The head of the United Nations body mandated to develop regulations for seabed mining in international waters says Pacific countries are playing a big role in shaping the regulations that will govern the future industry.

International Seabed Authority (ISA) Secretary-General Leticia Carvalho was in Fiji last week conducting training for Pacific Island nations on what it means to be a sponsoring state of a potential seabed mining company.

There is great interest from the likes of China and the US in polymetallic nodules found on the deep seabed in parts of the Pacific Ocean’s international waters.

• READ MORE: Other seabed mining reports

These nodules are rich in minerals such as copper, cobalt and nickel. These metals are highly valued in modern tech — but it remains uncertain how damaging mining would be to the marine environment.

Carvalho told RNZ Pacific Waves the region was very important to the ISA process of developing rules for mining, given the strong country positions both for and against.

“Some of them are really close to the idea of mining in the deep sea outside of national jurisdiction. Others are very much attached to the environmental safeguards and cautious about this activity, therefore this region has a big role in shaping the regime.”

She said she respected the opposing views Pacific countries had on the potential future industry.

PIF representatives
In Fiji, she met with representatives of Pacific Islands Forum (PIF) member countries and civil society organisations.

She said these were sovereign positions and her role was not to judge but rather to facilitate dialogue.

“And that is why I am here for capacity building, training, bringing my team to support these countries to better understand how they can make decisions internally and how they can sit at the table with others to find consensus in the multilateral space.”

She also acknowledged there were some civil society complaints about exclusion from the training but she clarified that the list of participants was constructed based on the relevance of the subject matter.

“So this training was particularly formulated to get government officials more enlightened about the responsibilities and how to make deals with contractors and investors.”

Carvahlo said some representatives of civil society networks were present as observers but it was not possible to invite everyone.

Before she left Fiji, Carvahlo did meet with a group of civil society representatives. She said it was good for her to hear their concerns firsthand.

‘Still big gap’
“They still see a big gap in their participation and their voices to be heard in the decision making,” she said.

“It was very enlightening for me to see that there is still work to be done in this region to make that communities can really engage and shape and influence decision making.”

The ISA boss encouraged all Pacific Island countries, regardless of their stance on deep sea mining, to participate fully in the International Seabed Authority meetings to make use of this historic opportunity to develop the proper regulations for an industry before it actually begins.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

“More can be done.”

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

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

NZ govt ‘not ready to bring climate refugees’

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

However, the document is non-binding.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

“Political and ego manoeuvring” is happening behind the scenes at COP30 in Brazil, as Australia and Türkiye wrestle to host the United Nations climate event next year.

Pacific Islands Forum’s climate adviser Karlos Lee Moresi, who is at the talks in Belém, said the negotiations for who would host COP31 was tough.

“We have Australia with the Pacific very adamant that we need — not only do we want — we need to have a COP in the Pacific. The Türkiye position is they’re not giving up,” Moresi said.

• READ MORE: ‘Our land is not for sale’: Indigenous people protest at COP30 in Brazil
• Other COP30 reports

“In all honesty, there’s a bit of political and ego manoeuvring happening behind the scenes.”

Moresi said he thought Türkiye was trying to influence European countries to host the event.

He said as a last resort, and if COP is hosted in Türkiye, the Pacific would want something from Türkiye in response.

“It is not something that we’re really entertaining actively as an option to put forward on the table for now.”

10 years since Paris
COP30 began in Belém on Monday. It has been 10 years since the landmark Paris Agreement was signed.

In his opening speech at the conference, United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) executive secretary Simon Stiell said the science is clear, temperatures can be brought back down to 1.5C after any temporary overshoot.

“The emissions curve has been bent downwards because of what was agreed in halls like this, with governments legislating and markets responding, but I’m not sugarcoating it, we have so much more to go.”

The Pacific’s position throughout each COP — “1.5C to stay alive” — has not changed, along with improving access to climate finance.

Unique to this year’s summit is that it is the first time the world’s top court, the International Court of Justice’s advisory opinion, can be used as a negotiating tool.

The advisory opinion found failing to protect people from the effects of climate change could violate international law.

“In the context of the phrase ‘everyone has an opinion’, but is it an informed opinion, what we are saying is the ICJ that’s in the highest court is the most informed opinion on this issue.”

Solutions for children
Save the Children New Zealand youth engagement coordinator Vira Paky said she wants to see different parties working together on solutions designed for children and young people.

“We know that children and young people are disproportionately affected by climate change and we want to be on the frontlines to advocate for children and youth voices to be considered.”

Faiesea Ah Chee, one of the youth delegates with Save the Children, wants climate finance to be more accessible for the Pacific.

“I’ve seen how severe weather impact has impacted us and how there’s a lack of funding to help with adaptation and mitigation projects back home in the islands. So, hoping to get a clear vision and understanding of where we can get access to all this climate finance,” Chee, who grew up in Samoa, said.

While world leaders are meeting, rescue workers in Papua New Guinea are scrambling to relocate about 300 people living on unstable earth.

Papua New Guinea’s Wabag MP office spokesperson Geno Muspak said they live around the site of a deadly landslide that flattened houses while people slept inside.

He said it is clear to him the climate crisis is to blame.

“As times are changing the weather is not good for us, especially for people who are living in the remote places,” Muspak said.

The pointy end of COP 30 is still a while off, with the conference running until the end of next week.

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

When the Pacific Islands Forum concluded in Honiara last month, leaders pledged regional unity under the motto “Iumi Tugeda” — “We are Together”.

Eighteen Pacific heads of government reached agreements on climate resilience and nuclear-free oceans.

They signed the Pacific Resilience Facility treaty and endorsed Australia’s proposal to jointly host the 2026 COP31 climate summit.

• READ MORE: ULMWP alleges 15 civilians killed in West Papua military operation
• Other West Papua reports

However, the region’s most urgent crisis was once again given only formulaic attention. West Papua, where Indonesian military operations continue to displace and replace tens of thousands of Papuans, was given just one predictable paragraph in the final communiqué.

This reaffirmed Indonesia’s sovereignty, recalled an invitation made six years ago for the UN High Commissioner to visit, and vaguely mentioned a possible leaders’ mission in 2026.

For the Papuan people, who have been waiting for more than half a century to exercise their right to self-determination, this represented no progress. It confirmed a decades-long pattern of acknowledging Jakarta’s tight grip, expressing polite concern and postponing action.

A stolen independence
The crisis in West Papua stems from its unique place in Pacific history. In 1961, the West Papuans established the New Guinea Council, adopted a national anthem and raised the Morning Star flag — years before Samoa gained independence in 1962 and Fiji in 1970.

Papuan delegates had also helped to launch the South Pacific Conference in 1950, which would become the Pacific Islands Forum.

However, this path was abruptly reversed. Under pressure from Cold War currents, the Netherlands transferred administration to Indonesia.

The promised plebiscite was replaced by the 1969 Act of Free Choice, in which 1026 hand-picked Papuans were forced to vote for integration under military coercion.

Despite protests, the UN endorsed the result. West Papua was the first Pacific nation to have its recognised independence reversed during decolonisation.

Systematic blockade
Since the early 1990s, UN officials have been seeking access to West Papua. However, the Indonesians have imposed a complete block on any international institutions and news media entering.

Between 2012 and 2022, multiple UN high commissioners and special rapporteurs requested visits. All were denied.

More than 100 UN member states have publicly supported these requests. It has never occurred. Regional organisations ranging from the Pacific Islands Forum to the Organisation of African, Caribbean and Pacific States have made identical demands. Jakarta ignores them all.

International media outlets face the same barriers. Despite former Indonesian President Joko Widodo’s 2015 declaration that foreign journalists could enter Papua freely, visa restrictions and surveillance have kept the province as among the world’s least reported conflicts.

During the protests in 2019, Indonesia shut down internet access across the territory.
Indonesia calculates that it can ignore international opinion because key partners treat West Papua as a low priority.

Australia and New Zealand balance occasional concern with deeper trade ties. The US and China prioritise strategic interests.

Even during his recent visit to Papua New Guinea, UN Secretary-General António Guterres made no mention of West Papua, despite the conflict lying just across the border.

Bougainville vs West Papua
The Pacific’s inaction is particularly striking when compared to Bougainville. Like West Papua, Bougainville endured a brutal conflict.

Unlike West Papua, however, Bougainville received genuine international support for self-determination. Under UN oversight, Bougainville’s 2019 referendum allowed free voting, with 98 per cent choosing independence.

Today, Bougainville and Papua New Guinea are negotiating a peaceful transition to sovereignty.

West Papua has been denied even this initial step. There is no credible mediation. There is no international accompaniment. There is no timetable for a political solution.

The price of hypocrisy
Pacific leaders are confronted with a fundamental contradiction. They demand bold global action on climate justice, yet turn a blind eye to political injustice on their doorstep.

The ban on raising the Morning Star flag in Honiara, reportedly under pressure from Indonesia, has highlighted this hypocrisy.

The flag symbolises the right of West Papuans to exist as a nation. Prohibiting it at a meeting celebrating regional solidarity revealed the extent of external influence in Pacific decision-making.

This selective solidarity comes at a high cost. It undermines the Pacific’s credibility as a global conscience on climate change and decolonisation.

It leaves Papuans trapped in what they describe as a “slow-motion genocide”. Between 2018 and 2022, an estimated 60,000 to 100,000 people were displaced by Indonesian military operations.

In 2024, Human Rights Watch reported that violence had reached levels unseen in decades.

Breaking the pattern
The Forum could end this cycle by taking practical steps. For example, it could set a deadline of 12 months for an Indonesia-UN agreement on unrestricted access to West Papua.

If no agreement is reached, the Forum could conduct its own investigation with the Melanesian Spearhead Group. It could also make regional programmes contingent on human rights benchmarks, including ensuring humanitarian access and ending internet shutdowns.

Such measures would not breach the Forum’s charter. They would align Pacific diplomacy with the proclaimed values of dignity and solidarity. They would demonstrate that regional unity extends beyond mere rhetoric.

The test of history
The people of West Papua were among the first in Oceania to resist colonial expansion and to form a modern government. They were also the first to experience the reversal of recognised sovereignty.

Until Pacific leaders find the courage to confront Indonesian obstruction and insist on genuine West Papuan self-determination, “Iumi Tugeda” will remain a beautiful slogan shadowed by betrayal.

The region’s moral authority does not depend on eloquence regarding the climate fund, but on whether it confronts its deepest wound.

Any claim to a unified Blue Pacific identity will remain incomplete until the issue of West Papua’s denied independence is finally addressed.

Ali Mirin is a West Papuan academic and writer from the Kimyal tribe of the highlands bordering the Star Mountain region of Papua New Guinea. He holds a Master of Arts in international relations from Flinders University – Australia.

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.”

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.

A new report on the United States nuclear weapons testing legacy in the Marshall Islands highlights the lack of studies into important health concerns voiced by Marshallese for decades that make it impossible to have a clear understanding of the impacts of the 67 nuclear weapons tests.

The Legacy of US Nuclear Testing in the Marshall Islands, a report by Dr Arjun Makhijani of the Institute for Energy and Environmental Research, was released late last month.

The report was funded by Greenpeace Germany and is an outgrowth of the organisation’s flagship vessel, Rainbow Warrior III, visiting the Marshall Islands from March to April to recognise the 40th anniversary of the resettlement of the nuclear test-affected population of Rongelap Atoll.

• READ MORE: Legacy of US nuclear weapons tests in the Marshall Islands created global radiation exposure: new study
• Other Rainbow Warrior reports

Dr Mahkijani said that among the “many troubling aspects” of the legacy is that the United States had concluded, in 1948, after three tests, that the Marshall Islands was not “a suitable site for atomic experiments” because it did not meet the required meteorological criteria.

“Yet testing went on,” he said.

“Also notable has been the lack of systematic scientific attention to the accounts by many Marshallese of severe malformations and other adverse pregnancy outcomes like stillbirths. This was despite the documented fallout throughout the country and the fact that the potential for fallout to cause major birth defects has been known since the 1950s.”

Dr Makhijani highlights the point that, despite early documentation in the immediate aftermath of the 1954 Bravo hydrogen bomb test and numerous anecdotal reports from Marshallese women about miscarriages and still births, US government medical officials in charge of managing the nuclear test-related medical programme in the Marshall Islands never systematically studied birth anomalies.

Committed billions of dollars
The US Deputy Secretary of State in the Biden-Harris administration, Kurt Cambell, said that Washington, over decades, had committed billions of dollars to the damages and the rebuilding of the Marshall Islands.

“I think we understand that that history carries a heavy burden, and we are doing what we can to support the people in the [Compact of Free Association] states, including the Marshall Islands,” he told reporters at the Pacific Islands Forum leaders’ meeting in Nuku’alofa last year.

“This is not a legacy that we seek to avoid. We have attempted to address it constructively with massive resources and a sustained commitment.”

Among points outlined in the new report:

• Gamma radiation levels at Majuro, the capital of the Marshall Islands, officially considered a “very low exposure” atoll, were tens of times, and up to 300 times, more than background in the immediate aftermaths of the thermonuclear tests in the Castle series at Bikini Atoll in 1954.
• Thyroid doses in the so-called “low exposure atolls” averaged 270 milligray (mGy), 60 percent more than the 50,000 people of Pripyat near Chernobyl who were evacuated (170 mGy) after the 1986 accident there, and roughly double the average thyroid exposures in the most exposed counties in the United States due to testing at the Nevada Test Site.

Despite this, “only a small fraction of the population has been officially recognised as exposed enough for screening and medical attention; even that came with its own downsides, including people being treated as experimental subjects,” the report said.

Women reported adverse outcomes
“In interviews and one 1980s country-wide survey, women have reported many adverse pregnancy outcomes,” said the report.

“They include stillbirths, a baby with part of the skull missing and ‘the brain and the spinal cord fully exposed,’ and a two-headed baby. Many of the babies with major birth defects died shortly after birth.

New Caledonia has imposed a 50-year ban on deep-sea mining across its entire maritime zone in a rare and sweeping move that places the French Pacific territory among the most restricted exploration areas on the planet’s waters.

The law blocks commercial exploration, prospecting and mining of mineral resources that sits within Kanaky New Caledonia’s exclusive economic zone.

Nauru and the Cook Islands have already publicly expressed support for seabed exploration.

• READ MORE: Cook Islands environment group calls on govt to condemn Trump’s seabed mining order
• Other seabed mining reports

Sovereign island states discussed the issue earlier this year during last year’s Pacific Islands Forum, but no joint position has yet been agreed on.

Only non-invasive, scientific research will be permitted across New Caledonia’s surrounding maritime zone that covers 1.3 million sq km.

Lawmakers in the New Caledonian territorial Congress adopted a moratorium following broad support mostly from Kanak-aligned political parties.

“Rather than giving in to the logic of immediate profit, New Caledonia can choose to be pioneers in ocean protection,” Jérémie Katidjo Monnier, the local government member responsible for the issue, told Congress.

A ‘strategic lever’
“It is a strategic lever to assert our environmental sovereignty in the face of the multinationals and a strong signal of commitment to future generations.”

New Caledonia’s location has been a global hotspot for marine biodiversity.

Its waters are home to nearly one-third of the world’s remaining pristine coral reefs that account for 1.5 percent of reefs worldwide.

Environmental supporters of the new law argue that deep-sea mining could cause a serious and irreversible harm to its fragile marine ecosystems.

But the pro-French, anti-independence parties, including Caledonian Republicans, Caledonian People’s Movement, Générations NC, Renaissance and the Caledonian Republican Movement all planned to abstain from the vote the politically conservative bloc knew they could not win.

The Loyalists coalition argued that the decision clashed with the territory’s “broader economic goals” and the measure was “too rigid”, describing its legal basis as “largely disproportionate”.

“All our political action on the nickel question is directed toward more exploitation and here we are presenting ourselves as defenders of the environment for deep-sea beds we’ve never even seen,” Renaissance MP Nicolas Metzdorf said.

Ambassador’s support
But France’s Ambassador for Maritime Affairs, Olivier Poivre d’Arvor, had already asserted “the deep sea is not for sale” and that the high seas “belong to no one”, appearing to back the policy led by pro-independence Kanak alliances.

The vote in New Caledonia also coincided with US President Donald Trump signing a decree a week earlier authorising deep-sea mining in international waters.

“No state has the right to unilaterally exploit the mineral resources of the area outside the legal framework established by UNCLOS,” said the head of the International Seabed Authority (ISA), Leticia Carvalho, in a statement referring back to the United Nations’ Convention on the Law of the Sea.

Republished from the National Indigenous Times.

On April 24, 2025, Indonesia made a masterful geopolitical move. Jakarta granted Fiji US$6 million in financial aid and offered to cooperate with them on military training — a seemingly benign act of diplomacy that conceals a darker purpose.

This strategic manoeuvre is the latest in Indonesia’s efforts to neutralise Pacific support for the independence movement in West Papua.

“There’s no need to be burdened by debt,” declared Fiji Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka during the bilateral meeting at Jakarta’s Merdeka Palace.

• READ MORE: Indonesia gifts $12 million grant to Fiji
• Indonesia: Racism, discrimination against indigenous Papuans
• Russia-Indonesia: 75 years of cooperation in international affairs
• Other West Papua reports

More significantly, he pledged Fiji’s respect for Indonesian sovereignty — diplomatic code for abandoning West Papua’s struggle for self-determination.

This aligns perfectly with Indonesia’s Law No. 2 of 2023, which established frameworks for defence cooperation, including joint research, technology transfer, and military education, between the two nations.

This is not merely a partnership — it is ideological assimilation.

Indonesia’s financial generosity comes with unwritten expectations. By integrating Fijian forces into Indonesian military training programmes, Jakarta aims to export its “anti-separatist” doctrine, which frames Papuan resistance as a “criminal insurgency” rather than legitimate political expression.

The US $6 million is not aid — it’s a strategic investment in regional complicity.

Geopolitical chess in a fractured world
Indonesia’s manoeuvres must be understood in the context of escalating global tensions.

The rivalry between the US and China has transformed the Indo-Pacific into a strategic battleground, leaving Pacific Island nations caught between competing spheres of influence.

Although Jakarta is officially “non-aligned,” it is playing both sides to secure its territorial ambitions.

Its aid to Fiji is one move in a comprehensive regional strategy to diplomatically isolate West Papua.

While the world focuses on superpower competition, Indonesia is quietly strengthening its position on what it considers an internal matter — effectively removing West Papua from international discourse.

The Russian connection: Shadow alliances
Another significant yet less examined relationship is Indonesia’s growing partnership with Russia, particularly in defence technology, intelligence sharing, and energy cooperation

This relationship provides Jakarta with advanced military capabilities and reduces its dependence on Western powers and China.

Russia’s unwavering support for territorial integrity, as evidenced by its position on Crimea and Ukraine, makes it an ideal partner for Indonesia’s West Papua policy.

Moscow’s diplomatic support strengthens Jakarta’s argument that “separatist” movements are internal security issues rather than legitimate independence struggles.

This strategic triangulation — balancing relations with Washington, Beijing, and Moscow– allows Indonesia to pursue regional dominance with minimal international backlash. Each superpower, focused on countering the others’ influence, overlooks Indonesia’s systematic suppression of Papuan self-determination.

Institutionalising silence: Beyond diplomacy
The practical consequence of Indonesia’s multidimensional strategy is the diplomatic isolation of West Papua. Historically positioned to advocate for Melanesian solidarity, Fiji now faces economic incentives to remain silent on Indonesian human rights abuses.

A similar pattern emerges across the Pacific as Jakarta extends these types of arrangements to other regional players.

It is not just about temporary diplomatic alignment; it is about the structural transformation of regional politics.

When Pacific nations integrate their security apparatuses with Indonesia’s, they inevitably adopt Jakarta’s security narratives. Resistance movements are labelled “terrorist threats,” independence advocates are branded “destabilising elements,” and human rights concerns are dismissed as “foreign interference”.

Most alarmingly, military cooperation provides Indonesia with channels to export its counterinsurgency techniques, which are frequently criticised by human rights organisations for their brutality.

Security forces in the Pacific trained in these approaches may eventually use them against their own Papuan advocacy groups.

The price of strategic loyalty
For just US$6 million — a fraction of Indonesia’s defence budget — Jakarta purchases Fiji’s diplomatic loyalty, military alignment, and ideological compliance. This transaction exemplifies how economic incentives increasingly override moral considerations such as human rights, indigenous sovereignty, and decolonisation principles that once defined Pacific regionalism.

Indonesia’s approach represents a sophisticated evolution in its foreign policy. No longer defensive about West Papua, Jakarta is now aggressively consolidating regional support, methodically closing avenues for international intervention, and systematically delegitimising Papuan voices on the global stage.

Will the Pacific remember its soul?
The path ahead for West Papua is becoming increasingly treacherous. Beyond domestic repression, the movement now faces waning international support as economic pragmatism supplants moral principle throughout the Pacific region.

Unless Pacific nations reconnect with their anti-colonial heritage and the values that secured their independence, West Papua’s struggle risks fading into obscurity, overwhelmed by geopolitical calculations and economic incentives.

The question facing the Pacific region is not simply about West Papua, but about regional identity itself. Will Pacific nations remain true to their foundational values of indigenous solidarity and decolonisation? Or will they sacrifice these principles on the altar of transactional diplomacy?

The date April 24, 2025, may one day be remembered not only as the day Indonesia gave Fiji US$6 million but also as the day the Pacific began trading its moral authority for economic expediency, abandoning West Papua to perpetual colonisation in exchange for short-term gains.

The Pacific is at a crossroads — it can either reclaim its voice or resign itself to becoming a theatre where greater powers dictate the fate of indigenous peoples. For West Papua, everything depends on which path is chosen.

Ali Mirin is a West Papuan from the Kimyal tribe of the highlands that share a border with the Star Mountain region of Papua New Guinea. He graduated with a Master of Arts in international relations from Flinders University, Adelaide, Australia.

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.

The Pacific’s peak diplomatic bodies have signalled they are ready to engage with Papua New Guinea’s Autonomous Government of Bougainville as mediation begins on the delayed ratification of its successful 2019 independence referendum.

PNG and Bougainville’s leaders met in the capital Port Moresby this week with a moderator to start negotiations on the implementation of the UN-supervised Bougainville Peace Agreement and referendum.

Ahead of the talks, ABG’s President Ishmael Toroama moved to sideline a key sticking point over PNG parliamentary ratification of the vote, with the announcement last week that Bougainville would unilaterally declare independence on September 1, 2027.

• READ MORE: PNG and Bougainville to hold more talks on independence issue
• Other Bougainville reports

The region’s two leading intergovernmental organisations — Pacific Islands Forum (PIF) and Melanesian Spearhead Group (MSG) — have traditionally deferred to member state PNG on discussion of Bougainville independence as an internal matter.

But as a declaration of nationhood becomes increasingly likely and near, there has been a subtle shift.

“It’s their [PNG’s] prerogative but if this matter were raised formally, even by Bougainville themselves, we can start discussion on that,” PIF Secretary-General Baron Waqa told a press briefing at its headquarters in Fiji on Monday.

“Whatever happens, I think the issue would have to be decided by our leaders later this year,” he said of the annual PIF meeting to be held in Solomon Islands in September.

Marked peace deal
The last time the Pacific’s leaders included discussion of Bougainville in their official communique was in 2004 to mark the disarmament of the island under the peace deal.

Waqa said Bougainville had made no formal approach to PIF — a grouping of 18 Pacific states and territories — but it was closely monitoring developments on what could eventually lead to the creation of a new member state.

In 2024, Toroama told BenarNews he would be seeking observer status at the subregional MSG — grouping PNG, Fiji, Solomon Islands, Vanuatu and New Caledonia’s FLNKS — as Bougainville’s first diplomatic foray.

No application has been made yet but MSG acting Director-General Ilan Kiloe told BenarNews they were also keeping a close watch.

“Our rules and regulations require that we engage through PNG and we will take our cue from them,” Kiloe said, adding while the MSG respects the sovereignty of its members, “if requested, we will provide assistance” to Bougainville.

“The purpose and reason the MSG was established initially was to advance the collective interests of the Melanesian countries, in particular, to assist those yet to attain independence,” he said. “And to provide support towards their aim of becoming independent countries.”

The 2001 peace agreement ended more than a decade of bloody conflict  known as the Bougainville crisis, that resulted in the deaths of up to 15,000 people, and laid out a roadmap for disarmament and the referendum in 2019.

‘We need support’
Under the agreement, PNG retains responsibility for foreign affairs but allows for the ABG to engage externally for trade and with “regional organisations.”

“We need countries to support us, we need to talk to those countries [ahead of independence],” Toroama told BenarNews last September.

The referendum on independence was supported by 97.7 percent of Bougainvillians and the outcome was due to be ratified by PNG’s Parliament in 2020, but was deferred because of the covid-19 pandemic.

Discussions by the two parties since on whether a simple or two-thirds majority vote by parliamentarians was required has further delayed the process.

Toroama stood firm on the issue of ratification on the first day of discussions moderated by New Zealand’s Sir Jerry Mataparae, saying his people voted for independence and the talks were to define the “new relationship” between two independent states.

Last week, the 15 members of the Bougainville Leaders Independence Consultation Forum issued a statement declaring PNG had no authority to veto the referendum result and recommended September 1, 2027 as the declaration date.

“As far as I am concerned, the process of negotiating independence was concluded with the referendum,” Toroama said.

Implementation moderation
“My understanding is that this moderation is about reaching agreement on implementing the referendum result of independence.”

He told Marape “to take ownership and endorse independence in this 11th Parliament.”

PNG’s prime minister responded by praising the 25 years of peace “without a single bullet fired” but warned Bougainville was not ready for independence.

“Economic independence must precede political independence,” Marape said. “The long-term sustainability of Bougainville must be factored into these discussions.”

“About 95 percent of Bougainville’s budget is currently reliant on external support, including funding from the PNG government and international donors.”

Proposals to reopen Rio Tinto’s former Panguna gold and copper mine in Bougainville, that sparked its civil conflict, is a regular feature of debate about its economic future.

Marape also suggested people may be secretly harbouring weapons in breach of the peace agreement and called on the UN to clarify the outcome of the disarmament process it supervised.

“Headlines have come out that guns remain in Bougainville. United Nations, how come guns remain in Bougainville?” Marape asked on Monday.

“You need to tell me. This is something you know. I thought all guns were removed from Bougainville.”

PNG relies on aid
By comparison, PNG has heavily relied on foreign financial assistance since independence, currently receiving at about US$320 million (1.3 billion kina) a year in budgetary support from Australia, and suffers regular tribal violence and massacres involving firearms including assault rifles.

Bougainville Vice-President Patrick Nisira rejected Marape’s concerns about weapons, the Post-Courier newspaper reported.

“The usage of those guns, there is no evidence of that and if you look at the data on Bougainville where [there are] incidents of guns, it is actually very low,” he said.

Further talks are planned and are due to produce a report for the national Parliament by mid-2025, ahead of elections in Bougainville and PNG’s 50th anniversary celebrations in September.

Republished from BenarNews with permission.

Ongoing wars and conflict around the world expose how international law and norms can be co-opted. With the US pulling out again from the Paris Climate Agreement, and other international commitments, this volatility is magnified.

And with the intensifying US-China rivalry in the Pacific posing the real risk of a new “arms race”, the picture becomes unmistakable: the international global order is rapidly shifting and eroding, and the stability of the multilateral system is increasingly at risk.

In this turbulent landscape, the Pacific must move beyond mere narratives such as the “Blue Pacific” and take bold steps toward establishing a set of rules that govern and protect the Blue Pacific Continent against outside forces.

• WATCH: The authors discuss this issue at an ANU Department of Pacific Affairs seminar on 5 March 2025
• Other Pacific geopolitics reports

If not, the region risks being submerged by rising geopolitical tides, the existential threat of climate change and external power projections.

For years, the US and its allies have framed the Pacific within the “Indo-Pacific” strategic construct — primarily aimed at maintaining US primacy and containing a rising and more ambitious China. This frame shapes how nations in alignment with the US have chosen to interpret and apply the rules-based order.

On the other side, while China has touted its support for a “rules-based international order”, it has sought to reshape that system to reflect its own interests and its aspirations for a multipolar world, as seen in recent years through international organisations and institutions.

In addition, the Taiwan issue has framed how China sets its rules of engagement with Pacific nations — a diplomatic redline that has created tension among Pacific nations, contradicting their long-held “friends to all, enemies to none” foreign policy preference, as evidenced by recent diplomatic controversies at regional meetings.

Confusing and divisive
For Pacific nations these framings are confusing and divisive — they all sound the same but underneath the surface are contradictory values and foreign policy positions.

For centuries, external powers have framed the Pacific in ways that advance their strategic interests. Today, the Pacific faces similar challenges, as superpowers compete for influence — securitising and militarising the region according to their ambitions through a host of bilateral agreements. This frame does not always prioritise Pacific concerns.

Rather it portrays the Pacific as a theatre for the “great game” — a theatre which subsequently determines how the Pacific is ordered, through particular value-sets, processes, institutions and agreements that are put in place by the key actors in this so-called game.

But the Pacific has its own story to tell, rooted in its “lived realities” and its historical, cultural and oceanic identity. This is reflected in the Blue Pacific narrative — a vision that unites Pacific nations through shared values and long-term goals, encapsulated in the 2050 Strategy for the Blue Pacific Continent.

The Pacific has a proud history of crafting rules to protect its interests — whether through the Rarotonga Treaty for a nuclear-free zone, leading the charge for the Paris Climate Agreement or advocating for SDG 14 on oceans. Today, the Pacific continues to pursue “rules-based” climate initiatives (such as the Pacific Resilience Facility), maritime boundaries delimitation, support for the 2021 and 2023 Forum Leaders’ Declarations on the Permanency of Maritime Boundaries and the Continuation of Statehood in the face of sea level rise, climate litigation through the International Court of Justice and the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, and a host of other rules-based regional environmental, economic and social initiatives.

However, these efforts often exist in isolation, lacking a cohesive framework to bring them all together, and to maximise their strategic impact and leverage. Now must be the time to build on these successes and create an integrated, long-term, visionary, Pacific-centric “rules-based order”.

This could start by looking to consolidate existing Pacific rules: exploring opportunities to take forward the rules through concepts like the Ocean of Peace currently being developed by the Pacific Islands Forum, and expanding subsequently to include something like a “code of conduct” for how Pacific nations should interact with one another and with outside powers.

Responding as united bloc
This would enable them to respond more effectively and operate as a united bloc, in contrast to the bilateral approach preferred by many partners.

Over time this rules-based approach could be expanded to include other areas — such as the ongoing protection and preservation of the ocean, inclusive of deep-sea mining; the maintenance of regional peace and security, including in relation to the peaceful resolution of conflict and demilitarisation; and movement towards greater economic, labour and trade integration.

Such an order would not only provide stability within the Pacific but also contribute to shaping global norms. It would serve as a counterbalance to external strategic frames that look to define the rules that ought to be applied in the Pacific, while asserting the position of the Pacific nations in global conversations.

This is not about diminishing Pacific sovereignty but about enhancing it — ensuring that the region’s interests are safeguarded amid the geopolitical manoeuvring of external powers, and the growing wariness in and of US foreign policy.

The Pacific’s geopolitical challenges are mounting, driven by climate change, shifting global power dynamics and rising tensions between superpowers. But a collective, rules-based approach offers a pathway forward.

Cohesive set of standards
By building on existing frameworks and creating a cohesive set of standards, the Pacific can assert its autonomy, protect its environment and ensure a stable future in an increasingly uncertain world.

The time to act is now, as Pacific nations are increasingly being courted, and before it is too late. This implies though that Pacific nations have honest discussions with each other, and with Australia and New Zealand, about their differences and about the existing challenges to Pacific regionalism and how it can be strengthened.

By integrating regional arrangements and agreements into a more comprehensive framework, Pacific nations can strengthen their collective bargaining power on the global stage — while in the long-term putting in place rules that would over time become a critical part of customary international law.

Importantly, this rules-based approach must be guided by Pacific values, ensuring that the region’s unique cultural, environmental and strategic interests are preserved for future generations.

Sione Tekiteki is a senior lecturer at the Auckland University of Technology. He previously served at the Pacific Islands Forum Secretariat in three positions over nine years, most recently as director, governance and engagement. Joel Nilon is currently senior Pacific fellow at the Pacific Security College at the Australian National University. He previously served at the Pacific Islands Forum Secretariat for nine years as policy adviser.  The article was written in close consultation with Professor Transform Aqorau, vice-chancellor of Solomon Islands National University. Republished from DevBlog with permission.

The Marshall Islands marked 71 years since the most powerful nuclear weapons tests ever conducted were unleashed over the weekend.

The Micronesian nation experienced 67 known atmospheric nuclear tests between 1946 and 1958, resulting in an ongoing legacy of death, illness, and contamination.

The country’s President Hilda Heine says her people continue to face the impacts of US nuclear weapons testing seven decades after the last bomb was detonated.

• READ MORE: 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
• Nuclear justice for the Marshall Islands — a strategy for coordinated action
• UN rights council examines nuclear legacy consequences in the Marshall Islands
• Eyes of Fire – the Last Voyage of the Rainbow Warrior archive (Little Island Press)

The Pacific Islands have a complex history of nuclear weapons testing, but the impacts are very much a present-day challenge, Heine said at the Pacific Islands Forum leaders’ meeting in Tonga last year.

She said that the consequences of nuclear weapons testing “in our own home” are “expensive” and “cross-cutting”.

“When I was just a young girl, our islands were turned into a big laboratory to test the capabilities of weapons of mass destruction, biological warfare agents, and unexploded ordinance,” she said.

“The impacts are not just historical facts, but contemporary challenges,” she added, noting that “the health consequences for the Marshallese people are severe and persistent through generations.”

“We are now working to reshape the narrative from that of being victims to one of active agencies in helping to shape our own future and that of the world around us,” she told Pacific leaders, where the United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres was a special guest.

She said the displacement of communities from ancestral lands has resulted in grave cultural impacts, hindering traditional knowledge from being passed down to younger generations.

“As well as certain traditional practices, customs, ceremonies and even a navigational school once defining our very identity and become a distant memory, memorialised through chance and storytelling,” President Heine said.

“The environmental legacy is contamination and destruction: craters, radiation, toxic remnants, and a dome containing radioactive waste with a half-life of 24,000 years have rendered significant areas uninhabitable.

“Key ecosystems, once full of life and providing sustenance to our people, are now compromised.”

Heine said cancer and thyroid diseases were among a list of presumed radiation-induced medical conditions that were particularly prevalent in the Marshallese community.

Displacement, loss of land, and psychological trauma were also contributing factors to high rates of non-communicable diseases, she said.

“Despite these immense challenges, the Marshallese people have shown remarkable resilience and strength. Our journey has been one of survival, advocacy, and an unyielding pursuit of justice.

“We have fought tirelessly to have our voices heard on the international stage, seeking recognition.”

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

“We are a unique and important moral compass in the global movement for nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation,” Heine said.

The US Deputy Secretary of State in the Biden-Harris administration Kurt Cambell said that Washington, over decades, had committed billions of dollars to the damage and the rebuilding of the Marshall Islands.

“I think we understand that that history carries a heavy burden, and we are doing what we can to support the people in the [Compact of Free Association] states, including the Marshall Islands,” he said.

“This is not a legacy that we seek to avoid. We have attempted to address it constructively with massive resources and a sustained commitment,” he told reporters in Nuku’alofa.

A shared nuclear legacy
The National Nuclear Commission chairperson Ariana Tibon-Kilma, a direct descendant of survivors of the nuclear weapons testing programme Project 4.1 — which was the top-secret medical lab study on the effects of radiation on human bodies — told RNZ Pacific that what occured in Marshall Islands should not happen to any country.

“This programme was conducted without consent from any of the Marshallese people,” she said.

“For a number of years, they were studied and monitored, and sometimes even flown out to the US and displayed as a showcase.

“The history and trauma associated with what happened to my family, as well as many other families in the Marshall Islands, was barely spoken of.

“What happened to the Marshallese people is something that we would not wish upon any other Pacific island country or any other person in humanity.”

She said the nuclear legacy was a shared one.

“We all share one Pacific Ocean and what happened to the Marshall Islands, I am, sure resonates throughout the Pacific,” Tibon-Kilma said.

Billions in compensation
The UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights for the Pacific head, Heike Alefsen, told RNZ Pacific in Nuku’alofa that “we understand that there are communities that have been displaced for a long time to other islands”.

“I think compensation for survivors is key,” she said.

“It is part of a transitional justice approach. I can’t really speak to the breadth and the depth of the compensation that would need to be provided, but it is certainly an ongoing issue for discussion.”

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

The Marshall Islands has become the 14th Pacific Islands Forum (PIF) member state to join the South Pacific’s nuclear non-proliferation and disarmament treaty.

The agreement, known as the Treaty of Rarotonga, was signed in Majuro during the observance of Nuclear Victims Remembrance Day on Monday.

The Pacific Islands Forum said the historic signing of the treaty on March 3 — seven decades after the most powerful nuclear weapons tests ever conducted — underscored the Marshall Islands’ enduring commitment to nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation.

• READ MORE: Four decades after Rongelap evacuation, Greenpeace makes new plea for nuclear justice by US
• Nuclear justice for the Marshall Islands — a strategy for coordinated action
• UN rights council examines nuclear legacy consequences in the Marshall Islands
• Eyes of Fire – the Last Voyage of the Rainbow Warrior archive (Little Island Press)

“By becoming a signatory to the Treaty of Rarotonga, the Marshall Islands has indicated its intention to be bound with a view to future ratification,” the PIF said.

“This reinforces the region’s collective stand towards a nuclear-free Pacific as envisaged by the Rarotonga Treaty and the 2050 Strategy for the Blue Pacific Continent.”

PIF Secretary-General Baron Waqa, who is in Majuro, welcomed the move.

“This step demonstrates the nation’s unwavering commitment to nuclear disarmament,” he said.

‘Marshall Islands bears brunt of nuclear testing’
“Marshall Islands continues to bear the brunt of nuclear testing, and this signing is a testament to Forum nations’ ongoing advocacy for a safe, secure, and nuclear-weapon-free region.”

The Rarotonga Treaty was opened for signature on 6 August 1985 and entered into force on 11 December 1986.

It represents a key regional commitment to nuclear non-proliferation and disarmament, contributing to global efforts to eliminate the threat of nuclear proliferation.

The decision by the Marshall Islands to sign the Rarotonga Treaty carries profound importance given its history and ongoing advocacy for nuclear justice, the PIF said.

Current member states of the treaty are Australia, Cook Islands, Fiji, Kiribati, Nauru, New Zealand, Niue, Papua New Guinea, Samoa, Solomon Islands, Tonga, Tuvalu and Vanuatu.

‘We are committed’, says Heine
“In our commitment to a world free of the dangers of nuclear weapons and for a safe and secure Pacific, today, we take a historic step by signing our accession to the South Pacific Nuclear Free Zone Treaty, also known as the Rarotonga Treaty,” President Hilda Heine said.

“We recognise that the Marshall Islands has yet to sign onto several key nuclear-related treaties, including the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW), largely due to our unique historical and geopolitical circumstances.

“However, we are committed to reviewing our positions and where it is in the best interest of the RMI and its people, we will take the necessary steps toward accession.

“In the spirit of unity and collaboration, we look forward to the results of an independent study of nuclear contamination in the Pacific,” she added.

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

In a fervent appeal to the global community, Prime Minister James Marape of Papua New Guinea has called on US President Donald Trump to “rethink” his decision to withdraw from the Paris Agreement and current global climate initiatives.

Marape’s plea came during the World Economic Forum Annual Meeting held in Davos, Switzerland, on 23 January 2025.

Expressing deep concern for the impacts of climate change on Papua New Guinea and other vulnerable Pacific Island nations, Marape highlighted the dire consequences these nations face due to rising sea levels and increasingly severe weather patterns.

• READ MORE: Trump is withdrawing from the Paris Agreement (again), reversing US climate policy
• How are Trump’s deportation targets reacting to his threats?
• Fact check: Trump’s first-week immigration orders – what are the effects?

“The effects of climate change are not just theoretical for us; they have real, devastating impacts on our fragile economies and our way of life,” he said.

The Prime Minister emphasised that while it was within President Trump’s prerogative to prioritise American interests, withdrawing the United States — the second-largest emitter of carbon dioxide– from the Paris Agreement without implementing measures to curtail coal power production was “totally irresponsible”, Marape said.

“As a leader of a major forest and ocean nation in the Pacific region, I urge President Trump to reconsider his decision.”

He went on to point out the contradiction in the US stance.

US not closing coal plants
“The United States is not shutting down any of its coal power plants yet has chosen to withdraw from critical climate efforts. This is fundamentally irresponsible.

“The science regarding our warming planet is clear — it does not lie,” he said.

Marape further articulated that as the “Leader of the Free World,” Trump had a moral obligation to engage with global climate issues.

PNG Prime Minister James Marape’s plea to President Trump.  Video: PNGTV

“It is morally wrong for President Trump to disregard the pressing challenges of climate change.

He must articulate how he intends to address this critical issue,” he added, stressing that effective global leaders had a responsibility not only to their own nations but also to the planet as a whole.

In a bid to advocate for small island nations that are bearing the brunt of climate impacts, PM Marape announced plans to bring this issue to the upcoming Pacific Islands Forum (PIF).

He hopes to unify the voices of PIF member countries in a collective statement regarding the US withdrawal from climate negotiations.

US revived Pacific relations
“The United States has recently revitalised its relations with the Pacific. It is discouraging to see it retreating from climate discussions that significantly affect our region’s efforts to mitigate climate change,” he said.

Prime Minister Marape reminded the international community that while larger nations might have the capacity to withstand extreme weather events such as typhoons, wildfires, and tornadoes, smaller nations like Papua New Guinea could not endure such impacts.

“For us, every storm and rising tide represents a potential crisis. Big nations can afford to navigate these challenges, but for us, the stakes are incredibly high,” he said.

Marape’s appeal underscores the urgent need for collaborative and sustained global action to combat climate change, particularly for nations like Papua New Guinea, which are disproportionately affected by environmental change.

Republished with permission.

It didn’t come as a surprise to see President Donald Trump sign executive orders to again pull out of the Paris Agreement, or from the World Health Organisation, but the immediate suspension of US international aid has compounded the impact beyond what was imagined possible.

The slew of executive orders signed within hours of Trump re-entering the White House and others since have caused consternation for Pacific leaders and communities and alarm for those operating in the region.

Since Trump was last in power, US engagement in the Pacific has increased dramatically. We have seen new embassies opened, the return of Peace Corps volunteers, high-level summits in Washington and more.

• READ MORE: Trump 2.0 chaos and destruction — what it means Down Under
• Other Donald Trump reports

All the officials who have been in the region and met with Pacific leaders and thinkers will know that climate change impacts are the name of the game when it comes to security.

It is encapsulated in the Boe Declaration signed by leaders of the Pacific Islands Forum in 2018 as their number one existential threat and has been restated many times since.

Now it is hard to see how US diplomats and administration representatives can expect to have meaningful conversations with their Pacific counterparts, if they have nothing to offer when it comes to the region’s primary security threat.

The “on again, off again” approach to cutting carbon emissions and providing climate finance does not lend itself to convincing sceptical Pacific leaders that the US is a trusted friend here for the long haul.

Pacific response muted
Trump’s climate scepticism is well-known and the withdrawal from Paris had been flagged during the campaign. The response from leaders within the Pacific islands region has been somewhat muted, with a couple of exceptions.

Vanuatu Attorney-General Kiel Loughman called it out as “bad behaviour”. Meanwhile, Papua New Guinea’s Prime Minister James Marape has sharply criticised Trump, “urging” him to reconsider his decision to withdraw from the Paris agreement, and plans to rally Pacific Islands Forum (PIF) leaders to stand with him.

It is hard to see how this will have much effect.

The withdrawal from the World Health Organisation – to which the US provides US$500 million or about 15 percent of its annual budget – creates a deep funding gap.

In 2022, the Lowy Pacific aid map recorded that the WHO disbursed US$9.1 million in the Pacific islands across 320 projects. It contributes to important programmes that support health systems in the region.

In addition, the 90-day pause on disbursement of aid funding while investments are reviewed to ensure that they align with the president’s foreign policy is causing confusion and distress in the region.

Perhaps now the time has come to adopt a more transactional approach. While this may not come easily to Pacific diplomats, the reality is that this is how everyone else is acting and it appears to be the geopolitical language of the moment.

Meaningful commitment opportunities
So where the US seeks a security agreement or guarantee, there may be an opportunity to tie it to climate change or other meaningful commitments.

When it comes to the PIF, the intergovernmental body representing 18 states and territories, Trump’s stance may pose a particular problem.

The PIF secretariat is currently undertaking a Review of Regional Architecture. As part of that, dialogue partners including the US are making cases for whether they should be ranked as “Strategic Partners” [Tier 1] or “Sector Development Partners [Tier 2].

It is hard to see how the US can qualify for “strategic partner” status given Trump’s rhetoric and actions in the last week. But if the US does not join that club, it is likely to cede space to China which is also no doubt lobbying to be at the “best friends” table.

With the change in president comes the new Secretary of State Marco Rubio. He was previously known for having called for the US to cut all its aid to Solomon Islands when then Prime Minister Manasseh Sogavare announced this country’s switch in diplomatic ties from Taiwan to the People’s Republic of China.

It is to be hoped that since then Rubio has learned that this type of megaphone diplomacy is not welcome in this part of the world.

Since taking office, he has made little mention of the Pacific islands region. In a call with New Zealand Foreign Minister Winston Peters they “discussed efforts to enhance security cooperation, address regional challenges, and support for the Pacific Islands.”

It is still early days, a week is a long time in politics and there remain many “unknown unknowns”. What we do know is that what happens in Washington during the next four years will have global impacts, including in the Pacific. The need now for strong Pacific leadership and assertive diplomacy has never been greater.

Dr Tess Newton Cain is a principal consultant at Sustineo P/L and adjunct associate professor at the Griffith Asia Institute. She is a former lecturer at the University of the South Pacific and has more than 25 years of experience working in the Pacific islands region. This article was first published by BenarNews and is republished by Asia Pacific Report with permission.

Vanuatu’s top lawyer has called out the United States for “bad behavior” after newly inaugurated President Donald Trump withdrew the world’s biggest historic emitter of greenhouse gasses from the Paris Agreement for a second time.

The Pacific nation’s Attorney-General Arnold Loughman, who led Vanuatu’s landmark International Court of Justice climate case at The Hague last month, said the withdrawal represented an “undeniable setback” for international action on global warming.

“The Paris Agreement remains key to the world’s efforts to combat climate change and respond to its effects, and the participation of major economies like the US is crucial,” he told BenarNews in a statement.

• READ MORE:  ‘We will drill, baby, drill’: Why Trump wants US out of Paris climate deal
• Other Pacific climate change reports

The withdrawal could also set a “troubling precedent” regarding the accountability of rich nations that are disproportionately responsible for global warming, said Loughman.

“At the same time, the US’ bad behavior could inspire resolve on behalf of developed countries to act more responsibly to try and safeguard the international rule of law,” he said.

“Ultimately, the whole world stands to lose if the international legal framework is allowed to erode.”

Trump’s announcement on Monday came less than two weeks after scientists confirmed that 2024 was the hottest year on record and the first in which average temperatures exceeded 1.5 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels.

Agreed to ‘pursue efforts’
Under the Paris Agreement adopted in 2015, leaders agreed to “pursue efforts” to limit warming under the 1.5°C threshold or, failing that, keep rises “well below” 2°C  by the end of the century.

Fiji Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka said on Wednesday in a brief comment that Trump’s action would “force us to rethink our position” but the US president must do “what is in the best interest of the United States of America”.

Other Pacific leaders and the Pacific Islands Forum (PIF) regional intergovernmental body have not responded to BenarNews requests for comment.

The forum — comprising 18 Pacific states and territories — in its 2018 Boe Declaration said: “Climate change remains the single greatest threat to the livelihoods, security and wellbeing of the peoples of the Pacific and [we reaffirm] our commitment to progress the implementation of the Paris Agreement.”

Trump’s executive order sparked dismay and criticism in the Pacific, where the impacts of a warming planet are already being felt in the form of more intense storms and rising seas.

Jacynta Fa’amau, regional Pacific campaigner with environmental group 350 Pacific, said the withdrawal would be a diplomatic setback for the US.

“The climate crisis has for a long time now been our greatest security threat, especially to the Pacific,” she told BenarNews.

A clear signal
“This withdrawal from the agreement is a clear signal about how much the US values the survival of Pacific nations and all communities on the front lines.”

New Zealand’s former Minister for Pacific Peoples, Aupito William Sio, said that if the US withdrew from its traditional leadership roles in multilateral organisations China would fill the gap.

“Some people may not like how China plays its role,” wrote the former Labour MP on Facebook. “But when the great USA withdraws from these global organisations . . . it just means China can now go about providing global leadership.”

Analysts and former White House advisers told BenarNews last year that climate change could be a potential “flashpoint” between Pacific nations and a second Trump administration at a time of heightened geopolitical competition with China.

Trump’s announcement was not unexpected. During his first term he withdrew the US from the Paris Agreement, only for former President Joe Biden to promptly rejoin in 2021.

The latest withdrawal puts the US, the world’s largest historic emitter of greenhouse gases, alongside only Iran, Libya and Yemen outside the climate pact.

In his executive order, Trump said the US would immediately begin withdrawing from the Paris Agreement and from any other commitments made under the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change.

US also ending climate finance
The US would also end its international climate finance programme to developing countries — a blow to small Pacific island states that already struggle to obtain funding for resilience and mitigation.

A fact sheet published by the Biden administration on November 17, which has now been removed from the White House website, said that US international climate finance reached more than US$11 billion in 2024.

Loughman said the cessation of climate finance payments was particularly concerning for the Pacific region.

“These funds are essential for building resilience and supporting adaptation strategies,” he said. “Losing this support could severely hinder ongoing and future projects aimed at protecting our vulnerable ecosystems and communities.”

George Carter, deputy head of the Department of Pacific Affairs at the Australian National University and member of the COP29 Scientific Council, said at the centre of the Biden administration’s re-engagement with the South Pacific was a regional programme on climate adaptation.

“While the majority of climate finance that flows through the Pacific comes from Australia, Japan, European Union, New Zealand — then the United States — the climate networks and knowledge production from the US to the Pacific are substantial,” he said.

Climate actions plans
Pacific island states, like all other signatories to the Paris Agreement, will this year be submitting Nationally Determined Contributions, or NDCs, outlining their climate action plans for the next five years.

“All climate actions, policies and activities are conditional on international climate finance,” Carter said.

Pacific island nations are being disproportionately affected by climate change despite contributing just 0.02 percent of global emissions, according to a UN report released last year.

Low-lying islands are particularly vulnerable to rising sea levels and extreme weather events like cyclones, floods and marine heatwaves, which are projected to occur more frequently this century as a result of higher average global temperatures.

On January 10, the World Meteorological Organisation (WMO) confirmed that last year for the first time the global mean temperature tipped over 1.5°C above the 1850-1900 average.

WMO experts emphasised that a single year of more than 1.5°C does not mean that the world has failed to meet long-term temperature goals, which are measured over decades, but added that “leaders must act — now” to avert negative impacts.

Harry Pearl is a BenarNews journalist. This article was first published by BenarNews and is republished at Asia Pacific Report with permission.

Indonesia officially joined the BRICS — Brazil, Russia, China and South Africa — consortium last week marking a significant milestone in its foreign relations.

In a statement released a day later on January 7, the Indonesian Ministry of Foreign Affairs said that this membership reflected Indonesia’s dedication to strengthening multilateral cooperation and its growing influence in global politics.

The ministry highlighted that joining BRICS aligned with Indonesia’s independent and proactive foreign policy, which seeks to maintain balanced relations with major powers while prioritising national interests.

• READ MORE: Indonesia joins BRICS group of emerging economies
• Other West Papua independence reports

This pivotal move showcases Jakarta’s efforts to enhance its international presence as an emerging power within a select group of global influencers.

Traditionally, Indonesia has embraced a non-aligned stance while bolstering its military and economic strength through collaborations with both Western and Eastern nations, including the United States, China, and Russia.

By joining BRICS, Indonesia clearly signals a shift from its non-aligned status, aligning itself with a coalition of emerging powers poised to challenge and redefine the existing global geopolitical landscape dominated by a Western neoliberal order led by the United States.

Indonesia joining boosts BRICS membership to 10 countres — Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa, Egypt, Ethiopia, Indonesia, Iran and the United Arab Emirates — but there are also partnerships.

Supporters of a multipolar world, championed by China, Russia, and their allies, may view Indonesia’s entry into BRICS as a significant victory.

In contrast, advocates of the US-led unipolar world, often referred to as the “rules-based international order” are likely to see Indonesia’s decision as a regrettable shift that could trigger retaliatory actions from the United States.

The future will determine how Indonesia balances its relations with these two superpowers. However, there is considerable concern about the potential fallout for Indonesia from its long-standing US allies.

The smaller Pacific Island nations, which Indonesia has been endeavouring to win over in a bid to thwart support for West Papuan independence, may also become entangled in the crosshairs of geostrategic rivalries, and their response to Indonesia’s membership in the BRICS alliance will prove critical for the fate of West Papua.

Critical questions
The crucial questions facing the Pacific Islanders are perhaps related to their loyalties: are they aligning themselves with Beijing or Washington, and in what ways could their decisions influence the delicate balance of power in the ongoing competition between great powers, ultimately altering the Melanesian destiny of the Papuan people?

For the Papuans, Indonesia’s membership in BRICS or any other global or regional forums is irrelevant as long as the illegal occupation of their land continues driving them toward “extinction”.

The pressing question for Papuans is which force will ultimately dismantle Indonesia’s unlawful hold on their sovereignty.

Will Indonesia’s BRICS alliance open new paths for Papuan liberation fighters to re-engage with the West in ways not seen since the Cold War? Or does this membership indicate a deeper entrenchment of Papuans’ fate within China’s influence — making it almost impossible for any dream of Papuans’ independence?

While forecasting future with certainty is difficult on these questions, these critical critical questions need to be considered in this new complex geopolitical landscape, as the ultimate fate of West Papua is what is truly at stake here.

Strengthening Indonesia’s claims over West Papuan sovereignty
Indonesia’s membership in BRICS may signify a great victory for those advocating for a multipolar world, challenging the hegemony of Western powers led by the United States.

This membership could augment Indonesia’s capacity to frame the West Papuan issue as an internal matter among BRICS members within the principle of non-interference in domestic affairs.

Such backing could provide Jakarta with a cushion of diplomatic protection against international censure, particularly from Western nations regarding its policies in West Papua.

However, it is also crucial to note that for more than six decades, despite the Western world priding itself on being a champion of freedom and human rights, no nation has been permitted to voice concern or hold Indonesia accountable for the atrocities committed against Indigenous Papuans.

The pressing question to consider is what or who silences the 193 member states of the UN from intervening to save the Papuans from potential eradication at the hands of Indonesia.

Is it the United States and its allies, or is it China, Russia, and their allies — or the United Nations itself?

Indonesia’s double standard and hypocrisy
Indonesia’s support for Palestine bolsters its image as a defender of international law and human rights in global platforms like the UN and the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC).

This commitment was notably highlighted at the BRICS Summit in October 2024, where Indonesia reaffirmed its dedication to Palestinian self-determination and called for global action to address the ongoing conflict in line with international law and UN resolutions, reflecting its constitutional duty to oppose colonialism.

Nonetheless, Indonesia’s self-image as a “saviour for the Palestinians” presents a rather ignoble facade being promoted in the international diplomatic arena, as the Indonesian government engages in precisely the same behaviours it condemns Israel over in Palestine.

Military engagement and regional diplomacy
Moreover, Indonesia’s interaction with Pacific nations serves to perpetuate a façade of double standards — on one hand, it endeavours to portray itself as a burgeoning power and a champion of moral causes concerning security issues, human rights, climate change, and development; while on the other, it distracts the communities and nations of Oceania — particularly Vanuatu and the Solomon Islands, which have long supported the West Papua independence movement — from holding Indonesia accountable for its transgressions against their fellow Pacific Islanders in West Papua.

On October 10, 2024, Brigadier-General Mohamad Nafis of the Indonesian Defence Ministry unveiled a strategic initiative intended to assert sovereignty claims over West Papua. This plan aims to foster stability across the Pacific through enhanced defence cooperation and safeguarding of territorial integrity.

The efforts to expand influence are characterised by joint military exercises, defence partnerships, and assistance programmes, all crafted to address common challenges such as terrorism, piracy, and natural disasters.

However, most critically, Indonesia’s engagement with Pacific Island nations aims to undermine the regional solidarity surrounding West Papua’s right to self-determination.

This involvement encapsulates infrastructure initiatives, defence training, and financial diplomacy, nurturing goodwill while aligning the interests of Pacific nations with Indonesia’s geopolitical aspirations.

Indonesia has formally joined the BRICS group, a bloc of emerging economies featuring Russia, China and others that is viewed as a counterweight to the West https://t.co/WArU5O2PfT pic.twitter.com/IQKmPOJqlS

— Al Jazeera English (@AJEnglish) January 7, 2025

Military occupation in West Papua
As Indonesia strives to galvanise international support for its territorial integrity, the military presence in West Papua has intensified significantly, instilling widespread fear among local Papuan communities due to heightened deployments, surveillance, and restrictions.

Indonesian forces have been mobilised to secure economically strategic regions, including the Grasberg mine, which holds some of the world’s largest gold and copper reserves.

These operations have resulted in the displacement of Indigenous communities and substantial environmental degradation.

As of December 2024, approximately 83,295 individuals had been internally displaced in West Papua due to armed conflicts between Indonesian security forces and the West Papua Liberation Army (TPNPB).

Recent reports detail new instances of displacement in the Tambrauw and Pegunungan Bintang regencies following clashes between the TPNPB and security forces. Villagers have evacuated their homes in fear of further military incursions and confrontations, leaving many in psychological distress.

The significant increase in Indonesia’s military presence in West Papua has coincided with demographic shifts that jeopardise the survival of Indigenous Papuans.

Government transmigration policies and large-scale agricultural initiatives, such as the food estate project in Merauke, have marginalised Indigenous communities.

These programmes, aimed at ensuring national food security, result in land expropriation and cultural erosion, threatening traditional Papuan lifestyles and identities.

For more than 63 years, Indonesia has occupied West Papua, subjecting Indigenous communities to systemic marginalisation and brink of extinction. Traditional languages, oral histories, and cultural values face obliteration under Indonesia’s colonial occupation.

A glimmer of hope for West Papua
Despite these formidable challenges, solidarity movements within the Pacific and global communities persist in their advocacy for West Papua’s self-determination.

These groups, united by a shared sense of humanity and justice, work tirelessly to maintain hope for West Papua’s liberation. Even so, Indonesia’s diplomatic engagement with Pacific nations, characterised by eloquent rhetoric and military alliances, represents a calculated endeavour to extinguish this fragile hope for Papuan liberation.

Indonesia’s membership in BRICS will either amplify this tiny hope of salvation within the grand vision of a new world re-engineered by Beijing’s BRICS and its allies or will it conceal West Papua’s independence dream on a path that is even harder and more impossible to achieve than the one they have been on for 60 years under the US-led unipolar world system.

Most significantly, it might present a new opportunity for Papuan liberation fighters to reengage with the new re-ordering global superpowers– a chance that has eluded them for more than 60 years.

From the 1920s to the 1960s, the tumult of the First and Second World Wars, coupled with the ensuing cries for decolonisation from nations subjugated by Western powers and Cold War tensions, forged the very existence of the nation known as “Indonesia.”

It seems that this turbulent world of uncertainty is upon us, reshaping a new global landscape replete with new alliances and adversaries, harbouring conflicting visions of a new world. Indonesia’s decision to join BRICS in 2025 is a clear testament to this.

The pressing question remains whether this membership will ultimately precipitate Indonesia’s disintegration as the US-led unipolar world intervenes in its domestic affairs or catalyse its growth and strength.

Regardless of the consequences, the fundamental existential question for the Papuans is whether they, along with their global solidarity networks, can reinvent themselves while nurturing the fragile hope of restoring West Papua’s sovereignty in a world rife with change and uncertainty?

Ali Mirin is a West Papuan academic and writer from the Kimyal tribe of the highlands bordering the Star mountain region of Papua New Guinea. He lives in Australia and contributes articles to Asia Pacific Report.

Northern Marianas Governor Arnold Palacios and Senator Celina Babauta have travelled to Guam to attend a luncheon with Taiwan President Lai Ching-te.

Taiwan is officially known as the Republic of China (Taiwan). China claims Taiwan as its own territory, with no right to state-to-state ties, a position Taiwan strongly disputes.

Palacios welcomed the opportunity to meet Lai and said this could pave the way for improved relations with the East Asian country.

• READ MORE: Other Taiwan and the Pacific reports

“This meeting is an opportunity for the CNMI to foster relations with allies in the region.”

When asked if meeting the President would upset the People’s Republic of China, which considers Taiwan a rogue state and part of its territory, Palacios said: “As far as being in the crosshairs of China, we already are in many ways.”

Worldwide, a dozen countries maintain formal diplomatic ties with Taipei.

In January, Nauru cut ties with Taiwan and shifted its diplomatic allegiance to Beijing.

The Tongan and Fijian prime ministers are among the first Pacific Island leaders to congratulate US President-elect Donald Trump.

Trump, 78, returned to the White House on Wednesday by securing more than the 270 Electoral College votes needed to win the presidency, according to Edison Research projections.

Tonga’s Hu’akavameiliku Siaosi Sovaleni, who is also the chair of the Pacific Islands Forum said on X, formerly Twitter, that he is looking forward to advancing Tonga-US bilateral relationship and the Pacific interests and initiatives.

• READ MORE: US votes as Gaza burns – Trump ‘declares victory’ in election
• US presidential election holds high stakes for Pacific relations
• How the US election may affect Pacific Island nations
• Donald Trump ‘unfit to lead’ – vote for Harris, warns New York Times
• Other US presidential elections reports

Fiji’s Sitiveni Rabuka said it was his sincere hope and prayer that Trump’s return to the White House “will be marked by the delivery of peace, unity, progress, and prosperity for all Americans, and the community of nations”.

Rabuka also said Fiji was looking forward to deepening bilateral ties with America as well as furthering shared aspirations including, promoting peace and economic prosperity in the Pacific and beyond.

Papua New Guinea’s Prime Minsiter James Marape today congratulated Trump, saying: “We look forward to reinforcing the longstanding partnership between our nations, grounded in shared values and mutual respect.”

Marape also expressed gratitude for outgoing President Joe Biden’s service and Kamala Harris’s “spirited challenge” for the presidency.

Similar policies
Cook Islands Prime Minister Mark Brown said both the Democrats and Republics had similar policies on the Indo-Pacific and he did not expect much change.

“The US has reengaged with the Pacific in terms of diplomatic representation and increased people-to-people engagements,” Brown was quoted as saying by Cook Islands News.

“From a bipartisan perspective I don’t see any drastic changes in US policy on what they have termed as the Indo-Pacific strategy.

“Both Dems and Reps have similar policies on the Indo-Pacific. I don’t expect much change.”

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

Cook Islands Prime Minister Mark Brown has returned from New Caledonia saying it is not a simple “black and white situation”.

Brown returned from a three-day Pacific fact-finding mission in the French Pacific territory alongside the Prime Ministers of Solomon Islands, Tonga and Fiji.

New Caledonia has been going through a period of turmoil with violence and arson since May, resulting in 13 deaths and the destruction of many businesses.

• READ MORE: Forum troika’s visit highlights value of regionalism for New Caledonia
• Other Kanaky New Caledonia crisis reports

“There’s no doubt there is a call and a need for the easing of tensions in the country,” Brown said.

“This would enable more dialogue to take place between the various vested groups to find a pathway forward for New Caledonia.”

Brown said Kanaky New Caledonia’s population was diverse, made up of indigenous Kanak, French, and Pacific diaspora.

Almost all of these groups want greater autonomy from France with some also wanting full independence or to remain a French territory, he said.

“But you have quite a large group between those two extremes that want a way forward that enables New Caledonians, all of them, to be able to determine their own future.”

Pacific policing France ‘may wish to consider’
Brown said Australia’s newly proposed regional policing initiative is “an option that New Caledonians may wish to consider”.

“At the moment that’s being done by the state government through France through its gendarmes and police force.”

The last time regional policing was used was in Solomon Islands after ethnic unrest in the 2000s, he said.

When asked whether France had “militarised” New Caledonia, Brown said France sent a lot of support “to help maintain law and order” but the focus now was on the reduction of tensions and dialogue.

France’s Ambassador to the Pacific Véronique told the ABC she doubted French authorities would see the need for Pacific police to be deployed to New Caledonia.

Brown said the other issue was the need for an urgent financial package.

“Unlike most other Pacific countries in cases of disaster whether they be natural disaster or other sorts, Pacific countries have the likes of the World Bank, the Asian Development Bank, development partners that would support and assist.

Relying solely on France
“In the case of New Caledonia, it doesn’t have the association with any of those financial institutions and would rely solely on France for its support.”

There needed to first be a reduction of tensions so that any rebuild would not be under threat from more civil unrest, he said.

Brown said Pacific nations had taken different decolonisation paths — with the exception of Tonga which had never been colonised.

Fiji became a republic after a number of coups and Cook Islands is self-governing in free association with New Zealand.

“Each of us took a different path to where we are today to gain our autonomy and our sovereignty and it’s something that we were able to share with New Caledonia.”

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

As a three-day fact-finding mission from a group of Pacific leaders drew to a close in New Caledonia, and with the outcomes report not expected before next year, the visit to the riot-hit French Pacific territory seems to have triggered a new sense of awareness locally about the values of Pacific regional mechanisms of “talanoa” embodied by the Pacific Islands Forum (PIF).

Local President Louis Mapou stressed on several occasions during the visit that New Caledonia’s situation was the “subject of much attention” in the Pacific region.

He suggested that one of the reasons for this could be because of a potential “spillover” effect that could “jeopardise cohesion in the Pacific”.

• READ MORE: Pacific leaders’ mission to Nouméa – Mapou says New Caledonia at ‘turning point’
• Other Kanaky New Caledonia reports

However, Mapou also stressed that he had received the message conveyed by the PIF “Troika-Plus” group that “they’re ready to take part in [New Caledonia’s] reconstruction”.

‘New Caledonia’s regional integration in its region’
Mapou said that one of the recurrent themes during the PIF visit was “New Caledonia’s regional integration in its region”.

“Whatever might be said, in many ways, New Caledonia does not know its [Pacific] region very well. Because it has this affiliation relationship to Europe and France that has prevailed over all these years,” he told local media.

“So, in a certain way, we’re just discovering our region. And in this process, the Pacific Islands Forum could bring a sort of leverage,” he said.

Kanaky New Caledonia, as well as French Polynesia — both French Pacific entities — became full members of the Pacific Islands Forum in 2016, after several years of “associate members” status.

Mapou said New Caledonia’s current status vis-à-vis France was mentioned during talks with the PIF mission.

“I spoke with them about obstacles that should be removed, that are directly related to our current status. This is part of topics on which we should be working in future,” he said.

“They’re very open-minded, they don’t have any preconceived ideas, they’re happy to talk equally about the concepts of independence, just as they are for keeping [New Caledonia] within the French Republic,” he revealed.

One of the unexpected outcomes, beyond the specific fact-finding mission that brought this PIF “Troika-Plus” leaders’ delegation to New Caledonia, seems to have underlined the values of regionalism, as well as New Caledonia’s long-awaited and genuine integration in its “regional environment”.

These values seem to have been recognised by all sides of New Caledonia’s political spectrum, as well as all walks of life within the civil, economic, educational and religious society.

Pacific diversity in status
During the past few days, informal exchanges with the Pacific leaders have also allowed New Caledonia’s authorities to share and compare possible ways forward regarding the territory’s political status.

“They readily exchanged their own experiences with our government. The Cook Islands, which is a self-governing state in ‘free association’ with New Zealand; Tonga, which has never been colonised; and the Solomon Islands, who have also undergone inter-ethnic conflicts and where the young population was also involved. And Fiji, which obtained independence (in 1970), had decided to withdraw from the Commonwealth and is finally re-discussing its link with Great Britain,” Mapou briefed local media on Tuesday.

The leaders spent three days (October 27-29) in the French Pacific territory to gather information on the ground, after destructive riots broke out in May, resulting in 13 deaths and extensive economic damage estimated at €2.2 billion.

During the three days, the PIF leaders met a wide range of political, business, religious, and civil society leaders to get a first-hand account of the situation.

On Tuesday, the “plus” component of the troika, Fiji Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka, reiterated the mission’s assigned mantra in a manner of conclusion to their mission.

“We were here to understand and make recommendations. We have heard many extremely different attitudes. We hope it will be possible to find a solution for the people and the government,” Rabuka told religious leaders.

Bitterness from civil society
The long series of talks, within a particularly tight schedule, also allowed groups within New Caledonia’s civil society — including traditional chiefs, youth, human rights activists, educationists, mayors and women — to express their views directly during the Pacific leaders’ visit.

Some of these groups also took the opportunity to point out that they were not always listened to in other circumstances.

“Today, peace has just been through a rough episode. And we, women, are being asked to help. But when was the last time we were heard?

“We’ve already said women should be part of all levels of decision-making, including on matters of dealing with violence and access for women to economic empowerment.

“We were ignored. And then, when fire breaks out, we’re being asked for help because this is the foundation of Pacific values,” said Sonia Tonga, the president of the Oceania Union of Francophone Women, which groups women’s groups from New Caledonia, French Polynesia, Wallis-and-Futuna and Vanuatu.

Talking about the youth, she said there was an “ill-being”, “they don’t recognise themselves in this system, including for education. We’re trying to fit an Oceanian society into a framework that has not been designed for them.

“When will we be heard in our country?”.

As part of talks with church leaders, it was also pointed out that there were benefits from sharing experiences with Pacific leaders.

“I’ve been many times in Fiji, Tonga, the Solomon Islands, Vanuatu and other Pacific islands. They too have had their hard times.

“And they too are familiar with the experience of violence which is difficult to bring back to a path of dialogue,” said 80-year-old Nouméa Catholic Archbishop Michel-Marie Calvet, a respected figure.

In terms of earlier crises in the Pacific region, among PIF member island states, in the early 2000s, civil unrest occurred in both Fiji and the Solomon Islands, with shops being targeted and looted.

Under Pacific Islands Forum mechanisms, especially the declaration of Biketawa, this prompted in 2003 the setting up of “RAMSI” (Regional Assistance Mission to Solomon Islands), with mostly Australia and New Zealand military and police as its main contributors, with additional input from other Pacific island countries.

In Fiji, the mission to defuse the crisis, associated with an attempted coup and a MPs hostage situation within Parliament buildings in May 2000, was mainly achieved by the Republic of Fiji Military Forces (RFMF) through protracted negotiations and without violence.

Supporting Pacific dialogue
In the political sphere, there was a recognition of the benefits of a Pacific perspective.

“There is a Pacific tradition of dialogue and talanoa. So, I think [the PIF leaders] can invite pro-independence parties to come to the [negotiating] table,” said New Caledonia’s Mayors’ Association president Pascal Vittori.

“We’re actually expecting PIF will back this notion of dialogue — that’s what’s important now,” he told local media.

Sonia Backès, one of the staunchest defenders of New Caledonia remaining part of France, told reporters on Monday: “We didn’t ask for this [mission]. Now we’re waiting for this (troika) report based on their observing mission.

“We all know that there are biased views on the part of some, one way or the other.

“So we hope the final report will be as fair and neutral as possible so as not to add fuel to the fire.”

Following their visit to New Caledonia and based on the information gathered, the Forum “Troika-Plus” leaders are expected to compile a “comprehensive report” to be submitted to the next annual Forum Leaders’ Summit in the Solomon Islands in 2025.

“The terms of reference of this mission were discussed beforehand between the government of New Caledonia, the Pacific Islands Forum and the (French) State. We all agreed that what was most important was to have an assessment of the situation.

“There is a need to provide information to the public so that it is an informed opinion leader. It’s important in those times of misinformation and manipulation from one side or the other,” French ambassador for the Pacific Véronique Roger-Lacan told public broadcaster NC la 1ère TV on Tuesday evening.

Business sector now needs Pacific market overtures
Even the business sector now seems to believe that, as a result of the widespread destruction caused by the riots, which has left more than 800 companies burnt down and looted, as well as thousands jobless, the wider Pacific region has now become a new potentially attractive market.

“Our local market has just shrunk considerably and so we will need to find new openings for our products. In that perspective, our cooperation with the Pacific is very, very strategic”, said business leaders association MEDEF-NC president Mimsy Daly.

She had once again presented a detailed view of the widespread devastation caused by the recent riots and those who took part.

“‘Were they aware of what they were doing?’ is one of the questions I was asked,” she wrote on social networks after her encounter with the “Troika-Plus”.

“A logical question when you know that what has been destroyed equals about 70 percent of the GDP of the Cook Islands, 100 percent of the GDP of the Solomon Islands and 40 percent of the GDP of Fiji.”

But she admitted the response to this complex question was “primordial” and “every light will have to be shed on the matter”.

In a wrap-up of the three days, President Mapou held a final meeting with the group on Tuesday.

Wide circle of ‘concertation’ needed
French High Commissioner Louis Le Franc, after a final meeting with the delegation, said: “They have come here to seek the profound causes of what happened on May 13. They have been listening very closely.

“I understand their view is that a wide circle of concertation [cooperation] will be required to reach an agreement,” he said.

He elaborated, saying that the Pacific Forum leaders seemed to place a lot of hope in the notions of “trust”, the “necessity of living together” and the PIF’s “will to help, while saying that, at the same time, the solution lies in the hands of New Caledonia”.

Next: another ‘concertation and dialogue’ mission
Following the PIF “Troika-Plus” mission, another visit is expected in New Caledonia in the next few days — this time coming from Paris.

This new high-level visit will be headed by the presidents of both houses of Parliament in France (Senate and National Assembly), respectively Gérard Larcher and Yaël Braun-Pivet, from November 9-14.

They will lead what is described as a “mission of concertation and dialogue”.

The dates come as a top-level meeting took place last week, presided by French Head of State Emmanuel Macron and attended by French minister for Overseas François-Noël Buffet (who had just returned from New Caledonia), French PM Barnier, Larcher and Braun-Pivet.

The objective, once again, was to reinforce the signal that the time had come to resume political dialogue.

Macron indicated earlier that he still intended to host a meeting in Paris sometime in November.

Buffet was also in New Caledonia earlier this month for four days to assess the situation and try to restore a path to dialogue between all political stakeholders, both pro-independence and pro-France.

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

The Pacific Islands Forum (PIF) leaders’ troika, along with the Fiji’s prime minister, arrived in Kanaky New Caledonia at the weekend for a fact-finding mission on the French Pacific territory’s situation.

The troika plus format involves the PIF’s previous, current and future chairs.

They are mission leader Tonga Prime Minister Hu’akavameiliku Siaosi Sovaleni, Cook Islands Prime Minister Mark Brown, and representative of the Forum’s future chair, Solomon Islands Minister for Foreign Affairs and External Trade Peter-Shanel Agovaka (who takes part in place of Prime Minister Jeremiah Manele).

• READ MORE: Kanak pastor advocates for ‘hope and ‘humanity’ as Pacific leaders visit New Caledonia
• Other Kanaky New Caledonia reports

Fiji PM Sitiveni Rabuka is the “plus” component of the mission.

While Brown landed in Nouméa on Saturday, the rest of the PIF leaders touched down yesterday and were welcomed by New Caledonia’s highest officials, including local government President Louis Mapou, French High Commissioner Louis Le Franc and French Ambassador for the Pacific Véronique Roger-Lacan.

The regional leaders were also granted a full state protocol with a guard of honour, local media reported.

Charles Wéa, New Caledonia President Mapou’s adviser for international relations, told public broadcaster NC la 1ère at the weekend: “New Caledonia is a member of the Pacific Islands Forum and therefore is involved in everything that happens in the Pacific.”

“This mission comes in solidarity, to listen and see what are the possible ways to accompany our territory towards political and economic prospects.”

Upon return from their visit, the leaders are expected to prepare and submit a report to the next 54th Pacific Island Forum leaders’ summit, to be held in Solomon Islands from 8-12 September 2025.

Sunday programme: politics, economy, hospital
On Sunday, the Pacific leaders started their mission in earnest, going to the site of one of Nouméa’s large commercial centres, Kenu-Inn, near Nouméa, which was largely destroyed and looted during the May riots.

They also met there a delegation of business leaders who explained the heavy impact of the destruction, arson and looting, and its consequences on the local economy.

Local Chamber of Commerce and Industry (CCI) leader David Guyenne told local media: “We, economic leaders, really wanted them to see for themselves what did happen, and this is beyond imagination in terms of devastation.”

“There has been a moment of shock of cataclysmic proportions for business owners, employees, families who have all suffered the consequences.”

He said he believed the PIF mission could bring a constructive contribution if they do not have “an ideological vision of what happened in New Caledonia . . . to really understand that what took place is an economic and social issue”.

“We will build again with time, a pragmatic approach without mixing politics, ideology and what happened,” he said.

GDP decline — ’20 years backwards’
Guyenne also said he had conveyed to the Pacific leaders the hard figures from the crisis.

“We are talking about [losing] 20 percent of New Caledonia’s gross domestic product (GDP); this has taken us 20 years backwards.

“This is the reality for people and companies.”

Earlier in the day, the leaders also held talks with Le Franc and Roger-Lacan.

They also went to New Caledonia’s main hospital, Médipôle, to hear about how the crucial centre was affected by riots and the impact this had on the public health system.

Later in the day, political talks went on at New Caledonia’s Congress, where they held talks with its President Veylma Falaéo.

“I am happy to see that each one of them came to bring their encouragement in these difficult times for us and in our current efforts for dialogue and reconciliation,” Falaéo said.

“I don’t think they were here to tell us what to do. They believe the solution can only come from us and to encourage us to pursue the way to unity, peace and dialogue.”

Political talks, meetings
Today, the leaders ares scheduled to pursue its mission with political talks and meetings with a wide panel of political parties from both the pro-independence and pro-France (loyalist) movements.

The high-level mission is being described as “strictly observational” and “in line with the request of the New Caledonia government, will follow the terms of reference, agreed by the French state, the government of New Caledonia and endorsed by the Forum Leaders”.

The mission followed a request from President Mapou following the breakout of riots on May 13.

The PIF mission was initially scheduled to take place before the Pacific Islands Forum annual leaders’ summit in Nuku’alofa in late August, but was postponed, due to what was described at the time as differences between New Caledonia’s government and its administrative power, France, on the mission’s terms of reference.

The Forum leaders group is supported by PIF Secretary-General Baron Waqa and senior officials “with the guidance of the French state and New Caledonia government”, the Forum stated.

The Pacific region’s top political organisation said the troika-plus would tour Nouméa and meet stakeholders impacted by the recent unrest, including a wide spectrum of “New Caledonian political parties, youth”, and the “impacted communities from the private, health, and education sectors”.

“This mission to New Caledonia comes at a pivotal time, as it navigates complex political dynamics and seeks to address ongoing social and economic challenges in New Caledonia.

“By understanding local perspectives, the Forum can better support ongoing dialogue about New Caledonia’s future, all while respecting its current status.”

The sensitive terms of reference were finally agreed to during the PIF leaders’ summit in Tonga at the end of August.

In their final communiqué on August 30, PIF leaders mentioned the issue of New Caledonia in two paragraphs].

They “noted the update on the situation in New Caledonia by the President of the government of New Caledonia, Mapou, and reaffirmed their continued call for order and stability to prevail as well as their continued commitment to provide support as necessary to New Caledonia”.

They also “reaffirmed the commitment to deploy the high-level Forum troika plus mission to New Caledonia in line with the request of New Caledonia’s government and noted the agreement of the French State and the Government of New Caledonia on the Terms of Reference for the Forum Troika Mission”.

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

A Kanak pastor from the Protestant Church of Kanaky New Caledonia, attending a Pacific solidarity forum in Aotearoa, says connecting with Pacific activists has given him the chance to feel hope again after months of riots in the French territory.

Reverend Billy Wetewea told RNZ Pacific on the sidelines of Te Hui Oranga o te Moana nui a Kiwa, a conference in Auckland this week, that the indigenous peoples of New Caledonia are fighting for their humanity and dignity.

He said being present in a room filled with Pacific peoples from countries across the region has reminded him that he is not alone.

• READ MORE: Other Kanaky New Caledonia reports

“We are descendants of fierce warriors and navigators,” Wetewea said, adding that it “should give us the strength and fire to continue the legacy of those who have walked before us and passed away, for us to carry the fight for our next new generation.

“That is something that I felt strong here in Aotearoa.”

A Pacific Islands Forum leaders’ high-level “strictly observational” mission headed by the Tongan Prime Minister Hu’akavameiliku arrived in Nouméa yesterday.

The delegation includes Fijian Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka, Cook Islands Prime Minister Mark Brown, along with Solomon Islands Foreign Affairs Minister Peter-Shanel Agovaka.

Almost 7000 security personnel with armoured vehicles have been deployed from mainland France to New Caledonia to quell further unrest.

Thirteen people have died since the violence broke out in May, including 11 Kanaks and two French police officers.

One hundred and sixty-nine people have been injured, and more than 2000 people have been arrested in the past five months.

This week, Rabuka said he would be taking a back seat during the mission and cautioned the Kanak leaders to “be very, very reasonable about what they’re asking for” form Paris, adding he told the Kanak independence movement when they started “don’t slap the hand that has fed you”.

“So have a good disassociation arrangement when you become independent, make sure you part as friends,” he added.

Reverend Wetewea said comments like Rabuka’s have led him to question the “neutrality” of the PIF mission.

“I am questioning, not the legitimacy of this visit, but the neutrality of it,” Wetewea said.

He wants to know if the leaders will be fair to what is really happening in his homeland.

Reverend Wetewea said the issue that led to the PIF mission being deferred in August, was around tensions between local government and Paris.

He said New Caledonia’s President Louis Mapou reminded Pacific leaders he was the one who had called for the meeting in the first place, and that the PIF was going to New Caledonia at his request as a full member of PIF, which Paris is not.

“I hope that [the programme] will also fairly represent all the people in New Caledonia, especially the community on the ground, the youth and the mothers who are struggling in the community and on the ground,” he said.

When asked if he had hope, Rev Wetewea replied: “We need hope.”

“We are hope because we are still alive and we are still fighting, but our hope is toward a country that will be developed for the wellbeing of everyone in the country,” he said.

“In our discussion with the youth and the community we are involved in, it is not only when we speak about our fight as Kanak people. It is not only for the Kanaks.

“We are fighting for our humanity.”

The Pacific leaders’ three-day mission from October 27-29 is supported by the PIF Secretary-General Baron Waqa and senior officials, with the guidance of the French State and New Caledonia government.

According to the PIF, they will tour Nouméa and visit with stakeholders impacted by the recent unrest, including New Caledonian political parties, youth, and the impacted communities and dialogues with the private, health, and education sectors.

Hu’akavameiliku told RNZ Pacific he was not going to preempt any solutions whatsoever.

New Caledonia government spokesperson Charles Wea told RNZ Pacific leaders would have the chance to hear from all sides involved in the unrest.

A document will then be drafted on their findings, which will be taken to the PIF foreign ministers meeting.

Following that, the findings will be presented to the PIF members in Solomon Islands at next years leaders meeting, where a decision on how the Pacific will engage going forward will be made.

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

France has been criticised for the “alarming” death toll in New Caledonia during recent protests and its “cold shower” approach to decolonisation by experts of the UN Human Rights Committee.

The UN committee met this week in Geneva for France’s five-yearly human rights review with a focus on its Pacific territory, after peaceful protests over electoral changes turned violent leaving 13 people dead since May.

French delegates at the hearing defended the country’s actions and rejected the jurisdiction of the UN decolonisation process, saying the country “no longer has any international obligations”.

• READ MORE: PM defends Fiji’s UN ‘ambush’ vote – challenged by human rights advocate
• Rabuka’s message to free Kanaky movement: ‘Don’t slap the hand that feeds you’
• ‘We’ll be talking about the future of negotiations’, says Rabuka on New Caledonia mission
• Other Kanaky New Caledonia reports
• Other CHOGM reports

A delayed fact-finding mission of Pacific Islands Forum leaders is due to arrive in New Caledonia this weekend to assess the situation on behalf of the region’s peak regional inter-governmental body.

Almost 7000 security personnel with armoured vehicles have been deployed from France to New Caledonia to quell further unrest.

“The means used and the intensity of their response and the gravity of the violence reported, as well as the amount of dead and wounded, are particularly alarming,” said committee member Jose Santo Pais, assistant Prosecutor-General of the Portuguese Constitutional Court.

“There have been numerous allegations regarding an excessive use of force and that would have led to numerous deaths among the Kanak people and law enforcement,” the committee’s vice-chair said on Wednesday.

Months of protests
Violence erupted after months of protests over a unilateral attempt by President Emmanuel Macron to “unfreeze” the territory’s electoral roll. Indigenous Kanaks feared the move would dilute their voting power and any chance of success at another independence referendum.

Eleven Kanaks and two French police have died. The committee heard 169 people were wounded and 2658 arrested in the past five months.

New Caledonia’s economy is in ruins with hundreds of businesses destroyed, tens-of-thousands left jobless and the local government seeking 4 billion euros (US$4.33 billion) in recovery funds from France.

France’s reputation has been left battered as an out-of-touch colonial power since the deadly violence erupted.

Santos Pais questioned France’s commitment to the UN Declaration on Indigenous People and the “sufficient dialogue” required under the Nouméa Accord, a peace agreement signed in 1998 to politically empower Kanak people, that enabled the decolonisation process.

“It would seem that current violence in the territory is linked to the lack of progress in decolonisation,” said Santos Pais.

Last week, the new French Prime Minister announced controversial electoral changes that sparked the protests had been abandoned. Local elections, due to be held this year, will now take place at the end of 2025.

Pacific mission
Tomorrow, Tonga’s prime minister Hu’akavameiliku Siaosi Sovaleni will lead a Pacific “observational” mission to New Caledonia of fellow leaders from Cook Islands, Fiji and Solomon Islands Minister for Foreign Affairs, together known as the “Troika-Plus”.

The PIF leaders’ three-day visit to the capital Nouméa will see them meet with local political parties, youth and community groups, private sector and public service providers.

“Our thoughts have always been with the people of New Caledonia since the unrest earlier this year, and we continue to offer our support,” Sovaleni said in a statement on Friday.

The UN committee is a treaty body composed of 18 experts that regularly reviews compliance by 173 member states with their human rights obligations and is separate from the Human Rights Council, a political body composed of states.

Serbian committee member Tijana Surlan asked France for an update on investigations into injuries and fatalities “related to alleged excessive use of force” in New Caledonia. She asked if police firearms use would be reviewed “to strike a better balance with the principles of absolute necessity and strict proportionality.”

France’s delegation responded saying it was “committed to renewing dialogue” in New Caledonia and to striking a balance between the right to demonstrate and protecting people and property with the “principle of proportionality.”

Alleged intimidation by French authorities of at least five journalists covering the unrest in New Caledonia was highlighted by committee member Kobauyah Tchamdja Kapatcha from Togo. France responded saying it guarantees freedom of the press.

France rejects ‘obligations’
The French delegation led by Ambassador for Human Rights Isabelle Rome added it “no longer administers a non-self-governing territory.”

France “no longer has any international obligations in this regard linked to its membership in the United Nations”, she told the committee on Thursday.

New Caledonia voted by modest majorities to remain part of France in referendums held in 2018 and 2020 under a UN-mandated decolonisation process. Three referendums were part of the Nouméa Accord to increase Kanaks’ political power following deadly violence in the 1980s.

A contentious final referendum in 2021 was overwhelmingly in favor of continuing with the status quo. Supporters of independence rejected its legitimacy due to a very low turnout — it was boycotted by Kanak political parties — and because it was held during a serious phase of the covid-19 pandemic, which restricted campaigning.

“France, through the referendum of September [2021], has therefore completed the process of decolonisation of its former colonies,” ambassador Rome said. She added that New Caledonia was one of the most advanced examples of the French government recognising indigenous rights, with a shared governance framework.

Another of its Pacific territories — French Polynesia — was re-inscribed on the UN decolonisation list in 2013 but France refuses to recognise its jurisdiction.

No change in policy
After a decade, France began attending General Assembly Decolonisation Committee meetings in 2023 to “promote dialogue” and that it was not a “change in [policy] direction”, Rome said.

“There is no process between the French state and the Polynesian territory that reserves a role for the United Nations,” she added.

Santos Pais responded saying, “what a cold shower”.

“The General Assembly will certainly have a completely different view from the one that was presented to us,” he said.

Earlier this month pro-independence French Polynesian President Moetai Brotherson told the UN Decolonisation Committee’s annual meeting in New York that “after a decade of silence” France must be “guided” to participate in “dialogue.”

The Human Rights Committee is due to meet again next month to adopt its findings on France.

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

In the lead up to the inauguration of President Prabowo Subianto last Sunday, Indonesia established five “Vulnerable Area Buffer Infantry Battalions” in key regions across West Papua — a move described by Indonesian Army Chief-of-Staff Maruli Simanjuntak as a “strategic initiative” by the new leader.

The battalions are based in the Keerom, Sarmi, Boven Digoel, Merauke and Sorong regencies, and their aim is to “enhance security” in Papua, and also to strengthen Indonesia’s military presence in response to long-standing unrest and conflict, partly related to independence movements and local resistance.

According to Armed Forces chief General Agus Subiyanto, “the main goal of the new battalions is to assist the government in accelerating development and improving the prosperity of the Papuan people”.

• READ MORE: Indonesia to offer ‘amnesty’ for West Papuans contesting Jakarta’s rule
• Other West Papua reports

However, this raises concerns about further militarisation and repression of a region already plagued by long-running violence and human rights abuses in the context of the movement for a free and independent West Papua.

Thousands of Indonesian soldiers have been stationed in areas impacted by violence, including Star Mountain, Nduga, Yahukimo, Maybrat, Intan Jaya, Puncak and Puncak Jaya.

As a result, the situation in West Papua is becoming increasingly difficult for indigenous people.

Extrajudicial killings in Papua go unreported or are only vaguely known about internationally. Those who are aware of these either disregard them or accept them as an “unavoidable consequence” of civil unrest in what Indonesia refers to as its most eastern provinces — the “troubled regions”.

Why do the United Nations, Pacific Islands Forum (PIF) and the international community stay silent?

While the Indonesian government frames this move as a strategy to enhance security and promote development, it risks exacerbating long-standing tensions in a region with deep-seated conflicts over autonomy and independence and the impacts of extractive industries and agribusiness on West Papuan people and their environment.

Exploitative land theft
The Centre for Climate Crime and Climate Justice, in collaboration with various international and Indonesian human and environmental rights organisations, presented testimony at the public hearings of the Permanent Peoples’ Tribunal (PPT) at Queen Mary University of London, in June.

The tribunal heard testimonies relating to a range of violations by Indonesia. A key issue, highlighted was the theft of indigenous Papuan land by the Indonesian government and foreign corporations in connection to extractive industries such as mining, logging and palm oil plantations.

The appropriation of traditional lands without the consent of the Papuan people violates their right to land and self-determination, leading to environmental degradation, loss of livelihood, and displacement of Indigenous communities.

The tribunal’s judgment underscores how the influx of non-Papuan settlers and the Indonesian government’s policies have led to the marginalisation of Papuan culture and identity. The demographic shift due to transmigration programmes has significantly reduced the proportion of Indigenous Papuans in their own land.

Moreover, a rise in militarisation in West Papua has often led to heightened repression, with potential human rights violations, forced displacement and further marginalisation of the indigenous communities.

The decision to station additional military forces in West Papua, especially in conflict-prone areas like Nduga, Yahukimo and Intan Jaya, reflects a continuation of Indonesia’s militarised approach to governance in the region.

Security pact
The Indonesia-Papua New Guinea Defence Cooperation Agreement (DCA) was signed by the two countries in 2010 but only came into effect this year after the PNG Parliament ratified it in late February.

Indonesia ratified the pact in 2012.

As reported by Asia Pacific Report, PNG’s Foreign Minister Justin Tkatchenko and Indonesia’s ambassador to PNG, Andriana Supandy, said the DCA enabled an enhancement of military operations between the two countries, with a specific focus on strengthening patrols along the PNG-West Papua border.

This will have a significant impact on civilian communities in the areas of conflict and along the border. Indigenous people in particular, are facing the threat of military takeovers of their lands and traditional border lines.

Under the DCA, the joint militaries plan to employ technology, including military drones, to monitor and manage local residents’ every move along the border.

Human rights
Prabowo, Defence Minister prior to being elected President, has a controversial track record on human rights — especially in the 1990s, during Indonesia’s occupation of East Timor.

His involvement in military operations in West Papua adds to fears that the new battalions may be used for oppressive measures, including crackdowns on dissent and pro-independence movements.

As indigenous communities continue to be marginalised, their calls for self-determination and independence may grow louder, risking further conflict in the region.

Without substantial changes in the Indonesian government’s approach to West Papua, including addressing human rights abuses and engaging in meaningful dialogue with indigenous leaders, the future of West Papuans remains uncertain and fraught with challenges.

With ongoing military operations often accused of targeting indigenous populations, the likelihood of further human rights violations, such as extrajudicial killings, arbitrary detentions, and forced displacement, remains high.

Displacement
Military operations in West Papua frequently result in the displacement of indigenous Papuans, as they flee conflict zones.

The presence of more battalions could drive more communities from their homes, deepening the humanitarian crisis in the region. Indigenous peoples, who rely on their land for survival, face disruption of their traditional livelihoods and rising poverty.

The Indonesian government launched the Damai Cartenz military operation on April 5, 2018, and it is still in place in the conflict zones of Yahukimo, Pegunungan Bintang, Nduga and Intan Jaya.

Since then, according to a September 24 Human Rights Monitor update, more than 79,867 West Papuans remain internally displaced.

The displacement, killings, shootings, abuses, tortures and deaths are merely the tip of the iceberg of what truly occurs within the tightly-controlled military operational zones across West Papua, according to Benny Wenda, a UK-based leader of the United Liberation Movement of West Papua (ULMWP).

The international community, particularly the United Nations and the Pacific Islands Forum have been criticised for remaining largely silent on the matter. Responding to the August 31 PIF communique reaffirming its 2019 call for the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights visit to West Papua, Wenda said:

“[N]ow is the time for Indonesia to finally let the world see what is happening in our land. They cannot hide their dirty secret any longer.”

Increased global attention and intervention is crucial in addressing the humanitarian crisis, preventing further escalations and supporting the rights and well-being of the West Papuans.

Without meaningful dialogue, the long-term consequences for the indigenous population may be severe, risking further violence and unrest in the region.

As Prabowo was sworn in, Wenda restated the ULMWP’s demand for an internationally-mediated referendum on independence, saying: “The continued violation of our self-determination is the root cause of the West Papua conflict.”

Ali Mirin is a West Papuan academic from the Kimyal tribe of the highlands bordering the Star Mountain region of Papua New Guinea. He is a contributor to Asia Pacific Report and Green Left in Australia.

Fiji Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka is cautioning New Caledonia’s local government to “be reasonable” in its requests from Paris ahead of a Pacific fact-finding mission.

A much-anticipated high-level visit by Pacific leaders to the French territory is confirmed, after it was postponed by New Caledonia’s local government in August due to allegations France was pushing its own agenda.

President Louis Mapou has confirmed the Pacific leaders’ mission will take place from October 27-29.

• READ MORE:  ‘We’ll be talking about the future of negotiations’, says Rabuka on New Caledonia mission
• Other Kanaky New Caledonia reports
• Other CHOGM reports

Rabuka is one of the four Pacific leaders taking part in the so-called “Troika Plus” mission and confirmed he will be in Nouméa on Sunday.

He told RNZ Pacific during his visit to Aotearoa last week that as “an old hand in Pacific leadership”, listening was key.

“I’m hoping that they will be very, very reasonable about what they’re asking for,” the prime minister said.

“When they started, the Kanaky movement started during my time as Prime Minister. I told them, ‘look, don’t slap the hand that has fed you’.

‘Good disassociation arrangement’
“So have a good disassociation arrangement when you become independent, make sure you part as friends.”

This week, Rabuka told RNZ Pacific in Apia that he would be taking a back seat during the mission.

Veteran Pacific journalist Nick Maclellan, who is in New Caledonia, said there was “significant concern” that political leaders in France did not understand the depth of the crisis.

“This crisis is unresolved, and I think as Pacific leaders arrive this week, they’ll have to look beyond the surface calm to realise that there are many issues that still have to play out in the months to come,” he said.

He said there appeared to be “a tension” between the local government of New Caledonia and the French authorities about the purpose of Pacific leaders’ mission.

“In the past, French diplomats have suggested that the Forum is welcome to come, to condemn violence, to address the question of reconstruction and so on,” he said.

“But I sense a reluctance to address issues around France’s responsibility for decolonisation.

‘Important moment’
“The very fact that four prime ministers are coming, not diplomats, not ministers, not just officials, but four prime ministers of Forum member countries, shows that this is an important moment for regional engagement,” he added.

In a statement on Friday, the Pacific Islands Forum Secretariat said that the prime ministers of Tonga and the Cook Islands, along with Solomon Islands Foreign Affairs Minister, would join Rabuka to travel to New Caledonia.

Tongan PM Hu’akavameiliku will head the mission, which is expected to land in Nouméa after the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting (CHOGM) in Samoa this week.

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

Regional leaders will gather later this month in Tonga for the 53rd Pacific Islands Forum leaders meeting in Tonga and high on the agenda will be Japan’s dumping of
treated nuclear wastewater in the Pacific Ocean.

A week ago on the 6 August 2024, the 79th anniversary of the atomic bombing of
Hiroshima in 1945 and the 39th anniversary of the Treaty of Rarotonga opening for signatures in 1985 were marked.

As the world and region remembered the horrors of nuclear weapons and stand in solidarity, there is still work to be done.

• READ MORE: Other nuclear wastewater in Pacific reports

Cook Islands Prime Minister Mark Brown has stated that Japan’s discharge of treated nuclear wastewater into the Pacific Ocean does not breach the Rarotonga Treaty which established a Nuclear-Free Zone in the South Pacific.

Civil society groups have been calling for Japan to stop the dumping in the Pacific Ocean, but Brown, who is also the chair of the Pacific Islands Forum and represents a country
associated by name with the Rarotonga Treaty, has backtracked on both the efforts of PIFS and his own previous calls against it.

Brown stated during the recent 10th Pacific Alliance Leaders Meeting (PALM10) meeting in
Tokyo that Pacific Island Leaders stressed the importance of transparency and scientific evidence to ensure that Japan’s actions did not harm the environment or public health.

But he also defended Japan, saying that the wastewater, treated using the Advanced Liquid
Processing System (ALPS) to remove most radioactive materials except tritium, met the
standard set by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).

Harmful isotopes removed
“No, the water has been treated to remove harmful isotopes, so it’s well within the standard guidelines as outlined by the global authority on nuclear matters, the IAEA,” Brown said in an Islands Business article.

“Japan is complying with these guidelines in its discharge of wastewater into the ocean.”

The Cook Islands has consistently benefited from Japanese development grants. In 2021, Japan funded through the Asian Development Bank $2 million grant from the Japan Fund for Poverty Reduction, financed by the Government of Japan.

Together with $500,000 of in-kind contribution from the government of the Cook Islands, the grant funded the Supporting Safe Recovery of Travel and Tourism Project.

Just this year Japan provided grants for the Puaikura Volunteer Fire Brigade Association totaling US$132,680 and a further US$53,925 for Aitutaki’s Vaitau School.

Long-term consequences
In 2023, Prime Minister Brown said it placed a special obligation on Pacific Island States because of ’the long-term consequences for Pacific peoples’ health, environment and human rights.

Pacific states, he said, had a legal obligation “to prevent the dumping of radioactive wastes and other radioactive matter by anyone” and “to not . . .  assist or encourage the dumping by anyone of radioactive wastes and other radioactive matter at sea anywhere within the South Pacific Nuclear Free Zone.

“Our people do not have anything to gain from Japan’s plan but have much at risk for
generations to come.”

The Pacific Islands Forum went on further to state then that the issue was an “issue of significant transboundary and intergenerational harm”.

The Rarotonga Treaty, a Cold War-era agreement, prohibits nuclear weapons testing and
deployment in the region, but it does not specifically address the discharge of the treated
nuclear wastewater.

Pacific civil society organisations continue to condemn Japan’s dumping of nuclear-treated
wastewater. Of its planned 1.3 million tonnes of nuclear-treated wastewater, the Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO) has conducted seven sets of dumping into the Pacific Ocean and was due to commence the eighth between August 7-25.

Regardless of the recommendations provided by the Pacific Island Forum’s special panel of
experts and civil society calls to stop Japan and for PIF Leaders to suspend Japan’s dialogue
partner status, the PIF Chair Mark Brown has ignored concerns by stating his support for
Japan’s nuclear wastewater dumping plans.

Contradiction of treaty
This decision is being viewed by the international community as a contradiction of the Treaty of Rarotonga that symbolises a genuine collaborative endeavour from the Pacific region, born out of 10 years of dedication from Fiji, New Zealand, Australia, the Cook Islands, and various other nations, all working together to establish a nuclear-free zone in the South Pacific. Treaty Ratification

Bedi Racule, a nuclear justice advocate said the Treaty of Rarotonga preamble had one of the most powerful statements in any treaty ever. It is the member states’ promise for a nuclear free Pacific.

“The spirit of the Treaty is to protect the abundance and the beauty of the islands for future
generations,” Racule said.

She continued to state that it was vital to ensure that the technical aspects of the Treaty and the text from the preamble is visualised.

“We need to consistently look at this Treaty because of the ongoing nuclear threats that are
happening”.

Racule said the Treaty did not address the modern issues being faced like nuclear waste dumping, and stressed that there was a dire need to increase the solidarity and the
universalisation of the Treaty.

“There is quite a large portion of the Pacific that is not signed onto the Treaty. There’s still work within the Treaty that needs to be ratified.

“It’s almost like a check mark that’s there but it’s not being attended to.”

The Pacific islands Forum meets on August 26-30.

Brittany Nawaqatabu is assistant media and communications officer of the Suva-based Pacific Network on Globalisation (PANG). 

Fiji’s Prime Minister, Sitiveni Rabuka, says he will “apologise” to fellow Melanesian leaders later this month after failing to secure agreement from Indonesia to visit its restive West Papua province.

At last year’s Pacific Islands Forum (PIF) leaders meeting in Cook Islands, the Melanesian Spearhead Group appointed Rabuka and PNG Prime Minister James Marape as the region’s “special envoys” on West Papua.

Several Pacific officials and advocacy groups have expressed anguish over alleged human rights abuses committed by Indonesian forces in West Papua, where an indigenous pro-independence struggle has simmered for decades.

• READ MORE: Other West Papua reports

Rabuka and Marape have been trying to organise a visit to West Papua for more than nine months now.

But in an exclusive interview with the ABC’s Pacific Beat, Rabuka said conversations on the trip were still “ongoing” and blamed Indonesia’s presidential elections in February for the delay.

“Unfortunately, we couldn’t go . . .  Indonesia was going through elections. In two months’ time, they will have a new substantive president in place in the palace. Hopefully we can still move forward with that,” he said.

“But in the meantime, James Marape and I will have to apologise to our Melanesian counterparts on the side of the Forum Island leaders meeting in Tonga, and say we have not been able to go on that mission.”

Pacific pressing for independent visit
Pacific nations have been pressing Indonesia to allow representatives from the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights to conduct an independent visit to Papua.

A UN Human Rights committee report released in May found there were “systematic reports” of both torture and extrajudicial killings of indigenous Papuans in the province.

But Indonesia usually rejects any criticism of its human rights record in West Papua, saying events in the province are a purely internal affair.

West Papua Resistance Leader, Victor Weimo: I must thank the colonialists for continuously teaching us to aspire to true humanity by means of rebellion. pic.twitter.com/h9n4rN9yyN

— Sina Brown-Davis سينا (@uriohau) December 1, 2022

Rabuka said he was “still committed” to the visit and would like to make the trip after incoming Indonesian president Prabowo Subianto takes power in October.

The Fiji prime minister made the comments ahead of a 10-day trip to China, with Rabuka saying he would travel to a number of Chinese provinces to see how the emerging great power had pulled millions of people out of poverty.

He praised Beijing’s development record, but also indicated Fiji would not turn to China for loans or budget support.

“As we take our governments and peoples forward, the people themselves must understand that we cannot borrow to become embroiled in debt servicing later on,” he said.

“People must understand that we can only live within our means, and our means are determined by our own productivity, our own GDP.”

Rabuka is expected to meet Chinese president Xi Jinping in Beijing towards the end of his trip, at the beginning of next week.

Delegation to visit New Caledonia
After his trip to China, the prime minister will take part in a high level Pacific delegation to Kanaky New Caledonia, which was rocked by widespread rioting and violence earlier this year.

While several Pacific nations have been pressing France to make fresh commitments towards decolonisation in the wake of a contentious final vote on independence back in 2021, Rabuka said the Pacific wanted to help different political groups within the territory to find common ground.

“We will just have to convince the leaders, the local group leaders that rebuilding is very difficult after a spate of violent activities and events,” he said.

Rabuka gave strong backing to a plan to overhaul Pacific policing which Australia has been pushing hard ahead of the PIF leaders meeting in Tonga at the end of this month.

Senior Solomon Islands official Collin Beck took to social media last week to publicly criticise the initiative, suggesting that its backers were trying to “steamroll” any opposition at Pacific regional meetings.

Rabuka said the social media post was “unfortunate” and suggested that Solomon Islands or other Pacific nations could simply opt out of the initiative if they didn’t approve of it.

“When it comes to sovereignty, it is a sovereign state that makes the decision,” he said.

Republished with permission from ABC Pacific Beat.

Pacific foreign ministers have given their nod of approval for United States territories Guam and American Samoa to be associate members of main regional decision-making body, but a political analyst says it is geopolitics at play.

The news was delivered by Pacific Islands Forum (PIF) chair and Cook Islands Prime Minister Mark Brown at the PIF Foreign Ministers Meeting on Friday.

Brown said both territories meet the current qualifying criteria for associate membership.

• LISTEN TO RNZ MORNING REPORT: Guam and American Samoa to become associate members of Pacific Islands Forum
• Other Pacific Islands Forum reports

“I have to say there is widespread support for the membership of Guam and American Samoa, and so that is the recommendation in principle coming from foreign ministers that will be tabled with leaders,” he said.

However, Griffith Asia Institute’s Pacific Hub project lead Dr Tess Newton Cain said the move had a geopolitical aspect.

“When it comes to the Pacific Islands Forum, the US has struggled with the fact that it sits at the same table as China — they are both dialogue partners,” she said.

“It is like when you invite people to a wedding — the US does not like the table it is on.

US seeking ‘better table’
“It wants to be on a better table and being able to have two of its territories, American Samoa and Guam, get that associate membership — if that happens — does seem to indicate this is how they get a little bit of an edge on China.”

She expects the application to be accepted at the Leaders’ Meeting in Tonga at the end of the month.

Tokelau and Wallis and Futuna are currently the associate members of the Forum. American Samoa and Guam are currently forum observers; being upgraded to associate members will give them better participation in the regional institution.

Guam’s Governor Lou Leon Guerrero told RNZ Pacific last week the territory would ultimately want to be full voting members.

US Secretary of State Antony Blinken had previously said the territories’ political status meant they could not be full members but he supported the application for associate membership.

French territories New Caledonia and French Polynesia became full members in 2016.

Newton Cain believes full membership for the two US territories would be a push.

French territories ‘justified’
But she said for the French territories it was “kind of justified” — New Caledonia was on the path to independence, while French Polynesia was re-inscribed to the United Nations list of non-self-governing territories (C-24 list).

“If Guam and American Samoa are not interested, or there is no kind of indication that they are moving towards being sovereign or even in a compact, like Marshall Islands and Palau and FSM, then that would be a big ask.”

Newton Cain thinks full membership would mean some member states would have concerns because it means Washington is getting closer to the decision making.

“There is also regional concern surrounding Guam’s military build-up. If the territory wanted to progress to full membership it may not be able to comply with the South Pacific Nuclear-Free Treaty,” Newton Cain said.

Architecture reform
Brown said the Forum was undergoing a review of its architecture, including criteria for associate member status and observer status, which would likely see changes to associate membership applications.

“So, while [Guam and American Samoa] applications will be considered by leaders, and in this case, it looks favourably to be elevated to associate membership — the review of the regional architecture, as it pertains to associate membership, may see some changes,” he said.

Newton Cain said it was not clear what Brown meant.

“It would be a very bad look diplomatically if they were to allow them to become associate members and then in a couple of years say, ‘oh we have changed the rules now and you no longer qualify’.”

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

The high-level Pacific mission to New Caledonia will be a three person-led delegation and it is still expected to happen prior to the Pacific Islands Forum Leaders (PIF) Meeting in Tonga on August 26, says PIF chair Mark Brown.

Brown, who is also the Cook Islands Prime Minister, made the comment at the PIF Foreign Ministers Meeting on Friday following French President Emmanuel Macron approving the mission.

“It’s important that everyone can assess the situation together with [France],” the French Ambassador to the Pacific, Véronique Roger-Lacan, told RNZ Pacific on Friday.

• READ MORE: Macron gives Pacific mission to Kanaky New Caledonia green light, says diplomat
• Other Kanaky New Caledonia crisis reports

Brown said Tonga’s Prime Minister, Hu’akavameiliku Siaosi Sovaleni, may not be on the trip “because of pending obligations in preparation for the leaders meeting”.

“In which case the incoming troika member, Prime Minister of Solomon Islands [Jeremiah Menele], would be the next person,” he said.

“It will be a three-person delegation that will be leading the delegation to New Caledonia and the expectation is it will be done before the leaders meeting at the end of this month.”

Brown and Fiji Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka will both be on the mission.

‘Sensitive political dimensions’
“The Forum is very mindful of the nature of the relationship that New Caledonia as a member of the Forum has, but also France’s relationship with New Caledonia currently as a territory of France.

“There are some sensitive political dimensions that must be taken into account, but we feel that our sentiments as a Forum, firstly, is to try and reduce the incidents of violence that has taken place over the last few months and also to call for dialogue as the way forward.”

He said the decision around timing of the trip is up to the troika members — current chair, previous chair and incoming chair.

Meanwhile, New Zealand’s Foreign Affairs Minister and Deputy Prime Minister Winston Peters prior to the announcement from France, said it was still to be worked out what role New Zealand would play on the New Caledonia mission.

“We are seriously concerned to ensure that the long-term outcome is a peaceful solution but also where the economics of New Caledonia is sustained, that’s important,” he said.

Peters said he expected that over time there would be more than one delegation sent to New Caledonia.

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

France has approved a high-level Pacific “fact-finding mission” to New Caledonia to gather information from all sides involved in the ongoing crisis.

“We are welcoming a mission of the troika for a fact-finding mission in New Caledonia before the [Pacific Islands Forum Leaders Meeting],” the French Ambassador to the Pacific, Véronique Roger-Lacan, told RNZ Pacific in an exclusive interview today.

“I gave a letter to the [PIF] Secretary-General Baron Waqa and Prime Minister Mark Brown, the chair.

• READ MORE: Other Kanaky New Caledonia crisis reports

“It’s a good idea. It’s important that everyone can assess the situation together with [France].”

She said it was important that dialogue continued.

“We repeat the fact that these riots were conducted by a handful of people who contest democratic, transparent and fair processes, and that the French state has restored security, and is rebuilding and organising the reconstruction [of New Caledonia]. ”

Forum leaders wrote to French President Emmanuel Macron last month, requesting to send a Forum Ministerial Committee to Nouméa to gather information from all sides involved in the ongoing crisis.

The confirmation comes as the Forum foreign ministers are meeting in Suva, ahead of the 53rd PIF Leaders Summit on Tonga at the end of the month.

‘We are family’
Melanesian Spearhead Group chairperson and Vanuatu Prime Minister Charlot Salwai backs independence for New Caledonia through a democratic process.

“It’s a concern … and we decided to have a mission into New Caledonia to talk to the both sides,” Salwai said.

It has been almost three months since violence broke out in the French territory, killing 10 people, and causing tens of millions of dollars in damage to the economy.

Salwai told RNZ Pacific he had supported the independence of Melanesian countries for a long time.

“It’s not only a [PIF] member and neighbour, but we are family,” Salwai said.

“We are also for a long time Vanuatu support independence of Melanesian countries.

“We’re not going to interfere in the politics in France, but politically and morally, we support the independence of New Caledonia. Of course, it has to go through democratic process like a referendum, they are the ones to decide.”

Pacific leaders want to send a high-level Pacific mission to Nouméa before the end of the month.

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

France is “checking” whether a high-level mission to New Caledonia will be possible prior to or after the Pacific Islands Forum Leaders’ Summit in Tonga at the end of the month.

Forum leaders have written to French President Emmanuel Macron requesting to send a Forum Ministerial Committee to Nouméa to gather information from all sides involved in the ongoing crisis.

The French Ambassador to the Pacific, Véronique Roger-Lacan, will be in Suva on Friday for the Forum Foreign Ministers Meeting to “continue the dialogue . . . and explain the facts”.

• READ MORE: Other Kanaky New Caledonia unrest reports

She told RNZ Pacific that sending a mission to New Caledonia was a request and it was up to the PIF to decide if “anything is realistic”.

“Paris is checking whether it can be before the summit or after. We still need information,” she said.

Asked if France was open to the idea of such a visit by Pacific leaders, Roger-Lacan said: “Paris is always open for dialogue.”

On Monday, the incoming PIF chair and Tonga’s Prime Minister, Hu’akavameiliku Siaosi Sovaleni, confirmed he was still waiting to “receive any notification from Paris”.

“It’s very important for the Pacific Islands Forum to visit New Caledonia before the leaders meeting,” he said.

But Roger-Lacan said it is up to Paris to decide.

“New Caledonia is French territory and it is the State which decides on who enters the French territory and when and how.”

It has been almost three months now since violent unrest broke out in Nouméa after an amendment to the French constitution that would voter eligibility in New Caledonia’s local elections, which the pro-independence groups said would marginalise the indigenous Kanaks.

French security forces are still working on removing roadblocks, mainly in the capital Nouméa and its outskirts.

The death toll stands at 10 — eight civilians and two gendarmes. Senior pro-independence leaders who were charged for instigating the civil unrest are in jail in mainland France awaiting trial.

It is estimated over 800 buildings and businesses have been looted and burnt down by rioters.

There have been reports that people were leaving the territory for good in the aftermath of the unrest.

“There are lots of industries that have closed because of the burning and of the riots, and maybe those people are not sure that anything will reopen.

“When there is a place which is not worth investing anymore people change places. It’s normal life.”

She slammed the Pacific media for “not being very balanced” with their reports on the New Caledonia situation.

“Apparently, there have been people in the Pacific briefed by one side, not by all the sides, and they have to hear all the points of view.”

Saint-Louis still not under control
She said security was now “almost back”.

“There is one last pocket of of instability, which is the Saint-Louis community and there are 16,000 New Caledonian people who still cannot move freely within that area because there is  so many unrest.

“But otherwise, security has been brought back,” she added.

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

Promises of “accountability and transparency” in deep-sea mining has seen a tsunami-size vote by nations on Friday for a Brazilian scientist to replace the incumbent British lawyer as head of an obscure UN organisation that regulates the world’s seabed.

Mounting international opposition to prospects of the International Seabed Authority (ISA) approving exploitation of the deep ocean’s vast mineral bounty by corporations before its environmental regulations were finalised fuelled the mood for change.

A rare vote by member nations saw Brazil’s candidate, former oceanographer Leticia Carvalho, defeat two-term head Michael Lodge, who has been criticised for being aligned to seabed mining companies.

• READ MORE: Other deep-sea mining reports

Lodge was not present when the result was announced.

“The winning margin reflects the appetite for change,” Carvalho told BenarNews. “I see that transparency and accountability, broader participation, more focus on additional science, bridging knowledge gaps are the priority areas.”

Lodge had support from only 34 nations compared with 79 for Carvahlo, who also campaigned on restoring neutrality to the secretary-general position. She is currently a senior official at the UN Environment Programme and a former oil industry regulator in Brazil.

The change of leadership at the Kingston-based ISA is a possible setback to efforts to quickly finalise regulations for seabed mining, which would pave the way for exploitation to begin in the areas under its jurisdiction.

Some countries, meanwhile, are exploring the possibility of nodule mining in their territorial waters, which are outside of ISA oversight.

Mining of the golf ball-sized metallic nodules that litter swathes of the sea bed is touted as a source of rare earths and minerals needed for green technologies, such as electric vehicles, as the world reduces reliance on fossil fuels.

Sceptics say such minerals are already abundant on land and warn that mining the sea bed could cause irreparable damage to an environment that is still poorly understood by science.

Lodge was nominated for a third term by Kiribati, which is one of three Pacific island nations working with Nasdaq-listed The Metals Company on plans to exploit seabed minerals. More than 30 nations were disqualified from voting in the secret ballot as their financial contributions to the ISA are in arrears.

The hundreds of delegates and other attendees at the ISA assembly lined up to hug Carvalho following her election, including Gerard Barron, chief executive of The Metals Company.

After the vote the company tweeted, “we appreciate her proactive engagement with us and share her belief that adopting regulations, not a moratorium, is the best way to fulfil the ISA’s mandate,” adding they still hope to become “the first commercial operator in this promising industry.”

Greenpeace International campaigner Louisa Casson said she hoped Carvalho would work with governments “to change the ISA’s course to serve the public interest, as it has been driven by the narrow corporate interests of the deep sea mining industry for far too long.”

This week’s annual assembly of the ISA also witnessed more nations joining a call for a moratorium on mining until there was greater scientific and environmental understanding of its likely consequences.

Tuvalu is one of the latest to join those calling for a moratorium, taking to 10 the members of the 18-nation Pacific Islands Forum, now opposed to any imminent start to deep-sea mining.

Nations such as Vanuatu and Chile also succeeded in forcing a general debate on establishing an environmental policy at the ISA.

Pelenatita Petelo Kara, a Tongan activist who campaigns against deep-sea mining, said she was hopeful new leadership would mean “more time for science to confirm new developments” such as alternative minerals for green technologies as well as a more thorough dialogue on the proposed mining rules.

Deep-sea mineral extraction has been particularly contentious in the Pacific, where some economically lagging island nations see it as a possible financial windfall, but many other island states are strongly opposed.

The island nation of Nauru in June 2021 notified the seabed authority of its intention to begin mining, which triggered the clock for the first time on a two-year period for the authority’s member nations to finalise regulations.

Its president David Adeang told the assembly earlier this week that its mining application currently being prepared in conjunction with The Metals Company would allow the ISA to make “an informed decision based on real scientific data and not emotion and conjecture.”

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

New Zealand should join others in calling New Caledonia’s third independence referendum invalid, one of the founders of the Kanaky Aotearoa Solidarity Network says.

It follows the 10th Pacific Islands Leaders Meeting (PALM10) in Tokyo last week, where New Zealand Foreign Affairs Minister Winston Peters called for the Pacific Islands Forum to facilitate mediation in the French territory.

In December 2021, the Kanak population boycotted the referendum to mourn their dead during the covid-19 pandemic, after their calls for the referendum to be delayed was ignored.

• READ MORE: From Kanaky to Palestine, how Paris is weaponising deportations from Pacific
• Other Kanaky New Caledonia crisis reports

As a result, Peters said the referendum saw voter turnout collapse and almost 97 percent of voters who cast a ballot voted “No” to independence.

“Delegitimising the result, in the eyes of pro-independence forces and some neutral observers at least, was the low turnout of only 44 percent.”

Kanaky Aotearoa Solidarity group’s David Small said Peters should have aligned with the Melanesian Spearhead Group which has called for a UN mission to New Caledonia.

‘Referendum delegitimised’
“He said that the third referendum was delegitimised in the eyes of some, and did not include New Zealand in that,” Small said.

“It would have been better if he had because that third referendum was indefensible.”

The group said Peters had mentioned the need for dialogue but failed to provide a clear pathway or goal.

“The Kanaky Aotearoa Solidarity Group is deeply disappointed by Peters’ insufficient support for the Kanak people’s struggle.

“His statement at PALM10 represents a missed opportunity for New Zealand to assert its commitment to justice and self-determination for all Pacific peoples.”

‘Fed by disinformation’, claims envoy
However, the top French diplomat in the Pacific, Véronique Roger-Lacan, said she had reassured Pacific Islands Forum Leaders (PIF) that attended PALM10 that France’s actions during the third and final independence referendum were fair.

Roger-Lacan spoke to RNZ Pacific from Tokyo following talks with the leaders of Papua New Guinea and Tonga.

She said there was “so much disinformation” surrounding issues in New Caledonia and that Pacific leaders had only heard one side of the story.

“For example, Mark Brown sent a letter to President [Louis] Mapou but he did not try and contact France, kind of ignoring that New Caledonia until further notice is France,” she said.

“We tried to call them, but Mark Brown would not be there to pick up the phone.

“But luckily, the Prime Minister of Tonga, the incoming chair of the PIF and everyone else was there, so that everyone was very happy to hear the information that we were providing.

“We are going to provide full information in writing because it seems that everybody ignores . . . the substance of the matter, and everybody is totally fed by disinformation and propaganda” surrounding issues in New Caledonia.

“We will now go through the process of how we will put this into practice. Of course, it will require the support of the government of France for the mission to proceed,” Brown said at a news conference at the PALM10 meeting in Tokyo.

A spokesperson for the New Caledonia President’s office, Charles Wea, has told RNZ Pacific that the high-level group was expected to be made up of the leaders of Fiji, Cook Islands, Tonga and Solomon Islands.

“The decision that has been made by the leaders during the meeting in Japan to send a mission to New Caledonia before the annual meeting over the of PIF around the second or third week of August,” he said.

“The objectives of the mission will be to come and listen and discuss with all parties in New Caledonia in order to [prepare] a report [for] the leaders meeting in Tonga.”

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

By Pita Ligaiula in Tokyo

The Pacific Islands Forum hopes to send a high-level delegation to Kanaky New Caledonia to investigate the current political crisis in the French territory before the Pacific Islands Forum Leaders meeting in Tonga in August.

According to Pacnews, Forum Chair and Cook Islands Prime Minister Mark Brown confirmed this during an interview with journalists in Tokyo after the conclusion of the PALM10 meeting.

He said while it was a work in progress, there had been a request from the territorial government of New Caledonia for a high-level Pacific delegation.

• READ MORE: Other Kanaky New Caledonia reports

Brown said the next step was to write a letter which would then need support from France.

“We will now go through the process of how we will put this into practice. Of course, it will require the support of the Government of France for the mission to proceed,” Brown said.

The Melanesian Spearhead Group (MSG) has voiced strong objections to France’s handling of the political situation in Kanaky/New Caledonia.

Brown said the Forum shared similar concerns.

“We do have similar concerns. The third referendum was boycotted by the Kanak population because of the impacts of covid-19 and the respect for the mourning period. Therefore, the outcome of that referendum is not valuable,” he said.

The adviser to New Caledonia’s President Charles Wea, who is in Japan for talks on the sidelines of the PALM10 meeting, told RNZ Pacific the high level group would be made up of the leaders of Fiji, Cook Islands, Tonga and Solomon Islands.

Fiji’s Prime Minister and Foreign Minister Sitiveni Rabuka announced he would lead the Forum’s fact-finding mission in New Caledonia.

“I have also been asked by many Pacific leaders to lead a group to conduct a fact-finding mission in Nouméa to understand the problems they are facing,” he said during a talanoa session with the Fijian diaspora in Tokyo.

“Additionally, I will accompany Prime Minister James Marape to visit the President of Indonesia to discuss further actions regarding the people of West Papua.”

New Zealand’s Foreign Affairs Minister Winston said on Friday that the Pacific Islands Forum could serve as a “constructive force” to find a “path forward” in New Caledonia.

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

By Laraswati Ariadne Anwar in Suva

The Pacific Island countries are Indonesia’s neighbours. However, so far they are not very familiar to the ears of the Indonesian people.

One example is Fiji, the largest country in the Pacific Islands. This country, which consists of 330 islands and a population of 924,000 people, has actually had relations with Indonesia for 50 years.

In the context of regional geopolitics, Fiji is the anchor of Indonesian diplomacy in the Pacific.

• READ MORE:  When media freedom as the ‘oxygen of democracy’ and hypocrisy share the same Pacific arena — Pacific Media Watch
• Other Pacific Media Conference reports

Fiji is known as a gateway to the Pacific. This status has been held for centuries because, as the largest country and with the largest port, practically all commodities entering the Pacific Islands must go through Fiji.

Along with Papua New Guinea, Vanuatu, and the Front de Libération Nationale Kanak et Socialiste (FLNKS) of New Caledonia, Fiji forms the Melanesian Spearhead Group (MSG).

Indonesia now has the status of a associate member of the MSG, or one level higher than an observer.

For Indonesia, this closeness to the MSG is important because it is related to affirming Indonesia’s sovereignty.

Human rights violations
The MSG is very critical in monitoring the handling of human rights violations that occur in Papua. In terms of sovereignty, the MSG acknowledges Indonesia’s sovereignty as recorded in the Charter of the United Nations.

The academic community in Fiji is also highlighting human rights violations in Papua. As a Melanesian nation, the Fijian people sympathise with the Papuan community.

In Fiji, some individuals hold anti-Indonesian sentiment and support pro-independence movements in Papua. In several civil society organisations in Suva, the capital of Fiji, the Morning Star flag of West Papuan independence is also raised in solidarity.

Even so, Fijian academics realise that they lack context in examining Indonesian problems. This emerged in a talanoa or focused discussion with representatives of universities and Fiji’s mainstream media with a media delegation from Indonesia. The event was organised by the Indonesian Embassy in Suva.

Academics say that reading sources about Indonesia generally come from 50 years ago, causing them to have a limited understanding of developments in Indonesia. When examined, Indonesian journalists also found that they themselves lacked material about the Pacific Islands.

Both the Fiji and Indonesian groups realise that the information they receive about each other mainly comes from Western media. In practice, there is scepticism about coverage crafted according to a Western perspective.

“There must be open and meaningful dialogue between the people of Fiji and Indonesia in order to break down prejudices and provide space for contextual critical review into diplomatic relations between the two countries,” said Associate Professor Shailendra Singh, a former journalist who is now head of the journalism programme at the University of the South Pacific (USP). He was also chair of the 2024 Pacific International Media Conference Committee which was attended by the Indonesian delegation.

‘Prejudice’ towards Indonesia
According to experts in Fiji, the prejudice of the people in that country towards Indonesia is viewed as both a challenge and an opportunity to develop a more quality and substantive relationship.

In that international conference, representatives of mainstream media in the Pacific Islands criticised and expressed their dissatisfaction with donors.

The Pacific Islands are one of the most foreign aid-receiving regions in the world. Fiji is among the top five Pacific countries supported by donors.

Based on the Lowy Institute’s records from Australia as of October 31, 2023, there are 82 donor countries in the Pacific with a total contribution value of US$44 billion. Australia is the number one donor, followed by China.

The United States and New Zealand are also major donors. This situation has an impact on geopolitical competition issues in the region.

Indonesia is on the list of 82 countries, although in terms of the amount of funding contributed, it lags behind countries with advanced economies. Indonesia itself does not take the position to compete in terms of the amount of funds disbursed.

Thus, the Indonesian Ambassador to Fiji, Nauru, Kiribati, and Tuvalu, Dupito Simamora, said that Indonesia was present to bring a new colour.

“We are present to focus on community empowerment and exchange of experiences,” he said.

An example is the empowerment of maritime, capture fisheries, coffee farming, and training for immigration officers. This is more sustainable compared to the continuous provision of funds.

Maintaining ‘consistency’
Along with that, efforts to introduce Indonesia continue to be made, including through arts and culture scholarships, Dharmasiswa (a one-year non-degree scholarship programme offered to foreigners), and visits by journalists to Indonesia. This is done so that the participating Fiji community can experience for themselves the value of Bhinneka Tunggal Ika — the official motto of Indonesia, “Unity in diversity”.

Indonesia has also offered itself to Fiji and the Pacific Islands as a “gateway” to Southeast Asia. Fiji has the world’s best-selling mineral water product, Fiji Water. They are indeed targeting expanding their market to Southeast Asia, which has a population of 500 million people.

The Indonesian Embassy in Suva analysed the working pattern of the BIMP-EAGA, or the East ASEAN economic cooperation involving Indonesia, Malaysia, Brunei Darussalam and the Philippines. From there, a model that can be adopted which will be communicated to the MSG and developed according to the needs of the Pacific region.

In the ASEAN High-Level Conference of 2023, Indonesia initiated a development and empowerment cooperation with the South Pacific that was laid out in a memorandum of understanding between ASEAN and the Pacific Islands Forum (PIF).

At the World Water Forum (WWF) 2024 and the Island States Forum (AIS), the South Pacific region is one of the areas highlighted for cooperation. Climate crisis mitigation is a sector that is being developed, one of which is the cultivation of mangrove plants to prevent coastal erosion.

For Indonesia, cooperation with the Pacific is not just diplomacy. Through ASEAN, Indonesia is pushing for the ASEAN Outlook on the Indo-Pacific (AOIP). Essentially, the Indo-Pacific region is not an extension of any superpower.

All geopolitical and geo-economic competition in this region must be managed well in order to avoid conflict.

Indigenous perspectives
In the Indo-Pacific region, PIF and the Indian Ocean Rim Association (IORA) are important partners for ASEAN. Both are original intergovernmental organisations in the Indo-Pacific, making them vital in promoting a perception of the Indo-Pacific that aligns with the framework and perspective of indigenous populations.

On the other hand, Indonesia’s commitment to the principle of non-alignment was tested. Indonesia, which has a free-active foreign policy policy, emphasises that it is not looking for enemies.

However, can Indonesia guarantee the Pacific Islands that the friendship offered is sincere and will not force them to form camps?

At the same time, the Pacific community is also observing Indonesia’s sincerity in resolving various cases of human rights violations, especially in Papua. An open dialogue on this issue could be evidence of Indonesia’s democratic maturity.

Republished from Kompas in partnership with The University of the South Pacific.

An unheralded visit to Indonesia’s Papuan provinces by a leading Pacific diplomat has drawn criticism for undermining a push for a United Nations human rights mission to the region where indigenous pro-independence fighters have fought Indonesian rule for decades.

The Melanesian Spearhead Group’s Director-General, Leonard Louma, has not responded to BenarNews’ questions about the brief visit. It occurred just days after the most recent clash between Indonesian forces and the Papuan resistance, which resulted in four deaths and hundreds of civilians fleeing their homes in Paniai regency in Central Papua province.

Indonesia has capitalised on the visit earlier this month to portray its governance of the contested Melanesian territory, generally referred to as West Papua in the Pacific, in a positive light.

• READ MORE: Other West Papua reports

State news agency Antara said Louma had declared Papua to be in a “stable and conducive” condition.

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.”

The Indonesian government’s sponsorship of the visit is “another attempt to downplay a global call, including from the MSG, to allow the UN Human Rights Commission to visit and assess human rights conditions in Papua,” said Hipo Wangge, an Indonesian foreign policy researcher at Australian National University.

“It’s also another attempt to neutralise regional concern over deep-seated discrimination against Papuans,” he told BenarNews.

UN human rights rebuff
For several years, Indonesia has rebuffed a request from the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights to carry out an independent fact-finding mission in Papua.

The Pacific Islands Forum, a regional organisation of 18 nations, has called on Indonesia since 2019 to allow the mission to go ahead.

The Melanesian Spearhead Group (MSG) — whose members are Fiji, Vanuatu, Papua New Guinea, Solomon Islands and New Caledonia’s Kanak independence movement FLNKS — has made similar appeals.

It is unclear whether the comments attributed to Louma by Antara and an Indonesian government statement are his own words. The Antara article, published last week on June 19, in English and Indonesian, is more or less identical to a statement released by Indonesia’s Ministry of Information and Communications.

An insurgency has simmered in Papua since the early 1960s when Indonesian forces invaded the region, which had remained under a separate Dutch administration following Indonesia’s 1945 declaration of independence from the Netherlands.

Indonesia argues its incorporation of the mineral rich territory was rightful under international law because it was part of the Dutch East Indies empire that is the basis for Indonesia’s modern borders.

Papuans, culturally and ethnically distinct from the rest of Indonesia, say they were denied the right to decide their own future and are now marginalised in their own land. Indonesian control was formalised in 1969 with a UN-supervised referendum restricted to little more than 1000 Papuan voters.

Arrived from PNG
The Indonesian statement said Louma, his executive adviser Christopher Nisbert and members of their entourage arrived on June 17 at the Skouw-Wutung border crossing after traveling overland from Port Moresby in Papua New Guinea.

They were met by an Indonesian diplomat and then traveled to Jayapura accompanied by Indonesian officials.

On June 19 they took part in a conference organised by Indonesia’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs that was purportedly to address security concerns in Melanesia.

Yones Douw, a Papuan human rights activist based in Paniai, said a properly conducted visit by the Melanesian Spearhead Group should have had wide public notice and involved meetings with churches, customary leaders, journalists and civil society organisations, including the independence movement.

“This visit is just like a thief — in secret. I suspect that the comments submitted to the mass media were the language of the Indonesian government, not on behalf of the MSG,” he told BenarNews.

“This way can damage the togetherness or unity of the Melanesian people,” he said.

The United Liberation Movement for West Papua (ULMWP), an independence movement umbrella organisation, said it should have been notified of the visit because it has observer status at the MSG. Indonesia is an associate member.

‘A surreptitious visit’
“We were not notified by the MSG Secretariat. This is a surreptitious visit initiated by the Indonesian Ministry of Foreign Affairs,” said Markus Haluk, the ULMWP’s executive secretary.

“We will file a protest,” he told the MSG’s chair, Vanuatu Prime Minister Charlot Salwai.

Indonesia, over several years, has stepped up its efforts to neutralise Pacific support for the West Papuan independence movement, particularly among Melanesian nations that have ethnic and cultural links to Papuans living under Indonesian rule.

It has had success in ending direct criticism from Pacific island governments — many of which had used the UN General Assembly as a forum to air their concerns about human rights abuses — but grassroots support for Papuan self-determination remains strong.

Wangge, the ANU researcher, said the Indonesian government had been particularly active with Melanesian nations since Louma became director-general of the MSG’s secretariat in 2022.

At the same time it had avoided addressing ongoing reports of abuses in the Papuan provinces, he said, and militarisation of the region.

Indonesia’s military offered a rare apology to Papuans in March after video emerged of soldiers repeatedly slashing an indigenous man with a bayonet while he was forced to stand in a water-filled drum.

Regional security meetings
Among the initiatives, Indonesian police have facilitated regional security meetings, the Indonesian foreign ministry established an Indonesia-Pacific Development Forum, fisheries training has been provided, and the foreign ministry is providing diplomacy training for young diplomats from Melanesian countries and the MSG’s secretariat.

There was nothing to show, Wangge said, from the MSG’s appointment last year of Fiji Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka and Papua New Guinea Prime Minister James Marape as special envoys to Indonesia on West Papua.

The two leaders met Indonesian President Joko Widodo, whose second five-year term finishes in October, at a global summit in San Francisco in November.

Following the meeting, there was no agenda to facilitate a dialogue over West Papua, he said.

Marape is due in Indonesia mid-July for an official state visit.

“One thing is clear: the Indonesian government will buy more time by initiating more made-up efforts to cover pressing problems in West Papua,” Wangge said.

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

As New Caledonia passes the one-month mark since violent and deadly clashes erupted on last month, there has been no clear path put forward by Paris as far as the Kanak and Socialist National Liberation Front (FLNKS) is concerned.

Eight people — including the leader of the Field Action Coordinating Cell (CCAT) Christian Téin — were arrested yesterday by New Caledonia’s security forces over the unrest since May 13.

According to the Public Prosecutor’s office, they face several potential charges, including organised destruction of goods and property and incitement of crimes and murders or murder attempts on officers entrusted with public authority.

• LISTEN TO RNZ PACIFIC WAVES: Listen to the people that were harassed in their houses” – French Ambassador to the Pacific Véronique Roger-Lacan
• New Caledonia police arrest pro-independence leader among 11 people over deadly protests – Al Jazeera
• French police raid pro-independence Kanak party HQ, arrest eight in crackdown
• Nouméa’s Tontouta International Airport reopened after civil unrest
• Other New Caledonia unrest reports

“All the unrest, all the troubles, is the result of the ignorance of the French government,” said New Caledonia territorial government spokesperson Charles Wea.

“We cannot have peace without the independence of the country. New Caledonia will always get into trouble if the case of independence is not taken into consideration,” he said.

But speaking in an exclusive interview with RNZ Pacific, the French Ambassador to the Pacific, Véronique Roger-Lacan, said there were options to resolve the ongoing conflict — but the violence needed to stop first.

Roger-Lacan said there was a national process to address the independence issue — that was through the controversial constitutional changes which has sparked the unrest.

Paris is also engaged with the UN Committee on Decolonisation (C24) where options of self-determination through independence or free association with an independent state are being discussed.

On top of that, Paris has met with the Pacific Islands Forum (PIF) heads, or troika, over the phone and said talks are underway to either organise a meeting with regional leaders soon, or at the PIF leaders meeting in Tonga in August.

Whatever the option, the FLNKS and the wider pro-independence movement want a robust process that leads to independence, said Wea.

Roger-Lacan said the forces were needed and she rejected claims that the territory was being “militarised”.

She stressed that the thousands of special forces deployed were “necessary” to contain the violence and restore law and order.

Territorial Route 1 has been blocked by barricades erected by the rioters, and Roger-Lacan posed the question: “How do you remove this type of barricade if you have no forces?”

They have called for the immediate withdrawal of the extra forces and a phasing down of security options.

Pacific Conference of Churches general secretary Reverend James Bhagwan told RNZ Pacific France’s heavy deployment of security forces looked like militarisation to him.

“We have seen far too much already these last few weeks to be fooled,” he said.

“We still have militias who are armed, we still have increasing numbers of security forces on the ground. That is militarisation whether it is formal or something that’s been organised in a different way.

“We are just calling it as we see it.

“We’ve also seen the way in which the French government treats that particular area, recognising that this is part of maintaining their colonies as part of the Indo-Pacific strategy, that there is a militarisation movement happening by the French in the Pacific.”

‘Get their facts right’
However, Ambassador Roger-Lacan vehemently disagrees with such claims, saying individuals such as Reverend Bhagwan need to “get their facts right”.

She said claims that the French state had militarised New Caledonia and the region, must be corrected because “it’s not true”.

“First of all, violence had to be stopped, and public order and law enforcement had to be resumed,” she said.

“I would like to suggest for those people [civil society] to watch the houses that were burnt, to listen to the people that were harassed in their houses, to listen to people who were scared of the violence.”

She said such comments were biased, doubling down that “reinforcement was needed”.

Intergenerational trauma
The French Ambassador to the Pacific said concerns that the death toll from the unrest was much higher than reported was also not true.

The death toll stands at eight, she said, adding that three state security officers and five civilians had died.

But some indigenous Kanaks have called for Paris to investigate the death toll, as they believe more young rioters were feared dead.

Roger-Lacan wants worried parents to know France had heard them and concerned parents could call the 24/7 hotline.

“With gendarmes in New Caledonia everywhere, they know all the families, they know all the tribes,” she said.

“It is not true that we don’t have the appropriate links with the whole population.”

Reverend Bhagwan believes it is naive to expect communities to simply trust France given the political history of the territory.

He said there was “intergenerational trauma” simmering under the surface, especially when Kanaks see French forces on their land.

“You can understand then why mothers are concerned about their children, and so to ignore that intergenerational trauma for people in Kanaky, is really a little bit of naivety on the French High Commissioner’s part,” Reverend Bhagwan said.

But one thing all parties agree on is that “force” is not the answer to solve the current crisis.

“Of course, force is not the answer,” Ambassador Roger-Lacan said, but added “force has to be used to bring back public order sometimes”.

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

The leaders of Papua New Guinea and New Zealand have discussed a refreshed partnership that could boost the number of places for short-term RSE horticultural workers coming to Aotearoa.

Christopher Luxon had a stopover in Papua New Guinea yesterday while en route to Japan with a business delegation, and met with PNG Prime Minister James Marape.

But the Japan leg of the trip was almost derailed when Luxon had to leave most of his delegation behind in Papua New Guinea when the RNZ Air Force plane he was travelling on broke down.

• READ MORE: ‘Miracle’ needed for NZDF plane to get Christopher Luxon home – Judith Collins
• Pacific leaders concerned over RSE exodus
• Work continues to relocate PNG villagers after devastating landslide
• NZ’s Luxon briefly stopping over to see Marape in Port Moresby

Luxon was only supposed to be in Port Moresby for 90 minutes while the Boeing 757 was refuelled.

After an hour’s delay, a Defence Force spokesperson confirmed the aircraft had blown two fuses, forcing the prime minister to take a commercial flight.

In Port Moresby, Marape and Luxon discussed regional issues, a new partnership agreement between the countries expected to be signed before September, and the expansion of the RSE (Recognised Seasonal Employer) worker programme.

The programme allows workers from participating Pacific countries to fill short-term roles in New Zealand’s horticulture industry.

Workers well-respected
The workers from PNG were well-respected in New Zealand, Luxon said.

“We personally think we need to double the amount of RSE workers that we have in New Zealand, from 19,000 up to about 38,000 . . . over a period of time.

“So that it’s actually digestible to the countries where those workers are coming from, but also to make sure we’ve got the right accommodation in place and all the investments have happened in those horticultural farms.

“That’s something that we’ll consider through the statement of partnership, with the view of how does that help PNG . . . so that when those workers go to New Zealand they learn a set of skills that they can advance in New Zealand but also ultimately bring back here to Papua New Guinea.”

Marape said he hoped the workers would be able to earn qualifications while in New Zealand.

New Zealand and PNG both shared ambitions to increase their exports, Luxon said, and should work together on that more.

Luxon talks to media from PNG.   Video: RNZ News

Landslide killed thousands
New Zealand’s assistance after a massive landslide in PNG’s Enga province had been very welcome, Marape said.

The landslide in late May is believed to have killed thousands, and affected about 10,000 people.

Defence forces from New Zealand were sent to distribute supplies in the remote area, and funds were now being funnelled through non-government organisations, Luxon said.

“We’re open to helping any way we can. Initially, it was about getting supplies into the region using some of our defence assets . . .  we did talk about geotech where there’s expertise we can bring.

“It’s a pretty tragic set of events – it’s in a very remote part of the country, it’s difficult to access, and we stand ready to help.”

Luxon’s visit was warmly welcomed, Marape said.

“New Zealand has a senior presence in our part of Planet Earth.

‘Quality interventions’
“[It] has always made quality interventions in PNG matters over the last 49 years we’ve been independent; they’ve always had an active presence in our country.

“The future is where we will not take each other for granted but we consolidate on our past … and create a shared future that is mutually beneficial for both nations.”

Luxon also underlined the value of the relationship New Zealand holds with PNG.

“Papua New Guinea is such a critical relationship to us, it’s a relationship that matters,” he said.

“We want to continue to move forward and … deepen our partnership, that’s why we’re hopeful … we’ll be able to sign an enhanced statement of partnership, a renewed statement about how our countries are going to work together.”

The pair planned to hold further discussions at the Pacific Islands Forum Leaders Meeting in Tonga, on August 26-30.

Luxon had also been invited to Papua New Guinea for the country’s 50th anniversary of independence in September 2025.

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

The new secretary-general of the Pacific Islands Forum, Baron Waqa, is “well equipped” for the role, Fiji Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka says.

Waqa, a former Nauru president is the first Nauruan national to assume the top job at the Forum.

He began his tenure last week and was welcomed during a special ceremony on Thursday night in Suva.

• READ MORE: Other Pacific Islands Forum reports

Rabuka said Waqa would serve the region and the Pacific people well, given his wealth of experience.

“As one who has held multiple leadership roles at the national, regional and global levels, we are assured that you are well equipped to take on this role and that you will lead us well,” he said.

“We believe that you will serve our region and our Pacific people and with the vast experience that you bring, we are confident that our Blue Pacific is in safe hands.”

Rabuka said the region continued to be confronted with multidimensional challenges and stressed that climate change remained the region’s “greatest threat impacting our ability to meet our development aspirations”.

Increased urgency
He added there was an increased urgency to act collectively to progress shared priorities and goals as outlined in the 2050 Strategy.

“We have laid out our pathway through the 2050 Strategy with its implementation plan. It is now in your hands. We hold high expectations because we know that you are more than able.”

Since taking up office, Waqa has already made his first official regional trip to the Solomon Islands, meeting with Prime Minister Jeremaiah Manele and his foreign minister Peter Agovaka on June 10.

“One of my key priorities as Secretary-General is to continue to strengthen our solidarity as a Pacific family,” he said.

“We look forward to working with Prime Minister Manele to build our one Blue Pacific continent and improve the lives of all Pacific people.”

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

Cook Islands Prime Minister and Pacific Islands Forum (PIF) chair Mark Brown has written to the president of the government of New Caledonia to offer support in finding a way forward.

Brown said the political situation in the French territory — which is a full member of the PIF — remains deeply concerning to the Forum family.

He said there were a number of mechanisms and processes available to PIF members to help resolve “complex and historical issues” which remain “unsettled”.

• LISTEN TO RNZ PACIFIC WAVES: French Ambassador for the Pacific Véronique Roger-Lacan talks to Lydia Lewis
• Other Kanaky New Caledonia reports

He also stressed implementing an agreed way forward “must not be rushed”.

“Our Pacific region is home to independent experts and skilled personnel, that are familiar with this region, its history, its people, and importantly, its context, that can support all parties to move this process forward,” Brown said.

“Pacific Islands Forum [is ready to] to facilitate and provide a supported and neutral space for all parties to come together in the spirit of the Pacific Way, to find an agreed way forward that safeguards the interests of the people of New Caledonia.”

French President Emanuel Macron came and left Nouméa last week without announcing a return to a freeze or scrapping of the controversial constitutional amendment, which indigenous Kanaks and pro-independence groups have been calling for.

Dialogue promised
He promised dialogue would continue, “in view of the current context, we give ourselves a few weeks so as to allow peace to return, dialogue to resume, in view of a comprehensive agreement,” he said.

Indigenous Kanaks have also called for Macron to investigate the death toll, with more young rioters feared dead, and for the proposed constitutional amendments to be withdrawn.

Concerns have also been raised around the Kanak population facing a great deal of inequity and poor health, education and job outcomes.

Vanuatu Climate Minister Ralph Regenvanu told the media at the fourth UN Small Islands Developing States conference that “everyone could see this coming three years ago”.

“France has caused this crisis by its failure to recognise the Kanaks’ call for the third referendum to be deferred,” Regenvanu said.

Regenvanu said Macron’s visit made no difference “because France has to withdraw its legislative change to open the electoral rolls to allow for a resolution through dialogue”.

He said if that did not happen it will push the situation back to the cycle of violence that was prevalent in the 1980s.

“We are calling on France to withdraw the legislative proposals, and come back to the table and set up a new accord with the indépendantistes and the anti-independentists in the territory,” Regenvanu said.

“If France does not withdraw the legislative amendments, the violence will continue.”

‘France’s credibility challenged’
Massey University Defence and Security Studies associate professor Dr Powles said the PIF had produced a “fairly scathing” report on the third and final New Caledonia referendum.

But the French President’s stand on the issue of the third self-determination referendum (held in December 2021 and boycotted by the pro-independence camp) is: “I will not go back on this.”

Dr Powles said there were options for the Forum Secretariat, including using the existing regional crisis mechanism under the Biketawa Declaration.

The declaration has been used on a number of occasions in the Pacific, in Nauru, in Solomon Islands, as well as in several other cases, she said.

“France’s credibility was strongly challenged by virtue of the fact that it is a colonial power in the Pacific,” Dr Powles said.

“A resilient Pacific is a Pacific in which all Pacific peoples are free and independent. And that is really the best type of resilience which will keep the region safe.”

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

By a Kanak from Aotearoa New Zealand in Kanaky New Caledonia

I’ve been trying to feel cool and nice on this beautiful sunny day in Kanaky. But it has already been spoiled by President Emmanuel Macron’s flashy day-long visit on Thursday.

Currently special French military forces are trying to take full control of the territory. Very ambitously.

They’re clearing all the existing barricades around the capital Nouméa, both the northern and southern highways, and towards the northern province.

• READ MORE: Macron delays New Caledonia voting rolls “unfreeze” after riots
• Media fuss over stranded tourists, but Kanaks face existential struggle
• Other Kanaky New Caledonia reports

Today, May 25, after 171 years of French occupation, we are seeing the “Lebanonisation” of our country which, after only 10 days of revolt, saw many young Kanaks killed by bullets. Example: 15 bodies reportedly found in the sea, including four girls.

[Editor: There have been persistent unconfirmed rumours of a higher death rate than has been reported, but the official death toll is currently seven — four of them Kanak, including a 17-year-old girl, and two gendarmes, one by accident. Lebanonisation is a negative political term referring to how a prosperous, developed, and politically stable country descends into a civil war or becomes a failed state — as happened with Lebanon during the 1975-1990 Lebanese Civil War.]

One of the bodies was even dragged by a car. Several were caught, beaten, burned, and tortured by the police, the BAC and the militia, one of whose leaders was none other than a loyalist elected official.

With the destruction and looting of many businesses, supermarkets, ATMs, neighbourhood grocery stores, bakeries . . . we see that the CCAT has been infiltrated by a criminal organisation which chooses very specific economic targets to burn.

Leaders trying to discredit our youth
At the same time, the leaders organise the looting, supply alcohol and drugs (amphetamines) in order to “criminalise” and discredit our youth.

A dividing line has been created between the northern and southern districts of Greater Nouméa in order to starve our populations. As a result, we have a rise in prices by the colonial counters in these dormitory towns where an impoverished Kanak population lives.

President Macron came with a dialogue mission team made up of ministers from the “young leaders” group, whose representative in the management of high risks in the Pacific is none other than a former CIA officer.

The presence of DGSE agents [the secret service involved in the bombing of the Greenpeace flagship Rainbow Warrior in 1985] and their mercenaries also gives us an idea of ​​what we are going to endure again and again for a month.

The state has already chosen its interlocutors who have been much the same for 40 years. The same ones that led us into the current situation.

Therefore, we firmly reaffirm our call for the intervention of the BRICS, the Pacific Islands Forum members, and the Melanesian Spearhead group (MSG) to put an end to the violence perpetrated against the children of the indigenous clans because the Kanak people are one of the oldest elder peoples that this land has had.

There are only 160,000 individuals left today in a country full of wealth.

New Caledonia police kill Kanak protester https://t.co/7fnNPlx5W8
A day after president Macron’s visit..

— Jimmy Naouna (@JNaouna) May 24, 2024

Food and medical aid needed
Each death represents a big loss and it means a lot to the person’s clan. More than ever, we need to initiate the decolonisation process and hold serious discussions so that we can achieve our sovereignty very quickly.

Today we are asking for the intervention of international aid for:

• The protection of our population;
• food aid; and
• medical support, because we no longer trust the medical staff of Médipôle (Nouméa hospital) and the liberals who make sarcastic judgments towards our injured and our people.

This open letter was written by a long-standing Kanak resident of New Zealand who has been visiting New Caledonia and wanted to share his dismay at the current crisis with friends back here and with Asia Pacific Report. His name is being withheld for his security.

Outgoing Secretary-General Henry Puna of the Pacific Islands Forum is “not surprised” with the violent unrest in New Caledonia which has shut down the French Pacific territory.

New Caledonia has come to a virtual stop after three days of civil unrest, resulting in burning, shooting and looting, as leaders call for calm.

French police reinforcements have arrived in Nouméa, with reports of dozens of arrests being made.

• READ MORE: Three dead in New Caledonia amid independence, electoral unrest
• Three killed in riots after France backs New Caledonia vote changes
• Other Kanaky New Caledonia crisis reports

New Caledonia’s territorial President, pro-independence leader Louis Mapou, has condemned violent actions, saying “anger cannot justify harming or destroying public property, production tools, all of which this country has taken decades to build”.

Secretary-General Puna told journalists in his final news conference as the region’s top diplomat from Rarotonga that “to see the collapse [and], protesting is very unfortunate” — but it was predictable.

He said the issue “has been boiling” since the 2021 independence referendum in the French territory, the third and final vote under the Nouméa Accord, which was boycotted by the pro-indigenous Kanak population.

He said he was there in December 2021 to monitor the independence referendum when it was taken and “it was unfortunate that it was allowed to go ahead during that time”.

‘In middle of covid pandemic’
“We were in the middle of the covid pandemic and the Kanak custom is that when somebody passes, they mourn for one year. So they weren’t allowed that freedom.

“As a result, they didn’t want to take part in the referendum because they couldn’t go against their tradition and go campaigning or do other work. That’s disrespectful for the custom.”

Puna said the Nouméa Accord — all the processes, and the steps leading to that referendum, had been set and agreed to by all parties and if that had been followed right through, the referendum would not have been held then but in September 2022.

“To see the collapse and protesting is very unfortunate because it does raise some issues that need to be resolved. But I think it can be resolved in the wisdom of our leaders at this time.

“That’s something that we really need to talk about openly and honestly. What the causes of the problem are, and what the solutions could be.

‘Recognise greater autonomy’ – Mark Brown
The outgoing chair of the Forum and Cook Islands Prime Minister Mark Brown said greater autonomy for the indigenous Kanak population was needed.

Brown said Pacific peoples valued sovereignty and the protests were in response to that.

He said many forum members were former colonies.

“If there’s one thing that specific countries value, it is the sovereignty and independence. To be able to have control over the destiny of your own country,” he said.

New Caledonia, French Polynesia were new entrants into the Forum and this was in recognition of their calls they had made for greater autonomy coming from their people.

“My initial view of the unrest that’s occurring in Caledonia, it is a call to recognise greater autonomy and greater independence from the people on those islands,” he said.

“As a member of the Forum now, we will be able to provide support assistance to these member countries as to the best way forward without trying to avoid any escalation of conflict.”

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

A Pacific civil society alliance has condemned French neocolonial policies in Kanaky New Caledonia, saying Paris is set on “maintaining the status quo” and denying the indigenous Kanak people their inalienable right to self-determination.

The Pacific Regional Non-Governmental Organisations (PRNGOs) Alliance, representing some 15 groups, said in a statement that it reaffirmed its solidarity with the Kanaks in a bid to to expose ongoing efforts by the French government to “derail a decolonisation process painstakingly pursued in this Pacific Island territory for the last 30 years”.

It said that France — especially under the Macron government — as the colonial power administering this UN-sanctioned process of decolonisation had repeatedly shown that it
could not remain a “neutral party” to the Noumea Accords.

• READ MORE: Other Kanaky New Caledonia reports

The 1998 pact was designed specifically to hand sovereignty back to the people of Kanaky New Caledonia and end French colonial rule, said PRNGOs.

“In recent months, the Macron government [has] forced through proposed constitutional
amendments aimed at changing voting eligibility rules for local elections in the French
territory,” said the statement.

“These eligibility provisions have been preserved and protected under the [Noumea] Accords as a safeguard for indigenous peoples against demographic changes that could make them a minority in their own land and block the path to freedom.”

The electoral amendments were passed by the French Senate in early April and
will be voted on in Parliament this month.

Elections deferred
“The Macron government has, in a parallel move, also managed to defer local elections,
initially scheduled for mid-May, to mid-December at the latest, to allow voting under new
provisions that would favour pro-French parties,” the statement said.

In 2021, President Macron unilaterally called for the third independence referendum to be
held in December that year amid the covid-19 pandemic that “heavily affected the
ability of indigenous communities to organise and participate”.

Although it was a “no” vote, only 43.87 percent of the 184,364 registered voters exercised their right to vote.

“Express reservations and requests by Kanak leaders and representatives for a later date were ignored, casting serious doubt on genuine representation and participation,” said PRNGOs.

A Pacific Islands Forum Mission sent to observe proceedings concluded in its report that “the self-determination referendum that took place 12 December 2021 did so with the non-participation of the overwhelming majority of the indigenous people of New Caledonia.

“The result of the referendum is an inaccurate representation of the will of registered voters . . . ”

The alliance said that in all of these actions, the French government had shown no interest at all in respecting the Noumea Accords or in granting the Kanak people their most fundamental rights — “particularly the right to be free”.

‘Democracy’ link claimed
Macron’s allies and pro-French advocates have claimed that these initiatives by the
French government are more consistent with democratic principles and the rule of law.

The aspirations of the Kanak people for self-determination had been
“mischaracterised as being ethno-nationalistic, akin to the ‘far-right’, and racist,” PRNGOs said.

The alliance said that if the vote on May 13 succeeded in removing the electoral roll restrictions succeed, it would be seen as a direct attack on the principle of the right to self-determination enshrined in the UN Charter and its Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People.

“That the evil of colonialism can continue unchecked in this manner, and in this 21st century, is not only an insult to the Pacific region but to the international system,” the statement said.

“The Pacific is not distracted by French false narratives. The Kanak, as people, are the rightful inhabitants of what is present day New Caledonia still under enduring French colonial rule.”

The alliance called on President Macron to withdraw the constitutional changes on electoral roll provisions protecting the rights of the indigenous people of Kanaky, and it appealed to France to send a neutral high-level mission to resume dialogue between pro-independence parties and local anti-independence groups over a new political agreement.

It also called for another independence referendum that “genuinely reflects their will”.

Recent videos depicting the barbaric torture of an indigenous Papuan man by Indonesian soldiers have opened the wounds of West Papua’s suffering, laying bare the horrifying reality faced by its people.

We must confront this grim truth — what we witness is not an isolated incident but a glaring demonstation of the deep-seated racism and systematic persecution ravaging West Papuans every single day.

Human rights defenders that the videos were taken during a local military raid in the districts of Omukia and Gome on 3-4 February 2024, Puncak Regency, Pegunungan Tengah Province.

• READ MORE: Wenda condemns ‘sadistic brutality’ of Indonesian torture of Papuan – calls for UN action
• VIEW THE VIDEOS: WARNING: Graphic violent content
• Other reports on West Papua and self-determination

Deeply proud of their rich ethnic and cultural heritage, West Papuans have often found themselves marginalised and stereotyped, while their lands are exploited and ravaged by foreign interests, further exacerbating their suffering.

Indonesia’s discriminatory policies and the heavy-handed approach of its security forces have consistently employed brutal tactics to quash any aspirations for a genuine self-autonomy among indigenous Papuans.

In the chilling footage of the torture videos, we witness the agony of this young indigenous Papuan man, bound and submerged in a drum of his own blood-stained water, while soldiers clad in military attire inflict unspeakable acts of violence on him.

The state security forces, speaking with a cruel disregard for human life, exemplify the toxic blend of racism and brutality that festers within the Indonesian military.

Racial prejudice
What makes this brutality even more sickening is the unmistakable presence of racial prejudice.

The insignia of a soldier, proudly displaying affiliation with the III/Siliwangi, Yonif Raider 300/Brajawijaya Unit, serves as a stark reminder of the institutionalised discrimination faced by Papuans within the very forces meant to protect civilians.

This vile display of racism underscores the broader pattern of oppression endured by West Papuans at the hands of the state and its security forces.

These videos are just the latest chapter in a long history of atrocities inflicted upon Papuans in the name of suppressing their cries for freedom.

Regencies like Nduga, Pegunungan Bintang, Intan Jaya, the Maybrat, and Yahukimo have become notorious hotspots for state-sanctioned operations, where Indonesian security forces operate with impunity, crushing any form of dissent through arbitrary arrests.

They often target peaceful demonstrators and activists advocating for Papuan rights in major towns along the coast.

These arrests are often accompanied by extrajudicial killings, further instilling intimidation and silence among indigenous Papuans.

Prabowo leadership casts shadow
In light of the ongoing failure of Indonesian authorities to address the racism and structural discrimination in West Papua, the prospect of Prabowo’s presidential leadership casts a shadow of uncertainty over the future of human rights and justice in the region.

Given his controversial track record, there is legitimate concern that his leadership may further entrench the culture of impunity. We must closely monitor his administration’s response to the cries for justice from West Papua.

It is time to break the silence and take decisive action. The demand for the UN Human Rights Commissioner to visit West Papua is urgent.

This is where the Melanesian Spearhead Group (MSG), with its influential members Fiji and Papua New Guinea, who were appointed as special envoys to Indonesia can play a pivotal role.

Their status within the region paves the opportunity to champion the cause and exert diplomatic pressure on Indonesia, as the situation continues to deteriorate despite the 2019 Pacific Leaders’ communique highlighting the urgent need for international attention and action in West Papua.

While the UN Commissioner’s visit would provide a credible and unbiased platform to thoroughly investigate and document these violations, it also would compel Indonesian authorities to address these abuses decisively.

I can also ensure that the voices of the Papuan people are heard and their rights protected.

Let us stand unyielding with the Papuan people in their tireless struggle for freedom, dignity, and sovereignty. Anything less would be a betrayal of our shared humanity.

Ronny Kareni is a Canberra-based Free West Papua activist, musician, trained-diplomat, youth vocational specialist and human rights defender. He graduated in diplomacy studies at the Australian National University. He is committed to and passionate about working with First Nations, Pacific and the nonprofit sector to support social, cultural and legal justice for the most vulnerable target groups. Filed as a special article for Asia Pacific Report.