of Islands Countries

‘Colonialism’: The Evils of Remote Control of Islands Countries

EVERY now and again one hears references, by the postwar brand of idealistic com mentators, to “Colonialism”. By ■“Colonialism” is meant the selfish exploitation by Western nations of the countries they hold in Asia, Africa or the Pacific Islands, with out regard for the wishes or welfare of the native inhabitants.

Under this heading a great deal of nonsense has been talked about the colonisation of great areas of the earth’s surface which, before the advent of the European pioneers, were nothing more than a hunting ground for “uncivilised” jungle-dwellers (Africa, North America, Australia, New Zealand, for example) or which were held in slavery under despotic rulers (like Indonesia, the Philippines, and large sections of Asia). Had it not been for that kind of colonisation there would be today no United States, or Canada, or Australia, or New Zealand or South Africa; and there would have been no ready made structure of Western civili sation upon which countries like [ndia, Indonesia, Pakistan, Indo china, Ceylon may—if they are able —climb to modern nationhood.

The good achieved in the past two centuries by the so-called ‘colonialism,” so glibly condemned )y our Reds and their fellow ravellers, far outweighs the proven wils of the system.

However, whether good or bad,

the era of European colonisation is passing—is almost past. It may await the verdict of history.

BUT there remains as a legacy of that era an evil that really may be called “colonialism” — although not in the sense meant by the Reds and the Planners. It is an evil that is manifest particularly in the Pacific Islands. It may be described as suspended or paralysed administration, and one may see the evidence of it, especially, in Pacific archipelagoes governed by Britain and France and, in a lesser degree, in those Islands for which Australia and New Zealand are

responsible.

In nearly all these Pacific Terri tories—and, large and small, there are fourteen of them—the most baffling and maddening things met with by the man or corporation who wants to get on with the wofk of developing the land’s natural resources is the inability of the Government authority to give a firm decision. The man may want land, labour, some sort of public service, or a permit to do this or that—and, almost invariably, he has to wait months or years before a very remote and uninterested Mini ster somewhere gives a final reply, Australia’s Papua-New Guinea is an outstanding example of that.

The effect is seen in the almost total absence, in Papua-New Guinea, of any big developmental

projects by private enterprise alone.

The establishment of the copra crushing mill in Rabaul by Car penter interests and the launching of passionfruit pulping by Mr.

Greathead at Goroka are exceptions —the Bulolo plywood industry, being half Government-owned, does not count in this argument.

The Bulolo plywood industry, being partly the child of Canberra, was quickly established. But many other important projects, including timber development, Kenaf growing, cattle raising on a big scale, the extension of copra and rubber plantations, and other things based on the resources of this rich Terri tory, are all held up because of the inability of the Canberra bureau crats and politicians to give a definite answer or a clear direction.

There is the real evil of “colonialism” the apparent im possibility of getting a prompt and clear answer from the responsible Government—which Government is almost always remote and politics ridden.

FIJI has suffered in the same way. Today, under a Governor who displays both vision and driving force, Fiji is enjoying an unusual upsurge of developmental activity. But that probably will not last beyond the term of this particular Governor. (Since Mur chison Fletcher, the average term of a Fiji Governor is 3 years.) Then the fate of Fiji again will be subject to London’s laissez faire.

Remember the resolution of the Fiji Legislative Council, passed in 1952, asking the British Colonial

Office to order, as a matter of urgency, an enquiry into the popu lation problem of Fiji. It is still in the pigeon-hole of a yawning bureaucrat somewhere in the Whitehall area.

In the smaller Territories, like Solomon Islands, Gilbert & Ellice Colony, Cook Islands, the story is the same. The Solomon Islands appear to have almost everything that the Trust Territory of New Guinea has got—namely, a wide variety of unused land and a capacity to grow almost every kind of tropical product—there are even notable indications of gold deposits.

Yet this very large archipelago—as has been pointed out here frequently —is without any kind of real development, and any perceptible means of development. This is the direct result of remote control by a Power which, for reasons not dis cernible, jealously holds the terri tory against any other Power which might possibly make better use of it.

Somewhat similar comment may be directed to the New Hebrides.

There has been a certain amount of development of the group’s rich agricultural resources by the French —but nothing in comparison with what might be done. The British record of development and settle ment within the Condominium is pitiful and tragic.

Nothing much perhaps could be planned in the way of further development in the atolls of the Gilbert & Ellice Colony; but a great deal more could be done, for the benefit of humanity, in the New Hebrides and Solomons archi pelagoes.

New Caledonia is another great Island which is capable of greater development in relation to both its agricultural and its mineral re sources. But the record is the same—an apparent reluctance to encourage private enterprise, an absurd preoccupation with social problems, and an indication of a jealous determination to hold the rich lands against all comers.

“Colonialism” itself is not an evil in the way our postwar planners suggest; but the legacy of “Colonialism,” described above, is not only a deplorable thing in itself, but also is a menace to the well settled countries of Australia, New Zealand, Fiji, Tahiti, Samoa, etc.

The emptiness of many of the Islands Territories, and the failure of those who hold them to develop their natural worth, are clearly an irritation to the overcrowded nations of Asia, and an invitation to them to come in. fl Mr, G W. Johns, who for five years has been manager of the Grand Pacific Hotel, Suva, has re signed to take up a position in New Zealand. Mr. and Mrs. Johns were held in high regard in Fiji.