Palestinian people, demanding an end to the occupation, and exerting serious pressure on the Israeli government to comply”.

“We welcome this UN resolution demanding an end to one of the worst and ongoing crimes against humanity of the past century,” said Awad.

Turning ‘blind eye’
Ahead of the vote, a group of UN experts said in a statement that many countries “appear unwilling or unable to take the necessary steps to meet their obligations” in the wake of the ICJ’s opinion.

“Devastating attacks on Palestinians across the occupied Palestinian territory show that by continuing to turn a blind eye to the horrific plight of the Palestinian people, the international community is furthering genocidal violence,” the experts said.

“States must act now. They must listen to voices calling on them to take action to stop Israel’s attacks against the Palestinians and end its unlawful occupation.

“All states have a legal obligation to comply with the ICJ’s ruling and must promote adherence to norms that protect civilians.”

Israel captured the West Bank, Gaza and East Jerusalem in the 1967 war and subsequently annexed the entire holy city in 1980, reports Al Jazeera.

International law prohibits the acquisition of land by force.

Israel has also been building settlements — now home to hundreds of thousands of Israelis — in the West Bank in violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention, which bans the occupying power from transferring “parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies”.

PSNA calls for sanctions against ‘rogue state’
Meanwhile, New Zealand’s Palestine Solidarity Network Aotearoa (PSNA) says the exploding-pager attacks in Lebanon this week were another attempt by the “rogue state Israel” to provoke a wider Middle East war and has called on the government to impose sanctions.

National chair John Minto said in a statement: “It comes after several previous, highly-inflammatory Israeli actions aimed to do the same thing:

• The assassination of Hezbollah leader Fuad Shukr in Beirut;
• The assassination of Hamas Leader Ismail Hanniyah who was negotiating a ceasefire agreement with Israel. The assassination took place in Iran in a flagrant breach of Iranian sovereignty; and
• The Israeli missile attack on the Iranian consulate in Syria which killed several top Iranian officials

The New Zealand government had previously urged all parties to refrain from actions that would escalate Israel’s war on Gaza into a wider Middle East war.

“With this latest attack our government must condemn Israel,” Minto said.

“Israel is an out-of-control rogue state which is an imminent danger to peace and security the world over”

The UN General Assembly has voted overwhelmingly to grant Palestine new rights and privileges, calling on the Security Council to reconsider its bid for full UN membership, reports TrimFeed.

The resolution on Friday was opposed by the US, Israel, and seven other countries — four of them island nations from the Pacific — citing concerns over direct negotiations and a two-state solution.

Papua New Guinea, Federated States of Micronesia and Palau were among the countries voting against Palestine.

• READ MORE: How the countries voted on the UN Palestine resolution
• Fiji’s position over Israeli war on Gaza – international blunder or a domestic strategy?

The UN General Assembly called on the Security Council to reconsider Palestine’s request to become the 194th member of the United Nations.

The overwhelming vote in favour by 143-9, with 25 abstentions, reflects wide global support for full membership of Palestine in the world body.

The outcome of this vote has significant implications for the Israel-Palestine conflict, as it may influence the trajectory of future negotiations and the prospects for a two-state solution.

Furthermore, the level of international support for Palestinian statehood may impact on the balance of power in the region and beyond.

Fiji, Vanuatu, and Marshall Islands were among the countries that abstained from the vote, alongside the United States, Israel, Argentina, Czechia, Hungary, Micronesia, Nauru, Palau, and Papua New Guinea voting against.

US will veto statehood
The US has made clear that it would block Palestinian membership and statehood until direct negotiations with Israel resolve key issues and lead to a two-state solution.

The vote comes amid escalating violence and rising death tolls on the Palestinian people — more than 35,000 have been killed and almost 79,000 wounded in the War on Gaza

Many countries have expressed outrage at the situation and fears of a major Israeli ground offensive in Rafah.

Riyad Mansour, the Palestinian UN Ambassador, delivered an emotional speech, saying, “No words can capture what such loss and trauma signifies for Palestinians, their families, communities, and for our nation as a whole.”

Israel’s UN Ambassador Gilad Erdan vehemently opposed the resolution, accusing UN member nations of not mentioning Hamas’ October 7 attack that killed 1139 people and he shredded a copy of the UN charter in protest.

US Deputy Ambassador Robert Wood said: “For the US to support Palestinian statehood, direct negotiations must guarantee Israel’s security and future as a democratic Jewish state, and that Palestinians can live in peace in a state of their own.”

While the resolution grants Palestine some new rights and privileges, it reaffirms that it remains a non-member observer state without full UN membership and voting rights in the General Assembly.

Humanitarian ceasefire vote
Palestine became a UN non-member observer state in 2012. The United States vetoed a widely-backed council resolution on April 18 that would have paved the way for full United Nations membership for Palestine.

The General Assembly’s vote calling for a humanitarian ceasefire in Gaza on October 27 and the ongoing violence underscore the urgent need for a resolution to the long-standing crisis.

As the international community remains divided on the issue of Palestinian statehood, the path to lasting peace remains uncertain.

Republished from TrimFeed.

Surveillance and better vaccine coverage is needed to prevent another measles outbreak in the Pacific, says the World Health Organisation’s (WHO) Western Pacific regional director.

Dr Saia Ma’u Piukala said many children missed out on routine vaccinations — including measles and rubella — during the covid-19 pandemic.

According to WHO, measles cases jumped by 225 percent — from just over 1400 cases in 2022 to more than 5000 last year — in the Western Pacific region.

“I think the health workforce were concentrating on covid-19 vaccinations and forgot about routine vaccinations, not only for measles, but other routine immunisation schedule,” Piukala told RNZ Pacific.

“People are going back to fill the gaps.”

From 2022 to 2023, 11 countries in the Western Pacific, including Fiji, Kiribati, Marshall Islands, the Federated States of Micronesia, Palau and Papua New Guinea, conducted nationwide measles and rubella vaccination campaigns.

Catch-up successful
Piukala said the catch-up campaigns had been successful.

“That will definitely reduce the risk,” he said.

“No child should get sick or die of measles.”

In 2019, Samoa had an outbreak that killed 83 people off the back of an outbreak in Auckland.

Piukala said the deaths made people understand the importance of measles and rubella vaccinations for their children.

Fiji, Guam, French Polynesia and New Caledonia are the only countries or territories that have local testing capacity for measles, with most nations sending samples to Melbourne for testing.

Piukala said WHO plans for Samoa, the Cook Islands, and the Solomon Islands to have testing capacity by 2025.

“The PCR machines that were made available in Pacific Island countries during the covid pandemic can also be used to detect other respiratory viruses, including the flu, LSV, and measles and rubella.”

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

Marshall Islands officials quickly moved this week to reaffirm this nation’s ties with Taipei in the wake of Nauru shifting diplomatic allegiance from Taiwan to China.

“The Republic of the Marshall Islands (RMI) values the strong relationship with Republic of China (Taiwan) as an indispensable partner in promotion of democratic principles,” said Foreign Minister Kalani Kaneko.

“The RMI pledges its diplomatic allegiance with Taiwan and will continue to stand in solidarity with the government and people of Taiwan.”

• READ MORE: China has ‘whittled down’ key Taiwan support with Nauru move, says scholar
• Other China in the Pacific articles

President Hilda Heine quickly congratulated President-elect Lai Ching-te after his win in Taiwan’s presidential election last Saturday, adding that the Marshall Islands “looks forward to working closely with the Republic of China (Taiwan) to further strengthen the close and friendly ties between the two nations”.

Just two days after Lai’s election victory, Nauru announced its change to China — the latest development in the tit-for-tat between Taipei and Beijing, which views Taiwan as a renegade province that needs to be reunited with the mainland.

The mayors of the two largest local governments, in the capital Majuro and at Kwajalein, which hosts the US Army’s Reagan Test Site, took out full-page advertisements in the weekly Marshall Islands Journal supporting Taiwan.

Both local governments have benefited significantly from partnerships with Taiwan that have funded the building of numerous community sports facilities, installation of solar lighting, and purchase of equipment for maintenance of facilities.

Friendship ‘remains strong’
The “Marshall Islands-Republic of China (Taiwan) friendship remains strong and will continue to withstand the test of time,” Kaneko said.

“In parallel, we wholeheartedly respect the sovereignty of all countries and will continue to foster open and friendly dialogue with other nations for the sake of peace and stability for all.”

Kaneko said he wanted to reassure the dozens of Marshall Islands students currently attending universities in Taiwan “that the Nauru-ROC relationship change will not affect their current immigration status while in Taiwan.”

While Taiwan voters sent Beijing a message last Saturday by giving the ruling Democratic Progressive Party an unprecedented third four-year term by electing Lai, whose party and candidacy China had opposed, on Monday, China struck back, with the announcement by Nauru that it was dropping diplomatic ties with Taiwan and recognising China instead.

This development leaves only the Marshall Islands, Palau and Tuvalu as Taiwan allies in the Pacific, and reduces the total globally to 12 that recognise Taiwan.

Recently elected Nauru President David Adeang’s government issued a statement on Monday saying that Nauru was “moving to the One-China Principle…which recognises the People’s Republic of China as the sole legal government representing the whole of China.”

“This is a big win for China,” wrote Cleo Paskal, a senior fellow at the Foundation for Defence of Democracies who regularly writes on US-China issues in the Pacific, on X (formerly Twitter) on Tuesday.

She commented that one of the implications of Nauru’s switch is that now the incoming secretary-general of the Pacific Islands Forum will be from a China-aligned nation, not Taiwan.

‘A real problem for Beijing’
“Apart from the myriad other implications, the announced next Secretary-General of the Pacific Islands Forum was to be former Nauru President Baron Waqa, who has stood up to China in the past and, at the time of his selection, was from a country that recognised Taiwan — two things that were a real problem for Beijing,” Paskal said on X.

“This change means that, at least, the next Pacific Islands Forum Secretary-General will be from a country that recognises China rather than Taiwan. Now let’s see if it stays Baron Waqa.”

American Samoa Congresswoman Amata Radewagen congratulated the new Taiwan president and said in a statement issued by her office Wednesday.

“I’m confident that by far most leadership throughout the Pacific Islands fully supports a strong US commitment in the region and appreciates Taiwan’s role in our many economic and security partnerships that provide enduring regional stability, peace and prosperity.”

She also pointed out that people in the islands “value and support the right to self-determination and democratic elections, for themselves and their neighbours” — an unsubtle dig at China, a dictatorship run by the Chinese Communist Party without national elections.

“The Pacific Islands have a widespread desire to stand with the US and our key allies, which includes our friendship to the people of Taiwan.

I am certain that the decision by Nauru did not take our professional diplomats by surprise and will be an exception in the Pacific Islands,” she added.

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

A security studies professor says China has been applying pressure to countries to switch diplomatic ties over from Taiwan, but Beijing says its “ready to work” with the Pacific island nation “to open new chapters” in the relations between the two countries.

The Nauru government said that “in the best interests” of the country and its people, it was seeking full resumption of diplomatic relations with China.

China claims Taiwan as its own territory with no right to state-to-state ties, a position Taiwan strongly disputes.

• READ MORE: Pacific nation Nauru cuts ties with Taiwan, switches to China
• Other Nauru-Taiwan reports
• LISTEN TO RNZ: Nauru severs diplomatic ties with Taiwan

Dr Anna Powles, an associate professor at the Massey University Centre for Defence and Security Studies, told RNZ this was not Nauru’s “first rodeo” — this was the third time they had “jumped ship”.

“China, certainly, has been on the offensive to effectively dismantle Taiwan’s diplomatic allies across the Pacific,” Dr Powles said.

“There has been increased Chinese pressure — that was certainly one of the reasons why Australia pursued their Falepili union agreement with Tuvalu last year with great speed,” she said.

Taiwan now has three Pacific allies left — Palau, Tuvalu and the Marshall Islands.

Significant drop
Dr Powles said that was a significant drop from 2019 when Solomon Islands and Kiribati had switched allegiance.

But she said the switch should not come as a major surprise. Most countries, including New Zealand, Australia, and the United States, recognised China and adhere to the one-China policy.

“Nauru is like most other Pacific Island countries, recognising China over Taiwan,” Dr Powles said.

“The challenge here though for Taiwan is for a very long period of time, the Pacific was the bulkhead of its allies, and as I mentioned, China has effectively and very successfully managed to whittle that down and dismantle that network.

“For many of those countries in the Pacific which have switched back and forth between the two, this actually hasn’t contributed in positive ways to sustainable, consistent growth and development.”

Unanswered questions
Dr Powles said there were still questions to be answered.

Nauru set up its intergenerational fund in 2015 with Australia, New Zealand and Taiwan as contributors.

“So the question here is, will China now be a contributor to the trust fund?”

Lai Ching-te from Taiwan’s ruling Democratic Progressive Party, or DPP, won the presidential election on Saturday as expected and will take office on May 20.

“With deep regret we announce the termination of diplomatic relations with Nauru,” Taiwan’s Foreign Affairs Ministry said on social media platform X, formerly Twitter.

“This timing is not only China’s retaliation against our democratic elections but also a direct challenge to the international order. Taiwan stands unbowed and will continue as a force for good,” it added.

China ‘ready to work’
China’s Foreign Ministry spokesperson Hua Chunying said that Beijing “China appreciates and welcomes the decision of the government of the Nauru”.

“There is but one China in the world, Taiwan is an inalienable part of China’s territory, and the government of the People’s Republic of China is the sole legal government representing the whole of China.”

She said this was affirmed in the UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 “and is the prevailing consensus among the international community”.

“China has established diplomatic relations with 182 countries on the basis of the one-China principle.

“The Nauru government’s decision of re-establishing diplomatic ties with China once again shows that the One-China principle is where global opinion trends and where the arc of history bends.

“China stands ready to work with Nauru to open new chapters of our bilateral relations on the basis of the one-China principle.”

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

The President of Palau has slammed New Zealand’s new government for its oil and gas exploration plans as the COP28 global climate summit gets underway.

The National-led government intends to reopen Aotearoa waters to oil and gas exploration, despite a commitment to limit global warming to 1.5 degrees.

Pacific leaders are poised to hold what they describe as “perpetrators of climate chaos” to account.

The National-led government intends to reopen Aotearoa waters to oil and gas exploration, despite a commitment to limit global warming to 1.5 degrees.

Pacific leaders are poised to hold what they describe as “perpetrators of climate chaos” to account.

While the new Climate Change Minister Simon Watts was not expecting criticism over fossil fuels at the summit, Palau President Surangel Whipps Jr has served it up.

“What a backward position that an island that is part of the Pacific Island Forum that should understand the challenges that we’re facing,” Whipps Jr said.

NZ ‘should take lead’
“New Zealand as a Pacific Island and a member of the forum should take a leadership role and should be active in doing all they can to transition away from fossil fuels. That’s what they should be working on,” he said.

“They shouldn’t be going out and exploring more gas and oil.”

The Pacific Islands Climate Action Network (PICAN) has also taken aim at the New Zealand government’s plans.

Regional coordinator Lavetanalagi Seru said it was not the time to be exploring and expanding the extraction of fossil fuel including gas.

“At a time when the Pacific and many climate frontline communities are grappling with the single greatest security threat of climate change, intensifying fossil fuel dependency, not only undermines collective efforts, but also sends a very strong sense of wrong market signals, neglecting broader environmental and social ramifications,” Seru said.

“It will undermine all our efforts to ensure climate resilience for communities, and this isn’t the time to be exploring and expanding the extraction of fossil fuels, including gas.”

Watts said the overturning of the ban did not weaken New Zealand’s climate position.

‘We rely on NZ’
Tuvalu’s former prime minister and now opposition leader Enele Sopoaga has a reminder for the new government: “We rely on New Zealand to stand up strong with the island countries”.

Niue’s Minister for Natural Resources Mona Ainu’u will be drumming home the tangable impacts felt in the Pacific while in Dubai.

“We come to COP, without any commitment from a lot of these countries and these perpetrators of climate chaos, as I call them,” she said.

“It’s very difficult to hold them accountable. We continue to travel 1000s and 1000s of miles, because our people are suffering. People continue to find innovative ways to survive on this earth. From no fault of ours. But we need to hold these countries accountable.”

Ainu’u said there had been little to no movement on last year’s commitment by the world’s biggest emitters to contribute to costs caused by climate change.

This year, one of the main Pacific priorities is building up that loss and damage fund.

A delegate from Palau, Xavier Matsutaro said there was a lot to put into action.

“Let’s just put it this way, there’s a lot to prove on COP28, and every subsequent COP becomes more and more urgent because it narrows down that window that we need to do to wrap up in emission reduction,” he said.

“And that’s one of the things are the heart of this meeting. And one of the things that will spell out the level of success.”

‘Affect real lives’
A Pacific youth delegate, Metoyer Lohia who is also there, wants to remind the world of the reality of the situation:

“There’s a lot of that. I guess media and the Western world don’t really understand about the real problems and the real challenges that are faced by our communities and people on the ground,” Lohia explained.

“Because at the end of the day, although these are very high level discussions, they ultimately affect real people with real lives and as a Pacific.”

Whipps Jr said US President Joe Biden was a noticeable absence from this year’s meeting.

“The United States needs to be active, it needs to show leadership. And of course, not having Biden here definitely weakens at least or gives us concern about our hope for the future,” he said.

“But there’s Australia, there’s China, there’s India, there’s the EU. I mean, everybody’s got to step it up.”

“As a Pacific island country. I believe that New Zealand should understand better than any other country in the world the challenges that Pacific islands have,” Whipps Jr said.

“We have Marshall Islands, Tuvalu, Kiribati, all their islands are less than two metres above water.

“I mean, if you’re a Pacific island nation, and you don’t understand that, I don’t know, I don’t know how, what else we can say.

“It’s just tragic to be hearing these kinds of actions by the New Zealand government.”

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

A Japanese government spokesperson says it is “not wilfully trying to divide the Pacific” over the Fukushima treated nuclear wastewater release.

Japan is set to start discharging more than one million tonnes of treated nuclear wastewater into the Pacific Ocean tomorrow (local time).

This comes 12 years after a tsunami slammed the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant resulting in what has been labelled as the largest civil nuclear energy disaster since Chernobyl.

• READ MORE:  NZ women’s peace group protests over imminent Fukushima nuclear wastewater release
• Other Fukushima reports

Palau, Papua New Guinea, Cook Islands and the Federated States of Micronesia have publicly backed the plan or at least placed their faith in Japan’s word that it will be safe.

The release is forecast to take 30 to 40 years to complete.

Fiji’s Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka is the most recent Pacific leader to speak out in defence of Japan.

He said he is satisfied their plan is safe after reading the UN nuclear agency’s report.

Rabuka’s voice is important because he is in the Pacific Islands Forum leadership team — known as the Troika — as the past chair of the Forum. The other two are current chair Cook Islands Prime Minister Mark Brown and future chair, the Tongan Prime Minister Hu’akavameiliku Siaosi Sovaleni.

Since making that statement Rabuka has apologised for speaking ahead of the recent Troika meeting, but he has not backtracked on his view.

‘Discharged’ into Japan’s own backyard
Rabuka has taken to social media in response to criticism of his statement of support.

“Comparisons between the nuclear legacy in the Pacific and Japan’s nuclear wastewater release is fear-mongering,” he wrote.

He also said the wastewater was not being dumped but discharged into Japan’s “own backyard”, over 7000km from Fiji.

1/3 One of my critics at the weekend appeared to be somehow connecting the wastewater discharge with the cataclysmic power of the nuclear bombs dropped in the Pacific as part of weapons testing.

— Sitiveni Rabuka (@slrabuka) August 22, 2023

That in itself has been the centre of debate with nuclear activists continuing to call it a dump.

One nuclear expert appointed by the Pacific Islands Forum said there was an argument that it was a dump over a release.

But the International Atomic Energy Agency has gone to great lengths — even travelling to New Zealand and Rarotonga — to explain why this is not a dump.

Director-General Rafael Grossi told RNZ Pacific earlier this year that he condemned dumping which he said had happened in the past and was not the case for Japan’s plan.

Against and on the fence
Vanuatu’s Foreign Minister has drafted a declaration urging Japan to stop the discharge.

He wants the leaders of the Melanesian Spearhead Group (MSG) meeting in Port Vila today to support the declaration.

Tuvalu has also spoken out, expressing opposition to Rabuka’s stance.

Tuvalu’s Minister for Finance, Seve Paeniu told FBC News that if Japan was genuinely confident, why did it not consider disposing of it within its own lakes and waters.

TEPCO assures the Pacific
Tokyo Electric Power Company Holdings (TEPCO) spokesperson Junichi Matsumoto told the first media briefing today that his team was “moving quickly” to prepare the release which would depend on the conditions.

“The final decision will be made on the morning of the [August] 24 based on the climate conditions or weather conditions,” he said.

“A very small amount will be carefully discharged using a two-step process.”

RNZ asked TEPCO about the nuclear legacy in the Pacific.

“To the members of the PIF, we have been providing explanations on the discharge into the sea,” Matsumoto said.

“So we would like to continue to provide the explanation on our initiative.

“And in terms of assurance, it may be a bit different in terms of nuance, but the result of sea area monitoring will be communicated.

Matsumoto said anyone wishing to could check the results of the sea area monitoring on the TEPCO website.

When questioned about when Pacific nations would see the effects of the release, he said that according to dispersion models particles would arrive on the shores of Papua New Guinea and Fiji in “a few years’ time or a few decades”.

“It will be impossible to distinguish that [discharged] tritium [in the Pacific Ocean] from that already existing in nature,” Matsumoto said.

A Japan government spokesperson said Tokyo was not wilfully trying to divide the Pacific and no compensation would be given to Pacific nations for potential reputational damage.

“The Japanese government has been taking opportunities at international conferences and at bilateral meetings to thoroughly and meticulously explain and disseminate information to the world through its website, as well as through social network media including X [formerly Twitter],” the spokesperson said.

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

Concerns have been raised about foreign influence in Pacific media after it was revealed Solomon Islands’ longest-running newspaper received funding from China in return for favourable coverage.

Earlier this week the Organised Crime and Corruption Reporting Project (OCCRP) revealed how China has been attempting to gain influence in media outlets in Palau and Solomon Islands.

In Palau, a failed media deal pushed by China has revealed how Beijing was seeking to exert its influence in the Pacific region by using political pressure and funding to capture local elites, including in the media.

• READ MORE: Solomon Star promised to ‘promote China’ in return for funding
• Leaked email shows how China got what it wanted at newspaper that promised favourable coverage
• Other Pacific media and China reports
• The OCCRP website

The OCCRP said at least one front page story had been supplied by an initiative that was backed by investors with ties to China’s police and military.

China had even more success gaining favour in Solomon Islands, where it has steadily been increasing its presence and influence since the Pacific nation switched diplomatic recognition from Taiwan to China in 2019.

There, according to the OCCRP,  the Solomon Star newspaper received Chinese money after giving assurances it would push messages favourable to Beijing.

Desperate for funding, editors at the Solomon Star wrote up a proposal to China’s embassy in Honiara in July last year.

Paper struggling to keep up
The paper was struggling to keep up and needed assistance — its printing machines were deteriorating and papers were often hitting the streets a day late, according to the proposal the Solomon Star sent to China.

Its radio station, Paoa FM, was having difficulty broadcasting into remote provinces.

“Reporters obtained a July 2022 draft funding proposal from the Solomon Star to China’s embassy in Honiara in which the paper requested 1,150,000 Solomon Islands dollars ($206,300) for equipment including a replacement for its ageing newspaper printer and a broadcast tower for its radio station, PAOA FM,” OCCRP said.

“The Solomon Star said in the proposal that decrepit equipment was causing editions to come out late and ‘curtailing news flow about China’s generous and lightning economic and infrastructure development in Solomon Islands’.”

According to the proposal, seen by the ABC’s Pacific Beat programme, China stood to gain “enormously”.

“The intended outcome of this project . . .  is that Solomon Star newspaper will be produced on time for the benefits of its readers, subscribers and the advertising community,” it said.

“China’s timely intervention in Solomon Islands’ infrastructure and economic development will also benefit enormously as news about this new-found partnership is published.”

OCCRP has confirmed the printing equipment the Solomon Star wanted was delivered earlier this year.

Alfred Sasako, Solomon Star’s editor, said the newspaper maintained its independence.

He told the OCCRP that any suggestion it had a pro-Beijing bias was “a figment of the imagination of anyone who is trying to demonise China”.

Sasako told the OCCRP the paper had tried unsuccessfully for more than a decade to get funding from Australia.

Financial desperation drives ailing paper to Chinese backers
Ofani Eremae, a journalist and co-founder at In-depth Solomons who used to work at the Solomon Star, said it has been struggling financially since COVID, and the majority of staff have left.

“They are really in a very, very bad financial situation, so they are desperate,” he told the ABC.

“I think this is what’s prompting them to look for finances elsewhere to keep the operation going.

“It just so happens that China is here and they [Solomon Star] found someone who’s willing to give them a lot of money.”

Taking the assistance from China has raised questions about the paper’s independence, he said.

“It’s a paper with the reputation people trust but in situations like that, you lose your credibility, you lose your independence and of course you become some kind of organisation that’s been controlled by outsiders,” Eremae told the ABC.

Government spending on advertisements in the paper could help it somewhat, but Eremae said “democratic countries, especially the US” should step in and help.

‘Have to defend democracy’
“They have to defend democracy, they have to defend freedom of the press in this country,” he told the ABC.

“Otherwise China, which seems to have a lot of money, they could just easily come in and take control of things here.”

University of South Pacific associate professor of journalism Shailendra Singh said “the Chinese offer hit the right spot” with the paper facing financial challenges due to covid and advertising revenues going to social media.

“If you look across the region, governments are shaking hands with China, making all kinds of deals and also receiving huge amounts of funds,” he told the ABC.

Dr Singh said media outlets had become part of the competition between large countries vying for influence in the region and warned other struggling Pacific media companies could be tempted by similar offers.

“They would seriously consider surrendering some of their editorial independence for a new printing press, just to keep them in business,” he said.

“Let’s just hope that this does not become a trend.”

The concerns these kind of deals bring was clear.

‘Risk of compromising editorial independence’
“This is simply because of the risk of compromising editorial independence,” Dr Singh told the ABC.

“There is concern the country’s major newspaper is turning into a Chinese state party propaganda rag.”

If China managed to sway both the Solomon Islands government and its main newspaper, that would create an “unholy alliance”, Dr Singh said.

“The people would be at the mercy of a cabal, with very little — if not zero — public dissent,” he said.

Despite the concerns, Dr Singh said there were some sound reasons for the Solomon Star to enter the deal.

“If they don’t sign the deal they will continue to struggle financially and it might even mean the end of the Solomon Star,” he told the ABC.

Only the Solomon Star publisher and editor had a full grasp of the situation and the financial challenges the paper faced, he said.

‘Makes business sense’
“From our lofty perch we have all these grand ideas about media independence in theory, but does anyone consider the business realities?”

“It may not make sense to the Americans or the Australians, but makes perfect sense to the Solomon Star from a business survival point of view.”

Solomon Islands and Pacific outlets have been funded for media development by Australia and other governments.

Third party organisations such as the ABC International Development supports the media community across the Pacific to promote public interest journalism and hold businesses, governments and other institutions to account.

But Solomon Islands opposition MP Peter Kenilorea Junior said he was concerned by direct support given to the Solomon Star by a foreign government.

“It’s totally inappropriate for any government — let alone the Chinese government — to be involved in our newspaper publications, because that is supposed to be independent,” he told the ABC.

“I don’t think standards are kept when there is this, according to the report, involvement by the Chinese to try and perhaps reward the paper for saying or passing on stories that are positive about a particular country.”

Georgina Kekea, president of the Media Association of Solomon Islands, said the financial support did not come as a surprise as most businesses were struggling.

“It’s quite difficult for us to ensure that the media industry thrives when they are really floundering, where companies are finding it hard to pay their staff salary,” she told the ABC.

“It is sad to see the US-funded OCCRP through its agent in Solomon Islands, Ofani Eremae, and his so-called ‘In-depth Solomons’ website making unrelented attempts to tarnish the reputation of the Solomon Star Newspaper for receiving funding support from China,” the paper said.

“One thing that Solomon Star can assure the right-minded people of this nation is that we will continue to inform and educate you on issues that matter without any geopolitical bias and that China through its Embassy in Honiara never attempted to stop us from doing so . . .  Solomon Star also continued to publish news items not in the favour of China and the Chinese Embassy in Honiara never issued a reproachment.

“It is indeed sad to see the OCCRP-funded journalists in Solomon Islands and the Pacific trying to bring geopolitics into the Pacific and Solomon Islands media landscape and Solomon Star strongly urges these journalists and their financiers to stop geo-politicising the media.”

OCCRP said it “is funded worldwide by a variety of government and non-government donors”.

“OCCRP’s work in the Pacific Islands is currently funded by a US-government grant that gives the donor zero say in editorial decisions,” it said.

Dr Singh said whether aid came from China, the US or Australia: “There’s no such thing as a free lunch.”

The ABC has sought comment from the Solomon Star and the Chinese Embassy in Solomon Islands.

Republished from ABC Pacific Beat with permission.

The media sector in the Pacific should be supported with an enabling environment to report “without fear” in the face of ongoing challenges brought about since the covid-19 pandemic, according to a new study.

The paper, titled Pacific media freedom since the pandemic, is published in the latest edition of the Pacific Journalism Review.

As part of the research, the authors hosted an online panel discussion with senior Pacific journalists and news editors from Palau, Solomon Islands, Tonga and Fiji in December 2021 and held a follow-up discussion with those journalists in March 2023.

• READ MORE: Disinformation and climate crisis, governance, training feature in PJR
• The July 2023 PJR table of contents
• Other PJR editions

Researchers from the Australian National University and the University of the South Pacific said there was a need for “ongoing vigilance with regards to media freedom in the Pacific Island countries” post-pandemic.

ANU’s Dr Amanda Watson and USP’s Dr Shailendra Singh, who are the paper’s co-authors, said covid-19 exposed the difficulties faced by media organisations and journalists in the region.

“Covid-19 has been a stark reminder about the link between media freedom and the financial viability of media organisations”, they said, adding “especially in the Pacific, where the advertising markets are relatively small and profit margins correspondingly limited”.

They said media companies “faced challenges during the height of the pandemic due to revenue downturns”.

‘Strives for impartial reporting’
However, the industry “continues to strive to conduct impartial reporting, for the benefit of citizens and the societies in which they live,” they said.

“Media professionals and businesses face various challenges and thus it is important to support their work and ensure that they are able to operate without fear of violence or any other forms of reprisal,” the researchers concluded.

A media study from 2021 found that Pacific journalists were among the youngest, most inexperienced and least qualified in the world.

Dr Singh has told RNZ Pacific in the past that capacity building of local journalists must become a priority for mainstream media to improve its standards and Pacific governments must also play a key role in investing in the industry’s development.

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

A major daily newspaper in Solomon Islands received nearly US$140,000 in funding from the Chinese government in return for pledges to “promote the truth about China’s generosity and its true intentions to help develop” the Pacific Islands country, according to a leaked document and interviews.

The revelation comes amid Western alarm over growing Chinese influence over the strategically located country, which switched diplomatic recognition from Taiwan to China in 2019 and then signed a surprise security agreement with Beijing last year.

Solomon Islands journalists have complained of a worsening media environment, as well as what is perceived to be a growing pro-China slant from local outlets that have accepted funding from the People’s Republic.

• READ MORE: How China’s creeping influence undermines Pacific media freedom — Shailendra Singh
• Other Pacific media and China reports
• The OCCRP website

A document obtained by OCCRP shows how one of these outlets, the Solomon Star newspaper, received Chinese assistance after providing repeated and explicit assurances that it would push messages favorable to Beijing.

Reporters obtained a July 2022 draft funding proposal from the Solomon Star to China’s embassy in Honiara in which the paper requested SBD 1,150,000 (about $137,000) for equipment, including a replacement for its aging newspaper printer and a broadcast tower for its radio station, PAOA FM.

The Solomon Star said in the proposal that decrepit equipment was causing editions to come out late and “curtailing news flow about China’s generous and lightning economic and infrastructure development in Solomon Islands.”

The document shows the Chinese embassy had initially offered SBD 350,000 in 2021, but revised this number upward in recognition of the newspaper’s needs.

A dozen pledges
In total, the proposal contains roughly a dozen separate pledges to use the Chinese-funded equipment to promote China’s “goodwill” and role as “the most generous and trusted development partner” in Solomon Islands.

In interviews, both the Solomon Star’s then-publisher, Catherine Lamani, and its chief of staff, Alfred Sasako, confirmed the paper had made the proposal, but declined to speak in detail about it.

Sasako said the newspaper maintained its independence. He said any suggestion it had a pro-Beijing bias was “a figment of the imagination of anyone who is trying to demonise China.”

Sasako said the paper had tried unsuccessfully for more than a decade to get assistance from Australia’s embassy in the country. Other Western countries, such as the United States, had neglected Solomon Islands for decades and were only now showing interest because of anxiety over Chinese influence, he added.

“My summary on the whole thing is China is a doer, others are talkers. They spend too much time talking, nothing gets done,” he said.

Press delivered
OCCRP was able to confirm that the printing equipment the Solomon Star had requested was indeed purchased and delivered earlier this year.

“I can confirm what was quoted was delivered in February and the payments came from the Solomon Star,” said Terry Mays, business development manager of G2 Systems Print Supply Division, the Brisbane, Australia, based supplier named in the proposal.

The Solomon Star funding is just one part of a regional push to get China’s message out in the Pacific Islands, as well as build relationships with the region’s elites, reporters have found.

Earlier this month, OCCRP reported on an aborted deal in the northern Pacific nation of Palau involving the publisher of the country’s oldest newspaper and a Chinese business group with links to national security institutions.

Bernadette Carreon and Aubrey Belford report for the Organised Crime and Corruption Reporting Project (OCCRP). OCCRP is funded worldwide by a variety of government and non-government donors. OCCRP’s work in the Pacific Islands is currently funded by a US-government grant that gives the donor zero say in editorial decisions.

A five-day Media, Elections and Democracy workshop wrapped up last week in the Marshall Islands capital Majuro with the first-ever Summit on Democracy: Public Engagement, Communications and the Media.

More than 40 students, journalists and public information officers from government and NGOs participated in the programme organised by the Pacific Media Institute in the Marshall Islands.

The workshop featured an experienced team of Pacific Island journalist trainers and resource people led by Honolulu-based writer and photographer Floyd K. Takeuchi.

• READ MORE: Other media and democracy reports

Nearly 20 journalists and college students from the Marshall Islands participated in a morning track of the workshop, while close to 30 PIOs from the Marshall Islands, Kiribati, Nauru, Federated States of Micronesia and Palau took part in an afternoon workshop track.

The workshop focused on learning to “write tight”, with techniques such as haiku (a Japanese poetic writing style) and the four-paragraph story employed.

Numerous special presentations were offered during the lunch hours, including:

• How media organisations support independent journalism and what they’ve accomplished in Tonga and the Solomon Islands, led by Kalafi Moala, president of the Media Association of Tonga, and Georgina Kekea, president of the Media Association of the Solomon Islands.

• Domestic violence and prevention initiatives, led by Kathryn Relang, Country Focal Officer, Marshall Islands, Human Rights and Social Development Division, Secretariat of the Pacific Community (SPC).

• Teieniwa Vision for Journalists: Anti-Corruption Reporting Toolkit for Journalists, led by Rimon Rimon, investigative journalist, Kiribati.

The workshop culminated in an all-day Summit on Democracy at the government’s International Conference Center.

It featured speeches by Marshall Islands President David Kabua and Nitijelā (Parliament) Speaker Kenneth Kedi, both of whom said they supported the summit concept from the time that Pacific Media Institute sought their endorsement early this year.

The Office of the Speaker co-sponsored the summit with Pacific Media Institute.

Guest speaker was Kalafi Moala who spoke about “Independent news media and traditional leadership: Can they live together?”

Each day of the workshop, including the summit, workshop participants, individually and in small groups, had writing assignments they delivered to the team of Pacific media trainers for review and editing.

Donor partners supporting the Media and Democracy workshops and Summit on Democracy include: AusAID, Republic of China/Taiwan Embassy in Majuro, USAID PROJECT Governance that is managed by the East-West Center and SPC, UN Office on Drugs and Crime, Pacific Anti-Corruption Journalists Network, New Zealand North Pacific Development Fund, and the Pacific Islands Forum Secretariat.

Giff Johnson is editor of the Marshall Islands Journal and co-founder of the Pacific Media Institute in Majuro.

Two Pacific nations considered by Washington as crucial in its competition with China for influence in the region have agreed to 20-year extensions of funding arrangements as part of security and defence treaties.

The Federated States of Micronesia signed off on a nearly-final Compact of Free Association on Monday with US Presidential Envoy Joseph Yun, followed by Palau on Wednesday.

Both documents are expected to be formally signed later this month, ending two years of negotiations.

• READ MORE: PNG’s Marape confident of pulling off PNG-US defence pact in spite of leak
• Other US defence reports

However, the Marshall Islands, the third North Pacific nation with a Compact, is unlikely to sign primarily because of outstanding issues surrounding the US nuclear testing legacy in the country.

The FSM will reportedly receive US$3.3 billion and Palau US$760 million over the 20-year life of the new funding agreements, according to US officials.

Yun was due to visit the Marshall Islands capital Majuro this week to discuss the situation further.

But the situation in the Marshall Islands appeared murkier than ever.

“The RMI (Republic of the Marshall Islands) looks forward to reaching an agreement soon with the US,” Marshall Islands Chief Negotiator and Foreign Minister Kitlang Kabua said on Wednesday.

Doubtful over new Compact
It is unclear at this stage when the two governments will reach agreement on a new 20-year deal, despite Kabua and Yun having initialled a memorandum of understanding in January that spelled out the amounts of funding to be provided to RMI over 20 years.

That would bring in US$1.5 billion and an additional US$700 million related to the nuclear weapons test legacy.

Yun acknowledged the situation with the Marshall Islands telling Reuters it was “doubtful” that the US and Marshall Islands would sign off on the Compact before he departs from Majuro this weekend.

At least one member of the Marshall Islands Compact Negotiation Committee said he was in the dark as to next steps.

“I really have no idea what is the game plan here,” he said.

In a widely-circulated email on the eve of Yun’s visit, Arno Nitijela (parliament) member Mike Halferty said there had been no involvement of the atoll of Arno and the majority of islands in the nation in developing the Compact.

“There is no report on the Compact negotiations for us to understand the situation,” he said. He objected to the exclusion of Arno and other islands from participation, saying the people of Arno are Marshallese like the people involved in the talks with the US.

‘Let people decide own fate’
“If we are truly a democracy, we should have had (a vote on Compact Two) and should now let the people vote to decide their own fate,” he said.

Reuters cited an unnamed “senior US official” who said the discussion between the US and RMI “is no longer about the amount of money but … about how the money will be structured and how it will be spent and what issues it will cover.”

Kitlang Kabua’s comments to the Marshall Islands Journal tended to confirm this analysis: “The RMI has matters tabled in the negotiations that are unique to our bilateral relationship with the US.

“These matters include the nuclear legacy, the communities affected by the US military operations and presence in-country, and the existential threat of climate change,” she said.

“We are also keen on strengthening processes to facilitate the RMI working jointly with the US, without jeopardising accountability and transparency, to utilise resources for areas of priorities as deemed by the RMI government’s strategic plan and other planning documents for the future.”

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

A group of former leaders of Pacific island nations have condemned the AUKUS security pact saying it is “bringing war much closer to home” and goes against the Blue Pacific narrative.

The deal between Australia, the United States and the United Kingdom will see Canberra forking out billions of dollars over the next three decades to acquire a fleet of nuclear submarines.

In a swinging criticism of the agreement, the Pacific Elders’ Voice, which includes former leaders of Kiribati, the Marshall Islands, Tuvalu and Palau, said Australia was deliberately exploiting a loophole in the Pacific’s nuclear-free agreement — the Rarotonga Treaty — which permits the transit of nuclear-powered craft such as submarines.

• READ MORE: AUKUS ‘going against’ Pacific nuclear free treaty – Cook Islands leader
• Other Pacific Elders’ Voice reports

“AUKUS signals greater militarisation by joining Australia to the networks of the US military bases in the northern Pacific and it is triggering an arms race, by bringing war much closer to home,” the Pacific elders said in a statement.

“Not only does this go against the spirit of the Blue Pacific narrative, agreed to all [Pacific Islands] Forum member countries last year, it also demonstrates a complete lack of recognition of the climate change security threat that has been embodied in the Boe and other declarations by Pacific leaders.”

The group stated that the “staggering” amount of money committed to AUKUS “flies in the face of Pacific islands countries, which have been crying out for climate change support”.

“The fact that not even a significant fraction of this figure is available for the region to deal with the greatest security threat shows a complete lack of sensitivity to this key Pacific priority in Canberra, London, Paris and Washington,” they wrote.

They also raised concerns about New Zealand’s ambitions to join the trilateral security deal, saying the forum should discourage Aotearoa from joining the “military alliance”.

“We are urging the Pacific Island Leaders to take a decisive and ethical stand on this important matter and not to be subsumed by the AUKUS nations. This does not only put our region at greater risk of a nuclear war but the real environmental impacts arising out of any incidents will be huge,” they said.

Pacific security threatened by ‘climate change’ — not China
One of the spokespeople for the Pacific Elders’ Voice, former Kiribati president Anote Tong told RNZ Pacific it was disappointing that Australia — as a founding forum member — was ready to commit more than $3 billion for military expansionism.

Australia is also a signatory to the 2050 Strategy for the Blue Pacific, which is the strategy that underscores the climate crisis as the region’s single greatest security threat.

“In the Pacific, we have always been saying loud and clear that the greatest challenge to our security has been climate change. It has always always been at the top of the agenda,” Tong said.

“We understand that the security priorities of the AUKUS partners is different from our priority, but at least we also have the existing arrangements in the region with respect to nuclear.”

Australia, Tonga said, was more concerned about the geopolitics when it came to concerns about security.

But for Pacific islands “security is what is the threat that we see challenging our future existence and it is climate change,” he said.

“It is not China or what is happening on the other side of the world.”

The recent attempts by the Australian government to reassure regional leaders that AUKUS would not breach the Rarotonga agreement demonstrated the lack of consultation on Canberra’s part, according to the former Kiribati leader.

“The consultations are taking place [now], but if that had taken place before all of this had happened it would have removed all of these concerns. If we all understood what it involves [and] I am sure if Pacific leaders were happy with it and the region feels that here is no threat to the existing [security] arrangement then we would have no opposition to what is going on.”

‘Australia’s got to step up’
Tong said Australia needed to “step up as a part of the Pacific family”.

He said anytime that a major decision, like AUKUS, was made all Pacific nations must be consulted.

“We have known what has happened in the past when some countries have felt left out so we could have fragmentation,” he said, referencing the Solomon Islands security pact with China which was condemned by other Pacific countries for the lack of consultation on Honiara’s part.

“We do not want to repeat it. We all have an interest in what goes on in our Blue Pacific. It has to be an every-way process, not just a one-way process.”

But while the former leaders group, the forum, and several regional leaders have expressed strong opposition, a few have publicly supported Australia’s plans — including Fiji Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka and Palau’s President Saurengal Whipps Jr.

President Whipps told RNZ Pacific in an interview that as part of peace and security “you also have to have the capability of deterrence”.

“We support what Australia has done because we believe that it is important that Australia is ready and is prepared to defend the Pacific,” he said.

He said Oceania’s largest economy was the first to assist its smaller neighbours with illegal, unreported and unregulated (IUU) fishing and maritime security.

“Australia is doing its part in making sure that we protect freedom and democracy and peace, provide peace and security in the region is important.”

President Whipps said Palau had held seven referendums to amend its constitution to allow the US to transmit nuclear submarines or vessels through its waters because it was about peace and security.

“Now, should they be testing nuclear? Or dumping nuclear waste in our waters? No, we do not agree to that,” he said.

“But we also understand that nuclear energy is something that you need. It powers aircraft carriers or powers, submarines, it powers power plants, and it’s clean energy.

“We need to continue to discuss and put everything into context as to where we are and how we can all do our part and make any increase in peace and security in the region.”

‘We will not acquire nuclear weapons’ – Australia
Last week, Vanuatu’s Climate Change Minister Ralph Regenvanu appealed in a tweet for Australia to assure its island neighbours that the nuclear submarines under the AUKUS agreement would not carry nuclear weapons.

Australia has signed up to the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW), a UN agreement that includes an unequivocal obligation for non-nuclear States Parties such as Australia to never acquire nuclear weapons.

“The Australian government has confirmed unequivocally that we do not seek, and will not acquire nuclear weapons,” a Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade spokesperson told RNZ Pacific.

“This reflects Australia’s existing international legal obligations under the TPNW and the South Pacific Nuclear Free Zone Treaty (SPNFZ), both of which we ratified decades ago.”

The spokesperson said the Australian government had reaffirmed that it would continue to meet in full its obligations under the TPNW and the SPNFZ Treaty.

“Australia has underscored the above position with Pacific governments, particularly during consultative engagements on AUKUS over the past 18 months.

“The Australian government shares the ambition of TPNW States Parties of a world without nuclear weapons.

“It is committed to engaging constructively to identify possible pathways towards nuclear disarmament and to an ambitious agenda to advance nuclear non-proliferation and disarmament,” the DFAT spokesperson added.

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

The Pacific Islands Forum (PIF) is now “a family reconciled” as its leaders have reaffirmed their commitment to reforms to strengthen the regional body.

Stepping back into the fold, Kiribati President Taneti Maamau inked the final signature on the Suva Agreement ending two years of uncertainty and marking the start of a new chapter for Pacific solidarity.

“In unity we will surely succeed,” Maamau told RNZ Pacific.

• READ MORE: Other Pacific Islands Forum reports

“We have a duty as a Pacific family to keep us together and to meet the challenges together,” he added.

The reforms deemed “non-negotiables” include the endorsement of Micronesian candidates for certain regional roles and the establishment of two sub-regional offices in the north Pacific.

The result is Nauru’s former president, Baron Waqa, is set to become the next PIF secretary-general starting in 2024.

Current Forum Deputy Secretary-General Filimon Manoni, a Marshall Islander, will become the Pacific Ocean Commissioner hosted in Palau, and Kiribati will be home to the PIF sub-regional office in Micronesia.

Australia and New Zealand have agreed to foot the bill and committed to “transitional funding of NZ$3 million towards the operationalisation of the Suva Agreement” over the next three years.

“The fracture is now history,” outgoing PIF Secretary-General Henry Puna said.

“We have all collectively decided to move on and today we have cemented that . . . we are not looking back at all,” Puna said.

A range of other issues were also discussed by the leaders, such as Japan’s plans to release over a million tonnes of treated nuclear wastewater into the Pacific Ocean.

“Forum leaders reaffirmed the importance of science and data to guide the political decisions on the proposed discharge,” the final communique for the 5th Forum Special Leaders Retreat stated.

They also agreed – in response to increased geopolitical tensions in the region – to establish a permanent representation at the UN and in Washington in the form of a PIF special envoy to the United States to “report back to Leaders at the 52nd Pacific Islands Forum Leaders Meeting in the Cook Islands.”

Fiji passes baton to Cook Islands
Fiji Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka said he was “pleased to be able to contribute” towards the final outcomes of the Nadi meeting.

“As I hand over the baton, I know that we are in good hands as we paddle our drua (canoe) to achieve our collective aspirations,” said Rabuka in his final statement as outgoing Forum chair.

The chairmanship has been transferred to the Cook Islands which will host the 52nd PIF summit later this year.

Cook Islands Prime Minister Mark Brown has promised to keep the region’s “unity intact”.

Brown said that while the main challenges in the Suva Agreement had been overcome with the allocation of offices within the region, “resourcing and financing” were issues that would need attention.

“We have to thank the governments of Australia and New Zealand for providing that support for the next three years,” he said.

“But I would expect that there will be more work done by officials to actually finalise what the financing requirements will be as negotiations will take place for costs and resources.”

The final member of the Forum Troika and next in line for chair is Tonga.

Other decisions
Other decisions set out in the communique included:

• PIF leaders pledging their support for Australia’s joint bid to host COP31 alongside Pacific countries.
• Support for a draft resolution to the UN General Assembly seeking an advisory opinion from the International Court of Justice on climate change and human rights.

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

Whistleblower Owen Wilkes was a tireless and formidable researcher for the Pacific, peace and disarmament. Before the internet, he combed publicly available sources on weapons systems and defence strategy.

In 1968, he revealed the secretive military function of a proposed satellite tracking station in the South Island, and while working in Sweden he was charged with espionage and deported after photographing intriguing but publicly visible installations.

In a new book about his life, Peacemonger, edited by May Bass and Mark Derby, Nicky Hager writes about Wilkes’ research techniques:

Owen Wilkes was an outstanding researcher, a role model of how someone can make a difference in the world by good research. But how did he actually do it? Owen managed to study complex subjects such as Cold War communications systems, secret intelligence facilities and foreign military activities in the Pacific.

There are many important and useful lessons we can learn from how he did this work. The world needs more public interest researchers, on militarism and other subjects. Owen’s self-taught research techniques are like a masterclass in how it is done.

• READ MORE: Other reports about Owen Wilkes and Peacemonger

Lots of information isn’t secret, just hard to find
Owen worked for many years, sitting at his large desk at the Peace Movement office in Wellington, researching the military communications systems set up to launch and fight nuclear war. How was this possible?

We are a bit conditioned currently to imagine the only option would be leaked documents from a whistleblower. The first secret of Owen’s success is that he had learned that large amounts of information on these subjects can be found and pieced together from obscure but publicly available sources.

The heart of his research method was long hours spent poring over US government records and military industry magazines, gathering the precious crumbs of detail like someone panning for gold.

Behind the large desk were shelves and shelves of open-topped file boxes, each with a cryptic title. These boxes were full of photocopied documents and handwritten notes from his researching. This may all sound very pre-internet; indeed it was largely pre-digital.

But what Owen was doing would today be called “open source” research and his work is far superior to that carried out by many people with Google and other digital tools at their fingertips. Probably his favourite source of all was a publicly available US defence magazine called Aviation Week and Space Technology. The magazine (now online) is written for military staff and arms manufacturers, keeping them informed about developments in weapons, aircraft and “C3I” systems, which stands for Command, Control, Communications and Intelligence systems: one of Owen’s main areas of speciality.

The magazine also covered Owen’s speciality of “space based” military systems, such as military communication and surveillance satellites. In Owen’s files, which can be viewed at the National Library in Wellington, Aviation Week and Space Technology appears often. In a file box called USA Space Systems is a clipping from 1983 about the US Air Force awarding a contract for a ballistic missile early warning system (nuclear war-fighting equipment). The article revealed that the early warning system would be based at air force bases in Alaska, Greenland and Fylingdales, England — three clues about US foreign military activities.

By reading and storing away details from numerous such articles, spanning many years, Owen built up a more and more detailed understanding of military and intelligence systems.

The other endlessly useful source Owen used was US Congress and Senate hearings and reports about the US military budget. This is where each year the US military spells out its military construction plans, new weapons, technology programmes and the rest; often with figures broken down to the level of individual countries and military bases.

Senior military officials appear at hearings to explain the threats and strategies that justify the spending. As with the military magazines, Owen systematically mined these reports year after year for interesting detail.

He was especially keen on the US Congress’ Committee on Appropriations, Subcommittee on Military Construction Appropriations. His files on US antisatellite weapons, for instance, contain a document from this subcommittee about new Anti-Satellite System Facilities (project number 11610) based at Langley Air Force base, Virginia. It had been approved by the president in the renewed Cold War of the mid-1980s to target Soviet satellites. Details like this were pieces in a 1000-piece jigsaw puzzle.

When he was based at the Peace Movement Aotearoa office in Wellington, from 1983 until about 1992, Owen spent long hours at the US Embassy library studying the Military Construction Appropriations and other US government documents. Each year the library received copies of the documents as microfiche (microphotos of each page on a film). Owen was a familiar visitor, hunched over the microfiche reader making notes and printing out interesting pages.

Many times this gave the first clue of construction somewhere in the world, pointing to that country hosting some new US military, nuclear or intelligence activity. The annual US military appropriation information is available to a researcher today. In fact it is now more easily accessed since it is online. But, if anything, Owen’s pre-digital techniques make it clearer how this research is done well. It’s a good reminder that the best sources of information are most often not in the first 10 or 20 hits of a Google search, the point where many people stop looking.

Experience and persistence
An important ingredient in all these methods is persistence. The methods usually work best if, like Owen, a researcher sticks at them over time. Sticking at a subject means you start to recognise names and places in an otherwise boring document, appreciate the significance of some fragment of information and understand the big picture into which each piece of information fits.

Someone who reads deeply and studies a subject over a number of years can in effect become, like Owen, an expert. They may, like him, have no formal university qualifications. But they can know more about their subject than nearly anyone else, which is a good definition of an expert. They recognise the names and places and appreciate the significance of new evidence.

A textbook example of this was when Owen returned to New Zealand in the early 1980s and went to see a recently discovered secret military site near the beach settlement of Tangimoana in the Manawatu.

Owen, who had spent years studying secret bases around the world, was the New Zealander most likely to know what he was looking at. There, on one side of the base, was a large circle of antenna poles: a CDAA circularly-disposed antenna array. It instantly told him the Tangimoana facility was a signals intelligence base. It had the same equipment and was part of the same networks as the bases he had studied in Norway and Sweden.

Ensuring his research was noticed
The purpose of Owen’s work was to make a difference to the issues he researched. A final and vital part of the work was getting attention for the findings of his research. Owen often spoke in the news and he wrote about the issues he was studying. Research, writing and speaking up are essential ingredients in political change. The part of this he probably enjoyed most was travelling and speaking in public to interested groups.

During the 1980s, he had major speaking tours to countries including Japan, the Philippines, Australia and Canada (and often around New Zealand). During these trips he would present information about military and intelligence activities in those countries. A 1985 trip to Canada, which he shared with prominent Palau leader Roman Bedor, was typical. He was in Canada for seven weeks, speaking in most parts of the country and numerous times on radio and television.

One of the things he emphasised was that Canadians, as residents of a Pacific country, should be thinking about what was going on in the Pacific. One of Owen’s recurrent themes was the importance of being aware of the Pacific.

The final ingredient of a good researcher is caring about the subjects they are working on. This can be heard clearly in everything Owen wrote about the Pacific. He described the Pacific being used for submarine-based nuclear weapons and facilities used to prepare for nuclear war. He talked about the big powers using the Pacific as the “backside of the globe”, epitomised by tiny Johnston Atoll west of Hawai’i where the US military does “anything too unpopular, too dangerous and too secret to do elsewhere”.

He talked about things that were getting better: French nuclear testing on the way out; chemical weapons being destroyed. But also the region being used as a site for great power rivalry; and, under multiple pressures, the small Pacific countries being at risk of becoming “more repressive, less democratic”. He cared, and that was at the heart of being a public-interest researcher for decades.

Many of the problems he described are still occurring today. More research, more good research, on these issues and many others is crying out to be done.

• An extract from Peacemonger – Owen Wilkes: International Peace Researcher, edited by May Bass and Mark Derby. Published by Raekaihau Press in association with Steele Roberts Aotearoa. This article was first published by Stuff and is republished with the book authors’ permission. David Robie is one of the contributing authors.
  

After two weeks of negotiations at the United Nations’ Climate Change Conference (COP27) talks at an Egyptian resort, it is now down to the wire.

Diplomats have created proposals on the controversial loss and damage agenda that will be decided upon by politicians.

Robust discussions at the resort town of Sharm el-Sheikh have seen many collaborations and discord resulting in negotiators not reaching agreement on funding that would see vulnerable countries compensated for climate change-fuelled disasters caused by developed nations.

• READ MORE: ‘Loss and damage’ negotiations dominate COP27’s final day as talks run past deadline
• Other COP27 reports

A key milestone was reached on Friday morning (New Zealand time), when the European Union shifted its position to support the G7 and China which includes Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS) and the Pacific.

The EU along with the United States pushed back this agenda as it feared being put on the hook for payments of billions of dollars for decades or even centuries to come.

However, developing nations and their allies have been able to stir up support, with major voting in favour for the set up of a loss and damage facility. Australia has chosen to keep the discussion open while the US maintained an isolated position, showing no flexibility.

Now, there are three options on the table for politicians to agree upon and they were due to be debated over the next few hours.

Climate change with Al Jazeera.

The Pacific’s call
The Pacific through the G7 and China has stressed the urgency of establishing a loss and damage framework at this COP.

Samoa Prime Minister Fiamē Naomi Mata’afa today called on the nations to place the same level of global urgency as seen for the covid-19 pandemic to meeting the 1.5 Celsius degree pathway.

Fiame said more action was needed on upscaling ambition on funding for loss and damage and must remain firmly on the table as nations continued to witness increasing occurrences and severity of climate change impacts everywhere.

Option one also entails need for loss and damage to be a separate funding from adaptation and mitigation.

Fiji’s Permanent Representative to the UN, Satyendra Prasad, explained there were gaps in trying to conflate the funding intended for other purposes with compensation as they were not the same thing.

Prasad said vulnerable people in the Pacific “are facing the loss of livelihoods, of land and of fundamental cultural and traditional assets”. These were non-economic losses that could not be compensated through adaptation and mitigation funds.

Financial support for loss and damage must be additional to adaptation funding but also differently structured. Option one calls for existing funding pledges to be made operational in the interim for vulnerable nations.

Short notice funding
Pacific’s Adviser for Loss and Damage Daniel Lund said when responding to damage caused by extreme weather events, finance needed to be available at short notice.

Lund added that current funding available was for project-based support under the Green Climate Fund which took around one year from proposal submission to receiving the first disbursement of funds,

“Something like that doesn’t work when the loss and damage are immediate.”

Republic of Palau’s Minister of State, Gustav Aitaro, in his address to world leaders, said, “every time we have a typhoon, we have to shift funds and budgets allocated for breakfast for students to address the damage. We have to shift funds from our hospital to address the damage, and it becomes such a big burden for us to look for funds to replace that.”

He pleaded with parties to understand the Pacific’s situation as it was a matter of life and death and their very existence depended on it.

“How do I explain to young kids in Palau, the children who live on that atoll, that their homes have been damaged by typhoons and we have to rebuild them over again and again? If they ask me why is it a recurring situation, what do I tell them? Who do we blame?

“Our islands, our oceans are our culture, it’s our identity in this world. I’m sure our developing countries share the same concerns and this is why we are asking them to help.”

Kicking the can down the road
Australia and the US have put forward options two and three for consideration. They propose a soft power influence.

They are proposing more time be given to iron out the finer details to establish a loss and damage finance in COP28 and operationalise the funding by COP29 in 2024.

The Sydney Morning Herald reported Climate Change and Energy Minister Chris Bowen as saying: “The world is unlikely to come to an agreement at COP27 over contentious calls for wealthy nations to pay loss and damage compensation to developing countries.”

He said: “Let’s just see how the internal discussions go. But I mean, I doubt very much it’ll be a full agreement on that at this COP.”

The two countries who have spent time in the wilderness of climate diplomacy, have also proposed developed nations continue to tap into climate funding made available through bilateral and multilateral arrangements.

This proposal also suggests that any funding made available for vulnerable states can be channelled through developed nation governments, proposing it does not need to be faciliated by a governing body like the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change.

The Pacific feels this is problematic. Pacific negotiator Sivendra Michael explained: “This is volatile as it depends on the government of the day.”

Finding a way for more capital
Time reports US climate envoy John Kerry as saying: “We have to find a way for more capital to flow into developing countries.”

Kerry added: “I think it’s important that the developed world recognises that a lot of countries are now being very negatively impacted as a consequence of the continued practice of how the developed world chooses to propel its vehicles, heat its homes, light its businesses, produce food.

“Much of the world is obviously frustrated.”

While the US allowed loss and damage finance to be added to the meeting’s formal agenda for the first time, it took the unusual step of demanding that a footnote be included to exclude the ideas of liability for historic emitters or compensation for countries affected by that pollution.

World leaders will now spend the next few hours deciding on which option to take on loss and damage finance.

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

The 51st Pacific Forum Leaders (PIF) Meeting starting today has been dealt a major blow after the Kiribati government confirmed it has withdrawn from the forum “with immediate effect”.

RNZ Pacific has seen a copy of a leaked letter, dated July 9, from Kiribati President Taneti Maamau to the forum’s Secretary-General Henry Puna, in which he expresses concerns over the regional body’s leadership, as well as the Suva Agreement signed last month.

According to the leaked communication, Kiribati did not sign up to the now-controversial deal, which was touted to mend the leadership rift and prevent the Micronesian subregion to split from the region’s premier political institution.

• READ MORE: Other Pacific Islands Forum reports

“We established a reform package that contains commitments that deepen trust and political cohesion across our region,” Fiji Prime Minister Voreqe Bainimarama had said after the conclusion of a special two-day meeting with three Micronesian leaders and the leaders of Cook Islands and Samoa in June.

“Fiji fully supports its [Suva Agreement] adoption at the next Pacific Islands Forum,” Bainimarama, also forum chair, said.

But in the letter to Puna, President Maamau states: “There was never a Micronesian Presidents’ Summit (MPS) caucus decision on the PIF reform packages that Kiribati was part of, and particularly an MPS collective decision to return to the PIF.”

The Kiribati president also requested for the forum to push out the date of the leaders convening so it would not coincide with their National Day celebrations. However, this was not considered.

RNZ Pacific understands forum officials are now working behind the scenes to convince the Kiribati government to reconsider its decision and urgently fly them over for the high-level meeting in Fiji’s capital.

RNZ has contacted the Forum Secretariat for comment.

Bringing the ‘family together’
Pacific leaders have attempted to bring the “family together” and resolve the political impasse for months, but there appears to be an apparent fracture within the forum.

Last week, New Zealand Foreign Minister Nanaia Mahuta, who is confirmed to be attending the meeting in Suva headed by Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern, said the forum was “at the heart of our engagement with the region”.

Mahuta welcomed the Suva Agreement and calling it “the Pacific-led solution that will see Micronesian states represented at the forum this year.”

But the latest turn of events indicates Pacific Forum leaders are scrambling to find a swift resolution ahead of the opening of one of the most significant leaders’ meetings in recent history starting tomorrow.

A diplomatic source close to RNZ Pacific said Puna must address the issues raised by Kiribati as there were concerns about the role of the secretary-general being a matter of “pride”.

The Suva Agreement
Tension between the Micronesian states and the office of the secretary-general of the PIF has been high since the Micronesian candidate for the top job narrowly missed out to Puna.

But the situation had been improving following the High-Level Political Dialogue which resulted in the Suva Agreement on June 6.

The agreement engineered by forum chair Bainimarama was tweaked by PIFS senior officials meeting earlier last week and approved by the Forum Foreign Ministers on Friday to be tabled for sign off at the Leaders Retreat on Thursday.

In the Suva Agreement, the secretary-general’s term is to be extended from three to five years and Puna would continue till 2024.

Then, unlike every other previous secretary-general in recent times, he is to step down without seeking re-election to make way for a Micronesian candidate.

Current Marshallese Ambassador to the United States and dual Palauan citizen Gerald Zackios was the Micronesian state’s nominee to the position of the forum secretary-general at the last vote of the Leaders Retreat in Tuvalu in 2019.

Also in the agreement is the induction of recruitment procedures for the top job to formalise the “Gentlemen’s Agreement” so the job rotates among the three sub-regions.

To ensure equal representation, an additional deputy secretary-general position is to be created and filled by other candidates to ensure each region can be represented all the time in the Forum Secretariat.

Additionally, Micronesia has asked that the Office of the Pacific Ocean Commissioner (OPOC), a position also held by the PIFS secretary-general and housed in Suva, is to be moved to a Micronesian state along with a new forum sub regional office.

The other major CROP agency, the Pacific Community, has a Micronesian regional office in Pohnpei.

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

Palau, Fiji, and Samoa have announced their opposition to deep-sea mining, calling for a moratorium on the emerging industry amid growing fears it will destroy the seafloor and damage biodiversity.

The alliance was announced just as a United Nations Oceans Conference began in Portugal this week.

The moratorium comes amid a wave of global interest in deep-sea mining despite environmental groups and governments urging to ban it or ensure it only goes ahead if regulations are in place.

• LISTEN TO RNZ PACIFIC WAVES: Phil McCabe speaks to Koroi Hawkins

The alliance between Palau, Fiji, and Samoa was made by Palau’s President Surangel Whipps Jr at an event co-hosted by the Deep Sea Conservation Coalition and the World Wildlife Fund as part of a side event at the United Nations Ocean Conference in Lisbon.

It comes after Vanuatu declared its opposition to deep-sea mining with Chile announcing support for a 15-year moratorium earlier this month, joining the Federated States of Micronesia, Fiji, and Papua New Guinea who have already taken steps against deep-sea mining.

The Pacific liaison for the Deep Sea Conservation Coalition Aotearoa, Phil McCabe, said a moratorium would prevent or slow the process of mining activity.

“It’s a pause on no more exploration licences being issued, no exploitation meaning no actual mining licenses being granted and not yet adopting or agreeing to the rules around how this activity might go ahead.”

Standing ovation
The Pacific leaders were given a standing ovation for their stance against deep-sea mining.

McCabe said the issue of mining was the most engaging topic at the event.

Surangel Whipps asked: “How can we in our right minds say ‘let’s go mining’ without knowing what the risks are?”

McCabe said Pacific leaders discussed the important role the ocean had in the region.

“The deep-sea mining issue, it seems like it’s the hottest topic here at the Ocean conference, there was a real heart space discussion around in the Pacific our relationship with the ocean and this activity just really attacking the base of that relationship — just inappropriate.

“And the leaders were acknowledged and there was a standing ovation,” he said.

Greenpeace Aotearoa campaigner James Hita is calling the new alliance “absolutely monumental” and said now was the time for the New Zealand government to take a strong stand on the issue.

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

The global community needs to “be inspired” to defend the world’s oceans ahead of the second United Nations Oceans Conference in Lisbon at the end of the month, a Fijian policymaker says.

Fisheries Minister Semi Koroilavesau said the Pacific could not protect its greatest resource through advocacy and action on its own.

Safeguarding the ocean and its resources against future dangers “to make it truly sustainable” will require the “entire world” to show more commitment, Koroilavesau said.

• READ MORE: Other Blue Pacific articles

A former Navy commander and a self-professed marine advocate, he believes Pacific people’s future will be secured if “we will take whatever actions we must take”.

There are “enormous challenges before us and we need to turn our hopes into genuine ambition” to boost ocean action in the Blue Pacific, he told participants attending the World Oceans Day celebrations in Suva on Wednesday.

“As stewards of the Ocean, our task is to lead, to be a beacon of Blue leadership that inspires the world to turn away from the model of development that harms our ocean and threatens to strip off our life given resources,” he said.

This year’s theme for the international day — marked annually on June 8 — is “Revitalisation: Collective Action for the Ocean”.

Collaboration called for
Koroilavesau said it calls for “wider commitment” and urged stakeholders to collaborate to realise the changes necessary to protect the ocean.

“Our shared commitment towards collaboration will inspire and ignite actions that will certainly benefit us and our future generations,” he said, adding “the health and wellbeing of the Pacific Ocean and “the state of our climate are an interconnected system.”

The Pacific Ocean spans approximately 41 million square kilometres and is a fundamental part of the livelihoods and identity of the Pacific people.

Pacific Islands Forum Secretariat (PIFS) deputy director-general Dr Filimon Manoni said the ocean was at the heart of the region’s geography and its cultures.

“It’s all we have…[and] all we return to in times of need, either for daily sustenance, for economic development, and nation building aspirations,” Dr Manoni said.

“We are inextricably linked to the ocean in all aspects of our everyday life.”

The ocean is home to almost 80 percent of all life on Earth. But its state is in decline, as it faces a range of threats due to human activity.

Critical year for the ocean
“Its health and ability to sustain life will only get worse as the world population grows and human activities increase,” the United Nations has said.

This year 2022, therefore, is regarded as a critical year for the ocean and an opportunity to reset the global ocean agenda at the Portugal conference.

This week, regional stakeholders gathered in Suva during the fourth Pacific Ocean Alliance (POA) meeting convened by the Office of the Pacific Ocean Commissioner (OPOC) to prepare for the UN conference.

The gathering was scheduled to align with the World Oceans Day to drive regional and global awareness of the region’s priorities for global ocean action, according to OPOC.

Over two days, the alliance aimed to identify the collective priorities for ocean action and approaches to drive global support.

Ocean’s Commissioner and Pacific Islands Forum Secretary-General Henry Puna said “much has evolved” since the last time the Alliance met in 2019, prior to the covid-19 pandemic.

Puna said the region now finds itself “in a much more contested and challenging environment…faced with heightened geostrategic competition” as it “navigates the impacts of a global pandemic”.

Ocean health still suffers
“Yet the health of our ocean and indeed our planet continues to suffer as a result of climate change and other anthropogenic depressions,” he said.

“This challenging context will place significant pressure on our ability to realise our political and sustainable development aspirations.”

Several high-level ocean-related events have already been held this year with the Our Ocean Conference in Palau in April and the One Ocean Conference hosted by France in May.

Puna is expecting the conversations held during the POA meeting will strengthen the Pacific’s collective vision to conserve and sustainably use the world’s oceans and marine resources.

“I am hopeful that this gathering of the POA will provide an opportunity for us all to share our experiences and reflect on how we can work together, how we can collaborate and engage better, and how we can do more to ensure the health and survival of our ocean,” he said.

The UN Oceans Conference will be held from June 27 to July 1.

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

In a watershed moment, Pacific Islands Forum leaders have agreed on terms to prevent Micronesian countries from breaking up the leading regional body.

The row, which came to a head in February last year, centred around the selection of a candidate for the top job at the Forum, with Micronesia feeling snubbed when its candidate Gerald Zackios was overlooked for the former Cook Islands Prime Minister Henry Puna.

The high level political dialogue was held in-person in the Fiji capital Suva yesterday.

• READ MORE: Pacific leaders talk Micronesia, China and regional stability, security
• Other Pacific Islands Forum reports

It was hosted by Fiji’s Prime Minister Voreqe Bainimarama, the current chair of the Forum and attended by the leaders of Palau, the Federated States of Micronesia, Samoa and the Cook Islands.

To outsiders looking in, the Forum row over an executive position might have looked a bit silly.

But it was about more than just a job title.

As the president of Palau Surangel Whipps Jr explains it, it was a feeling on the Micronesians part of being excluded from the day to day business of the Forum and by extension the region as a whole.

‘Let us look long term’
“Micronesia said the SG (Secretary-General) is supposed to be Micronesian. But what is more important is, let us look long term.”

And it is that long term vision that clinched the deal for the Micronesians in Suva.

They came in wanting Puna out and were offered to have the rotation of the top job by sub-region put into writing and become a permanent fixture of the Forum going forward.

“By the Forum agreeing that now we are going to put it in writing. It is going to be rotational we are going to be more inclusive at the head office, have deputies that represent the region, and sub-regional offices and the other the oceans commissioner all those add to being inclusive.”

Samoa’s Prime Minister Fiame Naomi Mataafa is new at the helm and was not part of the events that led up to the rift. But she said she was pleased to be part of the solution.

“We need to go through the process of all the members signing up, but those of us who are here, six of us, I think are representative of the three sub-regions and hopefully we will be able to implement what has been proposed and agreed to,” she said.

Clock still ticking
This is a crucial detail. The clock is still ticking towards when the formal withdrawal processes initiated by the five disgruntled Micronesian states last year becomes official. RNZ Pacific understands the first of them matures at the end of this month.

That being said, it is still a huge break through and one Federated States of Micronesia President David Panuelo said he was grateful for.

“Because just a few days a go it could have been that we will walk away and break up the entire Pacific Family but the common ground that we have reached has kept us together,” he said.

Both Panuelo and Whipps Jr acknowledged the mediation of Pacific Islands Forum chair Voreqe Bainimarama and the Troika plus members and all other leaders involved in the political dialogue leading up to this juncture.

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

Regional stability and security, and the China Economic and Security Deal were on the agenda today when some Pacific leaders met in Suva, Fiji, a Micronesian head of the Pacific’s regional political body says

Several Pacific Island heads of state, including at least three from the Micronesian states, have arrived in Fiji for two days of meetings called by Fijian Prime Minister Voreqe Bainimarama.

As chair of the Pacific Islands Forum(PIF), Bainimarama is positioned to call meetings of the Pacific Troika which includes current, incoming and immediate past chairs of the Forum.

• READ MORE: China loses its way in the South Pacific – Michael Field
• Other China in the Pacific reports

This usually takes place ahead of the Pacific Forum Leaders Meeting which this year will take place in July.

The heads of the governments of Palau and the Federated States of Micronesia confirmed the Troika would meet with the Micronesian Presidents’ Summit (MPS) in the second of The Political Dialogue Mechanism, an initiative to allow for open conversation between PIF leaders.

When it last sat last year, the Political Dialogue Mechanism sought to address tensions within the PIF after the Micronesia President’s Summit threatened to pull out its membership of the forum, threatening regional stability for the first time.

The President of Federated States of Micronesia David Panuelo told RNZ Pacific in Suva, that the Micronesian leader’s main agenda was the tension over the way Micronesia was denied what long-standing regional tradition owed them, the seat of Secretary-General of the PIFS.

‘Nothing really being resolved’
“This is exactly why we’re here and talks are ongoing, and nothing is really being resolved but we’re actively discussing this. This is a very good trip for our Micronesian brothers. Meetings are ongoing and today we will continue to discuss how we can get the best in terms of uniting and promoting regionalism,” President Panuelo said.

“We’re all optimistic until, without ruling out any possibilities. I think we are optimistic. Let’s look forward to a successful conclusion of our ongoing meetings.”

Meanwhile, President of Palau Surangel Whipps Jr said the two-day meeting would be the first time since the pandemic that Pacific leaders could meet in person, which made it an “opportunity to invest” in good dialogue.

The Palauan president said Micronesian states had made clear their stance on the SG’s position and hoped the leader’s meeting would “come up with a solution where we can all walk away from it with good understanding and rebuilding of that trust.”

“Well, I’m optimistic because we’re here. And we have the opportunity to sit down and discuss and find the best way forward,” he said

Palau, which like most of the Micronesian states has diplomatic relations with Taiwan instead of China, hopes the Political Dialogue Mechanism would provide the space for Pacific leaders to “really share each other’s concerns and try to find a way forward where we can all be the winners.”

Micronesian states believe the Pacific Islands Forum as a political bloc was built on values of trust and mutual respect which needed rebuilding, implying the fragmentation created by tension over the SG’s position is further threatened by the emergence of China’s plan for its presence in the Pacific.

‘Regaining trust, respect’
“I think what’s most important is regaining that trust and mutual respect among the Micronesians and the rest of the forum. That’s what’s most important. How do we rebuild that? That’s the question and I think that’s what the discussion over the next few days is going to be about,” Whipps Jr said.

Micronesian leaders are concerned over the wording in China’s proposed Pacific Economic Security deal leaked ahead of Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi’s visit late last month.

“We are friends to everyone and enemies to none but we also lived through World War Two. When we see documents that say, you know, certain countries need to be taken or taken back, it brings us back to the time of where we were all involved in World War Two and we don’t want to relive that,” Whipps Jr said.

“We are peaceful countries and we want to live in peace and harmony. That’s the value of the forum. It’s the Pacific coming together and sharing the same values and I think we all want peace and prosperity in the region.”

Samoan Prime Minister Fiamē Naomi Mataʻafa has also arrived in Fiji for the meeting and the opening of a new Samoan High Commission in Suva.

Cook Islands Prime Minister Mark Brown is also in Fiji and opened a new high commission in the Fijian capital.

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

This week’s White House meeting between NZ Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern and US President Joe Biden reflected a world undergoing rapid change. But of all the shared challenges discussed, there was one that kept appearing in the leaders’ joint statement — China in the Pacific.

Tucked within the statement, with all its promises of increased co-operation and partnership, was this not-so-subtle declaration:

In particular, the United States and New Zealand share a concern that the establishment of a persistent military presence in the Pacific by a state that does not share our values or security interests would fundamentally alter the strategic balance of the region and pose national-security concerns to both our countries.

Unsurprisingly, this upset Chinese officials, with a foreign ministry spokesperson accusing Ardern and Biden of trying to “deliberately hype up” the issue.

• READ MORE: Amplifying narratives about the ‘China threat’ in the Pacific may help China achieve its broader aims
• New Zealand has just joined an overtly anti-China alliance – are the economic risks worth it?
• Saying China ‘bought’ a military base in the Solomons is simplistic and shows how little Australia understands power in the Pacific

But hopefully the statement will also prompt New Zealand to put its money where its mouth is when it comes to increasing assistance in the Pacific region. Expressing “concern” about China’s influence means little otherwise.

Aid and influence

While New Zealand and Australia are responsible for around 55 percent of all of the aid flowing into the region, that contribution needs to be seen in perspective.

There are two obvious shortcomings. First, more needs to be done to promote democracy in the Pacific, which means supporting anti-corruption initiatives and a free press. Second, both countries simply need to give more.

Neither spends anywhere near the 0.7 percent of gross national income on development assistance recommended by the United Nations (UN).

The high-tide mark for both was long ago: 0.52 percent for New Zealand in 1975 and 0.48 percent for Australia in 1967. Today, New Zealand spends 0.26 percent and Australia 0.21 percent of their incomes on overseas aid.

It is against this backdrop of under-spending that China has come to be seen as an attractive alternative to the traditional regional powers. It has no colonial baggage in the Pacific and is a developing country itself, having made impressive leaps in development and poverty reduction.

Pacific Islanders snub China by rejecting security pact https://t.co/Mv217iuSx2

— FT China (@ftchina) May 30, 2022

Debt and distress
Many of the small developing island states in the Pacific share common challenges and vulnerabilities: negative migration patterns, risk from climate change and fragile economies.

Three states in the region (Kiribati, Solomon Islands and Tuvalu) are in the UN’s “least developed countries” category. Two others (Samoa and Vanuatu) are just above the threshold. Most are at high risk of debt distress, increasing the risk of poor policy decisions simply to pay bills.

The average debt-to-GDP ratio for Pacific states has risen from 32.9 percent in 2019 to 42.2 percent in 2021. Vanuatu, Palau and Fiji have debt-to-GDP ratios greater than 70 percent.

China currently accounts for only about 6 percent of all aid in the region, but supplements this with grants and loans, some commercial and some interest-free. These overlap with grand infrastructure plans such as the Belt and Road Initiative aimed at connecting many regions of the world.

While it might not have secured its desired regional multilateral trade and security agreement with Pacific nations, China is clearly in the Pacific for the long haul.

Working with China
This presence need not be seen entirely negatively. In the right circumstances, Chinese assistance can have a positive impact on economic and social outcomes in recipient countries, according to the International Monetary Fund. (The same study also found a negative but negligible effect on governance.)

Overall, Chinese influence in the Pacific is not necessarily something that must be “countered”. For the good of the region, countries should seek ways to work together, especially given that aid to the Pacific is often fragmented, volatile, unpredictable and opaque.

Co-ordinated, efficient and effective partnerships between donors, recipients and regional institutions will be vital, and co-operation with China could be part of this.

New Zealand and Australia need to expand their work on the vast infrastructure and development needs of the Pacific. Transparency should be a priority with all projects and spending, and co-operation should be tied to shared benchmarks such as the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals.

For its part, China should give more aid rather than loans (especially to the least developed countries) to avoid the risk of poor countries becoming beholden to lenders or even bankrupted.

Chinese Ambassador’s warning to NZ: Getting into ‘exclusive circles’ could lead to ‘unmitigated disasters’ https://t.co/tjK9a2jCg4

— Newshub Politics (@NewshubPolitics) June 1, 2022

Peace and security
Above all, peace and security between and within countries should be an agreed fundamental principle. The good news is that South Pacific nations have already taken steps towards this by agreeing to the Nuclear Free Zone Treaty.

This could be complemented by an agreement banning foreign military bases in the region to maintain its independence. If needed, peacekeeping or outside security assistance should be multilateral through the UN, not bilateral through secret arrangements.

Co-operation for the good of the Pacific should be the goal, but this is only possible if the region is not militarised.

Chinese influence and power in the Pacific is a reality that cannot be wished away or easily undermined. With the US similarly determined to assert itself, the stakes are rising.

All nations should work together to ensure no small, independent Pacific country becomes a pawn in what could be a very dangerous game.

Dr Alexander Gillespie, professor of law, University of Waikato. This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons licence. Read the original article.

An Aotearoa New Zealand-based Fijian professor of Pacific studies says the increase in the frequency of natural disasters and land erosions, and rising ocean temperatures means new terminology is now needed to reflect how drastic the environmental challenges have become.

Professor Steven Ratuva, who is the co-leader for a New Zealand-government supported research project called Protect Pacific, said the term “climate change” doesn’t fully address the impacts seen throughout the Pacific and elsewhere globally.

Dr Ratuva, director of the Macmillan Brown Centre for Pacific Studies at the University of Canterbury, said it was time to shift away from saying climate change.

• READ MORE: Other climate crisis reports

“The word climate change has been around for some time, people have been using it over and over again,” he said.

“Of course climate changes, it’s naturally induced seen through weather, but the situation now shows it’s not just changing, but we’re reaching a level of a crisis — the increasing number of category five cyclones, the droughts, the erosion, heating of the ocean, the coral reefs dying in the Pacific, and the impact on people’s lives.

“All these things are happening at a very fast pace.

“So the words climate change do not address the dramatic changes taking place so we need another new way of framing it so the term climate crisis is being used now because we are right in the middle of it.”

Protect Pacific is a research project looking at climate crisis across the Pacific region and is led in partnership with the University of Canterbury, the University of the South Pacific and the New Zealand government.

At the recent Oceans Conference in Palau, New Zealand Minister Aupito William Sio announced that his government will allocate US$3 million to the project which Dr Ratuva said would mostly go towards research to be carried out across 16 Pacific islands.

The research project would be mainly led by the Pacific, for the Pacific and Dr Ratuva said it was an opportunity for the Pacific to finally participate in a study that took into account their lived experiences.

However, he added that the Pacific’s heavy dependence on aid had meant the region had had to look elsewhere for climate expertise rather than relying on their own indigenous knowlege.

Dr Ratuva said aid had not allowed the Pacific to express their independence fully.

“The pattern of economic development, the pattern of governance, the pattern of doing things, has always been reliant on aid donors — they define what has to be done with the money.

“Often the Pacific climate policies are driven by the international narratives from the United Nations, from the various aid donors so it’s important that the evidence should be generated within the Pacific using our own expertise.”

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

“Of course climate changes […] but we’re reaching a level of a crisis – the increasing number of category five cyclones, the droughts, the erosion, heating of the ocean, the coral reefs dying in the Pacific, and the impact on people’s lives.” https://t.co/RqeBq44RkG

— RNZ Pacific (@RNZPacific) May 6, 2022

At the closing of the Our Ocean conference in Palau the co-hosts announced that 410 commitments had been made by various, countries, civil society, and industry valued at $US16.35 billion.

The two-day conference was held in the Pacific region for the first time.

Palau President Surangel Whipps Jr and the US Special Presidential Envoy for Climate, John Kerry, closed the conference. Each of them praised those attending for the commitment to protect the ocean.

• READ MORE: Other Our Ocean reports

“Our goal this week was to shine a light on what is happening to our ocean and to make real commitments about real actions and not just words,” Kerry said.

The Palauan president said that the conference was truly a global event, with more than 500 delegates from 80 plus nations.

The Assistant Secretary of State for Oceans and International Environmental and Scientific Affairs at the Department of State, Monica P. Medina, said that since the launch of the Our Ocean conference in 2014 it had ” generated over 1400 commitments valued at more than $US90 billion, that’s not including the commitments made at the 2022 conference”.

“Over the years, leaders around the world have protected more than 5 million square miles of ocean — that’s an area larger than the United States and Palau combined,” she said.

NZ commits US $6 million at Our Ocean conference
The Minister for Pacific Peoples and Associate Minister of Foreign Affairs, Aupito William Sio, and FFA Director-General, Dr Manumatavai Tupou-Roosen, announced at the Our Ocean conference that the New Zealand government would commit to a US$3.4 million partnership with the Pacific Islands Forum Fisheries Agency (FFA).

Aupito said fishing was a major big asset in the region, for example in Tokelau, 81 percent of its non-aid money came from fishing.

He said New Zealand’s financial commitment to the FFA was for 4 years.

Increasing jobs and economic benefits from the Pacific’s offshore fisheries is the focus of the partnership.

New Zealand also committed US$3 million towards climate change assessment. The funds will go to the University of the South Pacific and the University of Canterbury.

The next Our Ocean conference will be in Panama in 2023.

RNZ Pacific’s manager Moera Tuilaepa-Taylor is covering the conference in Palau. Her trip was made possible by the US State Department. This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

Global climate talks have started in Glasgow, Scotland, but most Pacific leaders cannot get there.

While the leaders of four Pacific nations are attending the United Nations’ COP26 summit, covid travel restrictions are preventing the leaders of 10 Pacific nations from attending with their delegates.

Cook Islands Prime Minister Mark Brown is one, and he said it was verging on hypocrisy that Pacific countries are denied a voice unless they attend in person.

• READ MORE: COP26: World gathers amid calls to avert climate disaster
• Other Pacific COP26 stories
• Watch on Twitter

“I would have been committed to go to Glasgow as one of the climate change champions for finance for the Pacific, but the situation, of course, with the outbreak in New Zealand – the travel restrictions meant that I could possibly be locked out of my own country for a period of time that wasn’t acceptable,” he said.

Brown said COP26 organisers should allow virtual voting.

“We’ve come through two years of attending virtual meetings with the covid situation, the inability to travel.”

Brown said the Cook Islands’ Europe-based representative would go to COP26 while he and his team would be pushing their climate messages hard from home.

Four Pacific leaders attending
Leaders from Papua New Guinea, Fiji, Tuvalu and Palau are attending the summit.

But covid-19 travel restrictions have grounded the leaders of 10 Pacific nations — the Cook Islands, Federated States of Micronesia, Kiribati, Solomon Islands, Vanuatu, Tonga, Samoa, Nauru, Marshall Islands, and Niue.

Meanwhile, travellers heading to Glasgow have been left stranded by major rail disruption caused by “intense storms”.

Hundreds of people were left waiting at London’s Euston station after fallen trees caused all trains to be suspended.

At the G20 summit in Rome, which would up on Monday morning, the leaders of the world’s richest economies have agreed to pursue efforts to limit global warming with “meaningful and effective actions”.

But the agreement made few concrete commitments, disappointing activists.

‘Little sense of urgency’
Oscar Soria, of the activist network Avaaz, said there was “little sense of urgency” coming from the group, adding: “There is no more time for vague wish-lists, we need concrete commitments and action.”

Host nation Italy had hoped that firm targets would be set before COP26.

British Prime Minister Boris Johnson said leaders’ promises without action were “starting to sound hollow”.

“These commitments… are drops in a rapidly warming ocean,” Johnson said.

The G20 group, made up of 19 countries and the European Union, accounts for 80 percent of the world’s emissions.

The communiqué, or official statement released by the leaders, also makes no reference to achieving net zero by 2050.

Net zero means reducing greenhouse gas emissions until a country is absorbing the same amount of emissions from the atmosphere that it is putting out.

Italian Prime Minister Mario Draghi did, however, say in his closing statement that all of the G20 countries are committed to reaching the target by the mid-century.

Scientists have said this must be achieved by 2050 to avoid a climate catastrophe, and most countries have agreed to this.

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

And of course, Australia’s scientists have long, long, long been demanding urgent climate action. Here is one of the billion or so expert calls for the Australian federal government to act responsibly on climate: https://t.co/k4XY01E9uV

— David Ritter (@David_Ritter) October 31, 2021

Fiji Islands Prime Minister Voreqe Bainimarama is the current Chair of the 18-member Pacific Islands Forum. Addressing the UN General Assembly virtually on September 25, he called on the global community to embrace Fiji’s vision of a “better, greener, bluer and safer future for humanity”.

The United Nations report to the UN General Assembly this year is titled “Our multilateral challenges: UN 2:0”, a Common Agenda the blueprint for a future that is better, greener, and safer—and I would humbly add, “bluer”.

We want that future for Fiji. We want islands inhabited by citizens who stand with nature and not against it. We want sustainable economic growth that is powered by clean energy and protected from the impacts of climate change.

We want robust and resilient health systems, and we want good jobs and income supported by a green and blue economy. To succeed, our vision must become the vision of humanity, because our fate is the world’s fate.

• READ MORE: Fiji PM challenges world leaders to commit to climate action at COP26
• Facebook misinfo is hurting PNG, Marape tells UN
• Samoa’s PM highlights climate threat to oceans at UN
• Micronesian countries urge Taiwan involvement at UN
• WATCH: Bainimarama speaks at the UN General Assembly

The world’s present course leads nowhere near the future we want for ourselves. A deadly pathogen is burning through humanity like a bushfire—and inequity is fanning the flames. This year alone, climate-driven floods, heatwaves, fires, and cyclones have killed hundreds and inflicted unsustainable economic damage.

We humans are the cause, but we are refusing to become the solution.

The UN Secretary General’s recommendations in “Our Common Agenda” are spot on. We must meet this moment with a new UN—a new energy, new resources, and new bonds of trust with the people this institution serves.

A new UN that empowers those on the margins of society—particularly women and girls—and brings them into the centre of global decision-making.

Two pandemics
In the past year, it has become clearer that we face two pandemics—one that is ending for the wealthy nations and one that is worsening across much of the developing world. That widening chasm can be measured in lives lost and in years of economic progress undone.

Across the Global South, what the world once branded as “sustainable development” is unravelling before our eyes. Hundreds of millions of jobs have been lost, hundreds of millions of people cannot access adequate food, and an entire generation has had their education disrupted.

The wounds of this crisis will cripple us for years if left untreated.

Leaders who cannot summon the courage to unveil these commitments and policy packages at COP26 should not bother booking a flight to Glasgow. Instead, they—and the selfish interests they stand for—should face consequences that match the severity of what they are unleashing on our planet.

— Fiji Prime Minister Voreqe Bainimarama

Fiji’s experience shows how an equitable recovery can begin. It starts by getting jabs in arms, fast. After one full year with zero local covid cases, the insidious delta variant crept into our country and sparked a deadly second outbreak.

After a slow start while we scrambled to acquire enough vaccines, we are winning the battle.

Over 98 percent of adults across our 110 populated islands have [had] one jab of the vaccine, and more than 67 percent are fully vaccinated. We thank India, Australia, New Zealand and the United States for helping us secure the doses we needed.

Our mission now is to recover the more than 100,000 jobs lost to the pandemic and to recoup a 50 percent loss in government revenues. Soon, Fiji will reopen to tourism and to regional and international business.

Victory over the virus
We will look to accelerate investment trends, like increased digitisation, that will modernise our economy and help it recover.

But Fiji’s victory over the virus will be short-lived unless the global community can accelerate vaccinations everywhere. It is appalling that wealthier countries are already considering third doses or boosters for their citizens while millions of people—including frontline healthcare workers—in the developing world cannot access a single dose.

Globally, thousands of lives are still being lost every day to the virus. The majority represent our collective failure to make vaccines available to developing countries.

Vaccine nationalism must end. The G7, G20, and multilateral financial institutions have failed to stop it. Only the UN can fill this void of leadership.

I join other leaders in calling on the UN to convene an urgent special meeting of leaders to agree to a time bound, costed, and detailed plan for the full vaccination of developing countries.

Vaccine inequity is a symptom of a much larger injustice, one that is inherent to the international economic system. This injustice is the unequal distribution of finance, or access to finance, that can fuel a recovery.

While wealthy nations have propped up their economies by printing and investing trillions at near zero interest rates, developing nations—particularly small states—have had to borrow at punitive rates to simply keep our people alive, fed, and healthy.

Cash transfer programme
Through the pandemic, my government rolled out the largest cash transfer programme in our history—providing hundreds of millions of dollars in unemployment benefits to nearly one-third of Fiji’s adult population.

We even expanded some of our social protection programmes, including pensions for the elderly, and financial support for the differently abled and other vulnerable communities.

The alternative was mass destitution, which we would not accept. But to pay for it, we had to take on debt, precipitated by massive reduction in government revenue.

We need a more innovative framework for development finance that recognises the unique needs of SIDS (Small Island Developing States). And we must adopt a more sophisticated framework of assessing debt sustainability that incorporates the urgency of building resilience and breaks free of the norms of the 20th century.

This pandemic has been a painful lesson about where unilateral action can lead and where our multilateral institutions are unwilling to go. We must find new frontiers of co-operation if we stand any chance of averting future pandemics—or staving off the worst of climate change.

If small states are to build back greener, bluer, and better, we will need an equal voice about and vote on decisions that determine our future. Small states need our interests heard, understood, and acted upon.

Despite all the talk we hear of saving the planet, the world’s collective commitments are paltry. Akin to spitting into the strengthening winds of climate-fuelled super-storms.

Frequent devastation
The climate is on track for 2.7 degrees Celsius of global warming, which would ensure the loss of entire low-lying nations in the Pacific and huge chunks of global coastlines. It guarantees frequent devastation from floods, cyclones, coastal inundations, and wildfires.

It spells climate-driven conflict, mass migration, and the collapse of food systems and ecosystems. It is appalling. It is unimaginable. But it is where we are headed.

Since March 2020, Fiji has experienced three cyclones—two of which approached category five intensity. Fijians are strong people. We endured much, and we will endure more still. But I am tired of applauding my people’s resilience. True resilience is not just defined by a nation’s grit but by our access to financial resources.

Today, SIDS are able to access less than 2 per cent of the available climate finance. To build a truly resilient Fiji, we need access to fast-deploying targeted grants, long-term concessionary financing and financial tools and instruments established through public-private collaboration and partnership.

The Fijian economy depends on a healthy ocean and so we are taking bold strides to reverse its current decline. We have committed to 100 percent sustainable management of EEZ (Exclusive Economic Zone) and 30 per cent declared as marine protected areas by 2030.

We are expanding investments in sustainable aquaculture, seaweed farming, and high-value processed fish.

But we cannot do this alone. We look to the global system to stop illegal, unreported, and unregulated fishing. We look to UN member states to agree to a new treaty to preserve marine in waters beyond national jurisdictions.

Pacific mission in Glasgow
In one month, we meet in Scotland for a hugely consequential COP. The Pacific’s mission in Glasgow is clear: we must keep the 1.5 target alive.

This demands drastic emissions cuts by 2030 that put large nations on a path towards net-zero emissions before 2050.

Leaders who cannot summon the courage to unveil these commitments and policy packages at COP26 should not bother booking a flight to Glasgow. Instead, they—and the selfish interests they stand for—should face consequences that match the severity of what they are unleashing on our planet.

We do not tolerate war between states. So, how can we tolerate war waged against the planet, on the life it sustains, and on future generations? That is the firm red line Pacific nations will draw in Glasgow. We are demanding net-zero emissions and accepting zero excuses.

At COP26, the global north must finally deliver on US$100 billion a year in climate finance and agree to a pathway to increase financing commitments to at least $750 billion a year from 2025 forward.

If we can spend trillions on missiles, drones, and submarines, we can fund climate action. It is criminal that vulnerable Pacific Small Island Developing States can access a mere 0.05 percent of the climate finance currently available to protect ourselves from an existential crisis we did not cause.

These are the challenges we face, and we must find the courage to face them squarely. The consequences of not doing so are simply unthinkable.

Published in partnership with IDN-InDepthNews.

Four Micronesian leaders skipped the Pacific Islands Forum’s 51st virtual session yesterday, in a continuing protest over the organisation’s refusal to assign the leadership post to the subregion as previously agreed.

Fiji Prime Minister Voreqe Bainimarama’s official apology proved not convincing enough to break the impasse and appease the Micronesian leaders.

The Micronesian nations — Palau, Marshall Islands, Federated States of Micronesia, Kiribati and Nauru — declined to reconsider their collective decision to exit from the regional body if the gentleman’s agreement was not honoured.

• READ MORE: ‘We’re sorry,’ Pacific Forum chair tells Micronesia over SG post
• Climate, covid and co-ordination: Forum leaders hold online summit
• Pacific Islands Forum

Nauru President Lionel Aingimea, chair of the Micronesian Presidents’ Summit (MPS), was the only leader from the breakaway group who attended today’s meeting, where PIF discussed a planned in-person leaders’ retreat scheduled for 2022.

In a statement issued after the meeting, Aingimea said Micronesian leaders “are standing on the principles of the Mekreos Communique” and “are not attending the retreat”.

“The Mekreos Communique articulates that if the long-standing gentlemen’s agreement is not honoured, then the Micronesian presidents see no benefit in remaining with PIF,” Aingimea said.

The Mekreos Communique is a declaration signed by Palau, FSM, Marshall Islands, Nauru and Kiribati in 2020.

Micronesians support Zackios
The Micronesian leaders maintain that their candidate, Ambassador Gerald M. Zackios, must assume the secretary-general position in line with the gentlemen’s agreement’ for sub-regional rotation.

“Presidents agreed that the solidarity and integrity of the PIF are strengthened by the gentlemen’s agreement, that this issue is one of respect and Pacific unity, and that it is non-negotiable for the Member States. Presidents agreed that in the ‘Pacific Way’, a ‘gentlemen’s agreement’ is an agreement, and if this agreement is not honoured, then the presidents would see no benefit to remaining in the PIF,” the Mekreos Communique stated.

Nauru, FSM, RMI and Palau commenced the process for withdrawal from the PIF in February 2021 and will take effect by February 2022.

The 51st Pacific Islands Forum Leaders virtual meeting today also coincided with the 50th Anniversary of the Pacific Islands Forum.

Nauru is a founding member of the Forum, along with six others — Australia, Cook Islands, Fiji, New Zealand, Tonga and Western Samoa (now Samoa).

Tuvalu Prime Minister Kausea Natano handed over as Forum Chair to host leader of the 51st Pacific Islands Forum, Fiji Prime Minister Voreqe Bainimarama.

Bainarama welcomed Secretary-General Henry Puna and said they were looking forward to working with him.

Samoan PM welcomed
Bainarama also welcomed Samoa’s new Prime Minister Fiamē Naomi Mata-afa to the meeting.

While the forum celebrates 50 years of milestones, it is also facing a crisis with the looming fracture of the regional body.

Bainarama apologised anew to the Micronesian head of states over the PIF secretariat leadership row.

“To our Micronesian brothers, I offer my deepest apology, we could have handled the situation better, but I remain confident that we will find a way forward together,”

“I hope this meeting provides an avenue for frank dialogue,” Bainarama said.

He said he did not expect a resolution of the rift yesterday but he said the forum would continue dialogue with the Micronesian leaders.

“None of us can do this alone,” he said, and urged solidarity and to retain Pacific regionalism, especially on the issue of climate change and covid-19-related economic crisis.

Puna in his statement said the region was in the midst of “unprecedented challenges” of covid pandemic, climate change, and geopolitical interests.

He also cited the challenges the forum is facing among the members.

“Our bond as one forum family is being put to the extreme test,” Puna said.

But he was hopeful that the members would stay together with continued dialogue.