China’s test firing of a nuclear-capable ballistic missile into the South Pacific on Monday has added to unease in the Pacific over military posturing and strategic alliances.

Regional governments were notified by China shortly before it launched the test, on the same day that Australia’s Prime Minister Anthony Albanese went to Fiji to sign new treaties related to security and defence.

If the test launch was a clear message from China, the reaction from Australia and New Zealand has been swift.

• READ MORE: Jeremy Rose: The nuclear-free Pacific and hypersonic hypocrisy
• NZ accuses China of going against peace and stability of Pacific
• RIMPAC 2026: Part 1 – World’s biggest naval games a dress rehearsal for the coming ‘war on China’
• Missile test in South Pacific ‘routine’ and ‘consistent with international law’, China insists
• Other RIMPAC reports

Both governments accused China of undermining the peace and stability of the region, and of going against the values of Pacific Island countries as enshrined in the Pacific Forum’s Ocean of Peace initiative.

Chinese foreign ministry spokesperson Mao Ning said the launch was consistent with international law and customary international practice and was not directed at any specific country or target.

How many missiles has the US fired into the Pacific — did Australia protest those?

Here are the dates that the US test fired nuclear-capable ICBM missiles 7,000kms into the mid-Pacific:

•2026: March 5, June tbc.
•2025: February 19, May 21, November 4.
•2024: June 4,… pic.twitter.com/v6nxkRGA9U

— Peter Cronau (@PeterCronau) July 7, 2026

‘Please refrain’
The response from Pacific Island governments was generally more muted, although the biggest of the Island countries, Papua New Guinea, made an emphatic call against militarisation of the region.

PNG’s Prime Minister James Marape released a statement with an “appeal to our Chinese friends that this be the last such missile test conducted in Pacific waters”.

“This message is not directed only at China. It applies equally to the United States, France, Japan, the United Kingdom and every nation with military capability.

“If you respect the Pacific and its people, then please respect our ocean. We ask all major powers to refrain from using Pacific waters for missile testing, military weapons trials or any activity that contributes to conflict or militarisation,” Marape said.

Restraint urged
The Solomon Islands Prime Minister, Matthew Wale, said China’s actions were not the sort of thing a good friend to the Pacific Islands did, and described the missile test as being not good for the region.

Wale, who today hosted Albanese in Honiara, said that as chair of the Pacific Islands Forum he had registered a strong protest with China’s ambassador, and that Solomon Islands also lodged a protest note.

He said the message against using missiles in the region applied to all other nations too.

Meanwhile, Fiji reaffirmed its commitment to the Treaty of Rarotonga which established the South Pacific Nuclear Free Zone, the intent of which, New Zealand pointed out, has been breached by China’s test.

The Fiji Foreign Minister Sakiasi Ditoka urged restraint and underlined the need for peace, dialogue, transparency, mutual respect and adherence to international law.

“Fiji therefore encourages all states to exercise restraint, communicate openly, and conduct their activities in a manner that strengthens regional confidence and security rather than contributing to heightened tensions,” he said.

Not just China
However, the Pacific Council of Churches general-secretary, Reverend James Bhagwan, said it was a reminder of how quickly the Pacific’s Ocean of Peace can be turned into a theatre of power.

“At the same time, we are very mindful of the narrative which paints only China as an aggressor,” he told RNZ Pacific.

“It must be noted that the United States of America annually fires four nuclear-capable Minuteman III intercontinental ballistic missiles into our Blue Pacific, targeting Kwajalein Atoll in the Marshall Islands.”

Reverend Bhagwan said the Pacific region had had the most nuclear detonations of any region, at more than 300, and that Pacific Islanders were firmly opposed to nuclear arms.

“That’s why we were in the Australian Parliament this past week to call on the Labor government to sign the treaty on the prohibition of nuclear weapons, noting that Prime Minister Albanese and many others in his party and in government and in Parliament had pledged to do so eight years ago.

“We need Australia to lead the Pacific and secure our region from the threat of nuclear disaster by helping us take nuclear weapons off the table as an option,” Bhagwan said.

But at this time of heightened competition for power in the Pacific, it appears the Australian Labor Party’s promise of support for the ban on nuclear weapons may have been put on ice.

It comes as the new US Ambassador to New Zealand, Samoa, the Cook Islands and Niue last week pressed Wellington to revisit its stance against hosting nuclear ships.

The Pacific’s anti-nuclear resolve is being tested.

This story was first published on

On March 5 of this year, the United States launched a Minuteman III intercontinental ballistic missile from the Vandenberg Space Force Base, California. Travelling at speeds of more than 24,000 km/h, it landed near the Kwajalein Atoll in the Marshall Islands, 6700 kilometres away, 24 minutes later.

Minuteman III missiles can deliver up to three separate nuclear warheads, each more than 20 times as powerful as the bomb dropped on Hiroshima.

On March 3, 2025, the Marshall Islands formally announced its intention to join the South Pacific Nuclear Free Zone by signing the Treaty of Rarotonga.

• READ MORE: NZ accuses China of going against peace and stability of Pacific
• RIMPAC 2026: Part 1 – World’s biggest naval games a dress rehearsal for the coming ‘war on China’
• Other RIMPAC reports

Searches of The New Zealand Herald and Stuff websites for stories about the missile test, and the signing of the treaty come up empty.

And yet, on Tuesday, both The Herald and The Post led with news that China had test-fired a nuclear-capable ballistic missile in the Pacific. Neither report made any mention of the at least 15 ballistic missile tests fired into the Pacific by the US since 2021.

How many missiles has the US fired into the Pacific — did Australia protest those?

Here are the dates that the US test fired nuclear-capable ICBM missiles 7,000kms into the mid-Pacific:

•2026: March 5, June tbc.
•2025: February 19, May 21, November 4.
•2024: June 4,… pic.twitter.com/v6nxkRGA9U

— Peter Cronau (@PeterCronau) July 7, 2026

“The Pacific Islands Forum leaders have made clear that they want the Pacific to be an ocean of peace. We believe this test is inconsistent with that objective,” Wong said.

Wong isn’t wrong.

Kiribati criticised US test
In 2024 Kiribati publicly criticised an earlier test of a Minuteman III missile that also landed in the Ronald Reagan Space and Missile Test Range located near the Kwajalein Atoll. As the name suggests, the tests are a regular occurrence.

A statement from the President’s Office, reported by RNZ, said Kiribati objected equally to China and the US using the South Pacific for test-firing nuclear-capable missiles.

“Kiribati continues to advocate for the cessation of weapons testing in the Pacific Ocean and urges global cooperation to ensure the peace, security, and stability of our shared environment. We remain committed to protecting the peaceful future of the Pacific and safeguarding the well-being of future generations.”

It is a thought — almost — echoed by Winston Peters in his response to the Chinese test: “This missile was fired into the South Pacific Nuclear Free Zone established by the Treaty of Rarotonga. China’s action goes against the object and intent of that Treaty.”

You will search long and hard to find any similar criticism of the US missile tests by Ministers Peters and Wong. That is despite the people of the Marshall Islands themselves and the leaders of neighbouring countries making it clear any testing of ballistic missiles in the Pacific goes against the spirit of the Treaty of Rarotonga.

The Chinese missile test is widely being reported as a response to Australia and Fiji’s signing of the Ocean of Peace Alliance the previous day.

Without confirmation from China, it is impossible to know for certain, but it seems likely that the alliance — which New Zealand Prime Minister Christopher Luxon has expressed interest in signing up to — is seen as a ratcheting up of military tensions in the South Pacific.

When it comes to the “object and intent” of the Treaty of Rarotonga, mentioned by Peters, few if any of the signatories would have countenanced one of their members purchasing nuclear-powered submarines.

Australian nuclear submarines plan
But in 2023, Australia announced it was doing just that with the planned purchase of three nuclear submarines at an estimated cost of more than A$300 billion (about 15 times the combined GDP of the Forum countries excluding New Zealand and Australia).

Shortly after the announcement, then Solomon Islands Prime Minister Manasseh Damukana Sogavare told the UN General Assembly that his nation “would like to keep our region nuclear-free and put the region’s nuclear legacy behind us… We do not support any form of militarisation in our region that could threaten regional and international peace and stability.”

The legacy Sogavare mentions is nowhere felt more keenly than the Marshall Islands, where the US carried out 67 atmospheric nuclear tests between 1946 and 1956, resulting in sky-high rates of thyroid cancer.

The US has paid out just US$150 million in compensation despite the internationally mandated Marshall Islands Nuclear Claims Tribunal having awarded more than US$2 billion in personal injury and property claims.

A survey by the Asia New Zealand Foundation earlier this year found that just 23 percent of New Zealanders viewed China as a threat, compared to 35 percent who saw the US as one.

The US has more than 5000 nuclear warheads with 1700 actively deployed; China has 620 with 34 deployed.

China has a long-standing policy of no-first-use of nuclear weapons, while the US refuses to rule it out.

When our leaders claim to be supporting Pacific countries in their commitment to a nuclear-free Pacific by rightly criticising China’s missile tests while steadfastly refusing to criticise the US regular testing of intercontinental nuclear-capable ballistic missiles, they are indulging in hypersonic hypocrisy.

Jeremy Rose is a Wellington-based journalist and a contributor to Asia Pacific Report. This article was first published by his Substack Towards Democracy.

New Zealand says China’s testing of nuclear-capable weapons into the South Pacific is at odds with peace and stability in the Islands region.

China briefed regional governments on Monday of its intention to fire a long-range, nuclear-capable missile with a dummy warhead into the South Pacific Ocean.

According to New Zealand’s Minister of Foreign Affairs, Winston Peters, China carried out the test within hours of informing his government.

• READ MORE: RIMPAC 2026: Part 1 – World’s biggest naval games a dress rehearsal for the coming ‘war on China’
• Other RIMPAC reports

“The Pacific is an Ocean of Peace and we are deeply concerned by China’s testing of nuclear-capable weapons into the South Pacific,” Peters said.

New Zealand and Pacific Island countries have long opposed any form of nuclear testing, or testing of nuclear-related capabilities, in the region.

“We, like our neighbours in other Pacific countries, have no interest in China using the South Pacific as a testing site for missile capability,” the minister said

Peters said China’s move was at odds with the spirit and intent of the Blue Pacific Ocean of Peace, an initiative driven by Fiji’s Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka, aimed at safeguarding the Pacific region from conflict and militarisation, which has been endorsed by all Pacific Islands Forum members.

“This missile was fired into the South Pacific Nuclear Free Zone established by the Treaty of Rarotonga. China’s action goes against the object and intent of that Treaty,” Peters noted.

One of them was today reportedly sitting in harbour of Fiji’s capital, Suva, on the same day that Australia’s Prime Minister Anthony Albanese was visiting to sign landmark security and defence treaties with Fiji.

The Vuvale Union Treaty and the Ocean of Peace Alliance are the latest in a series of security or defence-related pacts that Canberra has signed with Pacific countries, seen by commentators as a move to wedge out China.

Various Pacific Islands governments have voiced concern about the increasing militarisation of the region, which was echoed by Peters today in response to China’s missile test.

“We will be talking with our Pacific partners about this development. Pacific leaders have been clear we do not want to see the region become a theatre for outside military competition.

“This launch is not consistent with regional stability, and peace in the South Pacific,” he said.

Given China’s test firing of an intercontinental ballistic missile into the South Pacific in 2024, Peters said regional countries were concerned at what now seemed to be a recurring pattern by China.

He said the region should not sit by and allow such tests to become “normalised or routine”.

This story was first published on

Former New Zealand prime minister Helen Clark has warned the country needs to maintain its nuclear-free policy as a “fundamental tenet” of its independent foreign policy in the face of gathering global storm clouds.

Writing in a new book being published next week, she says “nuclear war is an existential threat to humanity. Far from receding, the threat of use of nuclear weapons is ever present.

“The Doomsday Clock of the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists now sits at 89 seconds to midnight,” she says in the prologue to journalist and media academic David Robie’s book Eyes of Fire: The Last Voyage and Legacy of the Rainbow Warrior.

• READ MORE: 40 years on: Reflecting on Rainbow Warrior’s legacy, fight against nuclear colonialism
• Other Eyes of Fire reports

Writing before the US surprise attack with B-2 stealth bombers and “bunker-buster” bombs on three Iranian nuclear facilities on June 22, Clark says “the Middle East is a tinder box with the failure of the Iran nuclear deal and with Israel widely believed to possess nuclear weapons”.

The Doomsday Clock references the Ukraine war theatre where “use of nuclear weapons has been floated by Russia”.

Also, the arms control architecture for Europe is unravelling, leaving the continent much less secure. India and Pakistan both have nuclear arsenals, she says.

“North Korea continues to develop its nuclear weapons capacity.”

‘Serious ramifications’
Clark, who was also United Nations Development Programme administrator from 2009 to 2017, a member of The Elders group of global leaders founded by Nelson Mandela in 2007, and is an advocate for multilateralism and nuclear disarmament, says an outright military conflict between China and the United States “would be one between two nuclear powers with serious ramifications for East Asia, Southeast Asia, the Pacific, and far beyond.”

She advises New Zealand to be wary of Australia’s decision to enter a nuclear submarine purchase programme with the United States.

“There has been much speculation about a potential Pillar Two of the AUKUS agreement which would see others in the region become partners in the development of advanced weaponry,” Clark says.

“This is occurring in the context of rising tensions between the United States and China.

“Many of us share the view that New Zealand should be a voice for de-escalation, not for enthusiastic expansion of nuclear submarine fleets in the Pacific and the development
of more lethal weaponry.”

In the face of the “current global turbulence, New Zealand needs to reemphasise the principles and values which drove its nuclear-free legislation and its advocacy for a nuclear-free South Pacific and global nuclear disarmament.

Clark says that the years 1985 – the Rainbow Warrior was bombed by French secret agents on 10 July 1985 — and 1986 were critical years in the lead up to New Zealand’s nuclear-free legislation in 1987.

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

Chronicles humanitarian voyage
The book Eyes of Fire chronicles the humanitarian voyage by the Greenpeace flagship to the Marshall Islands to relocate 320 Rongelap Islanders who were suffering serious community health consequences from the US nuclear tests in the 1950s.

The author, Dr David Robie, founder of the Pacific Media Centre at Auckland University of Technology, was the only journalist on board the Rainbow Warrior in the weeks leading up to the bombing.

His book recounts the voyage and nuclear colonialism, and the transition to climate justice as the major challenge facing the Pacific, although the “Indo-Pacific” rivalries between the US, France and China mean that geopolitical tensions are recalling the Cold War era in the Pacific.

Dr Robie is also critical of Indonesian colonialism in the Melanesian region of the Pacific, arguing that a just-outcome for Jakarta-ruled West Papua and also the French territories of Kanaky New Caledonia and “French” Polynesia are vital for peace and stability in the region.

Eyes of Fire is being published by Little Island Press, which also produced one of his earlier books, Don’t Spoil My Beautiful Face: Media, Mayhem and Human Rights in the Pacific.

• Greenpeace executive director Dr Russel Norman is launching Eyes of Fire at the Ellen Melville Centre Pioneer Women’s Hall at 6pm on the bombing anniversary, July 10, following a memorial vigil in the morning on board the current flagship Rainbow Warrior III.
• Eyes of Fire microsite (Little Island Press)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The 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.

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). 

Keeping the Pacific nuclear-free, in line with the Rarotonga Treaty, was a recurring theme from the leaders of Tonga, Cook Islands and Samoa to New Zealand last week.

The New Zealand government’s Pacific mission wrapped up on Saturday with the final leg in Samoa.

Over the course of the trip, defence and security in the region was discussed with the leaders of the three Polynesian nations.

In Apia, Samoan Prime Minister Fiamē Naomi Mataʻafa addressed regional concerns about AUKUS.

New Zealand is considering joining pillar two of the agreement, a non-nuclear option, but critics have said this could be seen as Aotearoa rubber stamping Australia acquiring nuclear-powered submarines.

“We would hope that both administrations will ensure that the provisions under the maritime treaty are taken into consideration with these new arrangements,” Fiamē said.

New Zealand’s previous Labour government was more cautious in its approach to joining AUKUS because it said pillar two had not been clearly defined, but the coalition government is looking to take action.

Nuclear weapons opposed
Prime Minister Fiamē said she did not want the Pacific to become a region affected by more nuclear weapons.

She said the impact of nuclear weapons in the Pacific was still ongoing, especially in the North Pacific with the Marshall Islands, and a semblance of it still in the south with Tahiti.

She said it was crucial to “present that voice in these international arrangements”.

“We don’t want the Pacific to be seen as an area that people will take licence of nuclear arrangements.”

The Treaty of Rarotonga prohibits signatories — which include Australia and New Zealand — from placing nuclear weapons within the South Pacific.

Cook Island’s Prime Minister Mark Brown said Pacific leaders were in agreement over security.

“I think our stance mirrors that of all the Pacific Island countries. We want to keep the Pacific region nuclear weapons free, nuclear free and that hasn’t changed.”

Timely move
Reflecting on discussions during the Pacific Islands Forum in 2023, he said: “A review and revisit of the Rarotonga Treaty should take place with our partners such as New Zealand, Australia and others on these matters.”

“It’s timely that we have them now moving forward,” he said.

Last year, Fiji Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka proposed a Pacific peace zone which was discussed during the Forum leaders’ meeting in Rarotonga.

This year, Tonga will be hosting the forum and matters of security and defence involving AUKUS are expected to be a key part of the agenda.

Tongan Acting Prime Minister Samiu Vaipulu acknowledged New Zealand’s sovereignty and said dialogue was the way forward.

“We do not interfere with what other countries do as it is their sovereignty. A talanoa process is best,” Vaipulu said.

New Zealand Foreign Minister Winston Peters and Health and Pacific People Minister Dr Shane Reti reiterated that they cared and had listened to the needs outlined by the Pacific leaders.

They said New Zealand would deliver on funding promises to support improvements in the areas of health, education and security of the region.

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

An international relations professor says that if New Zealand joins AUKUS it could impact on its relations with Pacific countries.

AUKUS is a security agreement between Australia, the UK and the US, which will see Australia supplied with nuclear-powered submarines.

That has raised concern in the Pacific, which is under the South Pacific Nuclear Free Zone Treaty, also known as the Treaty of Rarotonga.

• READ MORE: Other AUKUS reports

The topic has come up while US Secretary of State Antony Blinken visited New Zealand.

The visit came after he visited Tonga.

Robert Patman, professor of international relations at the University of Otago, said New Zealand’s views on non-nuclear security are shared by the majority of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) members and also the Pacific Island states.

“Even if New Zealand joined AUKUS in a non-nuclear fashion, technically, it may be seen through the eyes of others as diluting our commitment to that norm,” Professor Patman said.

Sharing defence information
Professor Patman explained that “pillar 1” of AUKUS is about providing nuclear-powered submarines to Australia over two or three decades, and “pillar 2” is to do with sharing information on defence technologies.

“We haven’t closed the door on it, but it’s a considerable risk from New Zealand’s point of view, because a lot of our credibility is having an independent foreign policy.”

Asked about New Zealand’s potential membership in AUKUS, Blinken said work on pillar 2 was ongoing.

“The door is very much open for New Zealand and other partners to engage as they see appropriate,” he said.

“New Zealand is a deeply trusted partner, obviously a Five Eyes member.

“We’ve long worked together on the most important national security issues.”

New Zealand Foreign Minister Nanaia Mahuta said the government was exploring pillar 2 of the deal.

Not committed
But she said New Zealand had not committed to anything.

Mahuta said New Zealand had been clear it would not compromise its nuclear-free position, and that was acknowledged by AUKUS members.

Patman said that statement was reassurance for Pacific Island states.

“[New Zealand is] party to the Treaty of Rarotonga,” he said.

“We have to weigh up whether the benefits of being in pillar 2 outweigh possible external perception that we’re eroding our commitment, to being party to an arrangement which is facilitating the transfer of nuclear-powered submarines to Australia.”

He said New Zealand had also been in talks with NATO about getting access to cutting-edge technology, so it was not dependent on AUKUS for that.

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

Vanuatu Prime Minister Ishmael Kalsakau says Pacific security is about the security of the Pacific peoples and their way of life as identified by Forum leaders in the Boe Declaration.

Kalsakau said this reaffirmed climate change as the single greatest threat to regional security.

The PM was speaking at the opening of the Pacific Fusion headquarters in Port Vila on Tuesday, alongside Australian Deputy Prime Minister Richard Marles.

• READ MORE: Other Pacific climate action reports

He said Vanuatu, with the world’s first climate change refugees with the relocation in 2005 of 100 villagers in Torba Province, “will always consider climate change its top priority”.

He said climate change is real, an existential threat, impinging on the security and stability of all nations.

“We do not have to look too far to see how the increased intensity of climate change-induced tropical cyclones wreak havoc on the daily lives and livelihoods of our people and set us back years in our development,” said Kalsakau.

He said Vanuatu’s Pacific brothers also faced human security challenges caused by the nuclear testing in the Marshall Islands (by the US), Mororoa Atoll (France) and Australia (United Kingdom).

‘Our reefs are dying’
“With the effects of global warming and nuclear testing, our ocean is getting warmer, our reefs are dying and fishes are now very scarce.

“Our children and grandchildren are bound to never experience what we’ve enjoyed in our childhood.

“The maintenance and sustenance of our marine resources must be the top priority of our Pacific leaders.”

Kalsakau said there were other pressing issues such as the Fukushima nuclear waste water discharge and AUKUS.

“I say again that Pacific security is about the security of our Pacific peoples and way of life.

“This is why Vanuatu stood alongside our Pacific brothers and sisters to produce the Rarotonga Treaty. Which brings me to today’s very special occasion.

“The Pacific Fusion Centre is guided by the regional security priorities identified by the Boe Declaration and supports regional decision-making on these shared security priorities,” he said.

The centre, which is funded by Australia and to be run in collaboration with Pacific Forum member states, will aim to provide training and analysis on regional security issues.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Nuclear-armed submarines are not welcome in Fiji waters.

Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka said this as he stressed he did not support any nuclear development that went against the Rarotonga Treaty and the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons which Fiji is a signatory to.

“So people should not be worried about an escalation of nuclear weapons,” he said.

• READ MORE: As Australia signs up for nuclear subs, NZ faces hard decisions over the AUKUS alliance

However, he confirmed that Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese had informed him during his visit this week that global superpower United States, Australia and the United Kingdom were working on a AUKUS agreement to build a nuclear powered submarine.

“They are building a nuclear-powered submarine and it’s a AUKUS programme between Australia, UK and the US and it will not affect the Rarotonga Treaty nor the Non Proliferation (of Nuclear Weapons) Treaty,” he said.

“These ones will not be armed with nuclear weapons.”

He said a number of treaties ensured that non-nuclear power producing nations were not allowed to produce warheads.

Non-Proliferation Treaty
“The Non-Proliferation Treaty is on nuclear arms,” he said.

“It was on the Strategic Arms Limitation talks series and had series one, two and three and it’s about the non-proliferation or non-growth of a number of nuclear warheads.

“Also the Lateral Proliferation which states that those that do not have nuclear capabilities, particularly warheads, should not develop them, but it does happen.”

He added that Fiji could benefit from the treaty through employment.

Australia, United Kingdom and the United States signed the AUKUS pact in 2021 and as part of the deal, Australia will acquire three Virginia-class nuclear-powered submarines from the US.

Australia also plans to begin building a new fleet of nuclear-powered subs under a 30-year programme which could cost up to A$368 billion (F$546 billion).

The deal could see the nuclear-powered subs in operation around Australian waters from as early as 2027.

In a media briefing in Beijing on Tuesday, China’s Foreign Ministry spokesman Wang Wenbin accused AUKUS partners of breaking international rules on the spread of nuclear weapons.

Repeka Nasiko is a Fiji Times reporter. Republished with permission.

Australia needs to be put on notice by Pacific Islands Forum (PIF) leaders over abandoning its commitments under the South Pacific’s nuclear free accord — the Treaty of Rarotonga — by signing up to the controversial security pact, AUKUS, says the Pacific Network on Globalisation (PANG).

The deal by the Australian, the United Kingdom, and the United States governments is “highly problematic” and “heightens risks for nuclear proliferation” in the region, PANG coordinator Maureen Penjueli said.

“Security and defence pacts today are about the Pacific Ocean — which is our home — but it has never been with Pacific people, let alone our governments,” she said.

• READ MORE: AUKUS pact strikes at heart of Pacific nuclear-free regionalism
• Other AUKUS pact reports

AUKUS is promoted as a trilateral partnership between the three allies to enable Australia to boost its military capacity by acquiring nuclear-powered submarines for its navy.

However, Australia, was a key part of PIF and also a party to the Rarotonga Treaty, the region’s principal nuclear non-proliferation and disarmament agreement, Penjueli said.

The accord legally binds member states “not to manufacture, possess, acquire or have control of nuclear weapons (Article 3)”, as well as “to prevent nuclear testing in their territories (Article 6)”. The treaty further places an emphasis on keeping the region free from radioactive wastes.

Penjueli said that Pacific people had had first-hand experience of the threats of nuclear weapons testing, and continued to live with the sideeffects of historical nuclear catastrophes to this day.

Long list of nuclear threats
“We see AUKUS as just one in a long list of nuclear threats and issues that the region as a whole has been confronted with,” she said.

“We see Australia playing a key, often unilateral role, taking decisions around peace and security which is not aligned with Pacific peoples’ immediate priorities around security, in particular human security.

“AUKUS raises serious concerns over Australia’s intentions for its island neighbours.”

Pacific Island governments and civil society had been at the forefront in advocating for a nuclear free and independent Pacific.

They have expressed strong opposition to AUKUS since it was announced in September, which experts say undermines regional solidarity on the issue of a nuclear free Pacific.

Australuan foreign policy analyst Dr Greg Fry said that the more immediate threat to the South Pacific nuclear-free zone lay not in the nuclear submarines, which were not due until 2040 and beyond, “but in the fundamental shift in Australian-US defence arrangements which were announced alongside AUKUS”.

According to Dr Fry, these arrangements included the possible home-basing of American submarines, surface vessels, and bombers, in Australia, as well stockpiling of munitions.

Home basing threat
“Home basing would require the presence of nuclear weapons in Australia. This raises questions for article 5 of the Rarotonga Treaty which bans the stationing of nuclear weapons in the treaty zone.

“It would, therefore, require Australia to notify the Secretary-General of the PIFS under article 9 of the treaty.”

Dr Fry said Australia’s assurances that the nuclear reactors powering the submarines would not be in danger of accidently releasing radioactive material into the Pacific Ocean needed to be examined against the history of accidents involving nuclear submarines.

“There has already been a serious accident in the Pacific. In 2005, the US nuclear attack submarine USS San Francisco ran into a sea mount near the Caroline Islands in the Federated States of Micronesia.

“Although the nuclear reactor was undamaged, it was reported as ‘remarkable’ that it was not given the extensive damage to the submarine,” he said.

“Aside from the obvious nuclear concerns, the partnership is also widely noted to be an effort by the Australia-UK-US governments to counter the growing influence of China in the Pacific.

“It [AUKUS] also means Australia is even more fully integrated with US forces in a new cold war with China right now,” said Dr Fry.

Major policy shift
He added that “this is a major shift in policy from one where we pretended we were friends to both China and US”.

Penjueli said that several Pacific countries have had long diplomatic relations with China and the Asian superpower was not considered a problem.

“Our countries have taken much more nuanced policies with China. It is time that Australia is put on notice at the Forum. It is clearly part of our neighbourhood but it is acting outside of the norms of Pacific Islands Forum.”

She said that while AUKUS had taken the limelight, it was not the only cause for nuclear anxiety for the region.

The revelation by a Japanese utility company about plans to release nuclear waste from the Fukushima nuclear power plant — one of the world’s worst atomic disasters — into the Pacific Ocean had also set the alarm bells ringing.

“Japan is also a partner to the forum and the announcement has infuriated regional governments and activist groups,” Penjueli said.

“Our governments have opposed nuclear testing, they have opposed the movement of nuclear shipments of radioactive waste and they have strongly opposed the announcement by Japan to dump radioactive water into the Pacific Ocean.

“The Pacific Ocean is not a dumping ground for nuclear materials, nor is it a highway for nuclear submarines.”