Bewildering Changes:

Commentary

Who Slipped on

That Banana?

A LITTLE political blackmail seemed to be indicated by the New Zealand Minister for Customs when he said (during a debate on who should supply NZ’s bananas) that he hoped that a NZ mission to Fiji would be able to make “mutual trade arrangements” (Pacific Report, this issue).

He said that at present the balance of trade was all in Fiji’s favour. And this, of course, is very true.

It is only part of the story, how ever. It is now a matter of history that in the past decade New Zealand consumers have had an insatiable appetite for bananas, and some years ago, in order to appease this in the easiest way, the supply of tropical fruit to the Dominion appears to have been entrusted, by the National Government, to one private firm, Fruit Distributers Ltd.

Fruit Distributers made a five year contract with Fiji for the supply of bananas, and this expires next March, after which it is likely that Fiji will have to weigh in with something pretty substantial in the way of reciprocal trade if the Colony is to continue to enjoy its present market for the fruit in NZ.

When, in spite of this contract, Fiji’s banana quota was cut sharply at the beginning of this year (it was later restored, for 1958, to 100 per cent, of the base year 1956) it was stated to be because of NZ’s drop in overseas reserves. Now the NZ Government seems to be pre paring to make a virtue—or anyway, political capital out of this necessity. . First, it was a wicked thing, indeed (or so the present Govern ment says) for the then Govern ment to allow a private firm (“in terested only in its own profits”) to make any contact with Fiji.

Secondly, it was even worse that the agreement should have been made with Fiji —when all the time NZ should have been fostering trade with its own UN Trusteeship Territory, Western Samoa.

Now, so far as we know, Western Samoa has not suffered one iota m the last five years from the agreement the fruit company had ui NZ would have been able to take all of what Samoa, as well as what Fiji produced.

Banana production in Samoa ihctuates widely—6s,ooo cases in uJS2; 446,000 cases in 1954; 294,000 the next year; over 300,000 in 1957.

It is only in this year, 1958, that samoan banana exports have

boomed—with an expected total of 750,000 cases.

This sudden, 100 per cent, increase has produced problems of its own. and Samoa has had to reduce its shipments. For the time being.

Next year, because of climatic conditions, or because the Samoans wish it, exports could fall drastically.

On the other hand, at NZ’s behest, a lot of people in Fiji, over the last five years, have been working hard to produce more bananas. It is difficult to get anyone to believe now, that it was all just a mistake —even though we have the present Government’s word for it that if every New Zealander examined his conscience he would admit that it had hurt him to be eating Fiji bananas when in his heart he knew that it was just a Tory trick: That the bananas could, as easily, have come from NZ’s own Trust Territory of Western Samoa.

We can only guess at the reasons why Fruit Distributers made that five-year contract with Fiji. But the guess is that while the Fiji Government can urge Fijians to go forth and plant more bananas and get a 95 per cent, response, the Western Samoan Government—and a NZ-directed W. Samoan Govern ment at that—urging the same thing can expect only that Samoans will respond by exercising their traditional right of pleasing them selves. ☆

No Unity in the

Islands World

WHEN Representative Wentworth, in the Australian Parliament, commenting on Australia’s loan of ten millions to financially embarrassed New Zealand, suggested a closer union between Australia and New Zealand—he even sug gested that NZ might become a State of the Commonwealth! —most newspapers ignored it.

It yet may be shown that this young Wentworth has vision worthy of his famous forebear.

Many European nations and communities ranging from Aus tralia down to small groups in the South Pacific Islands—were estab lished in the 19th Century. By mid-20th Century, we were sure we were here to stay.

Now, we are not so sure. If we lose the protection of Western Europe and North America—the destruction of which is the chief aim of the Communist world—we shall simply disappear under a flood of Asians. Colombo Plans and UNO idealisms may give the flood a tinge

of benevolence, but neither will shape it or halt it.

God helps those who help them selves. The countries of the South Pacific —Australia and New Zealand and the 14 European communities established in the South Pacific Islands —could help considerably in the problems of their own defence and survival, if only they would get together and face realities.

Except for the French Territories of New Caledonia and French Polynesia, the whole South Pacific region is either British or English speaking: and each Territory has its own peculiar problem, in addition to the over-all problem of defence and survival.

In Solomons, for example, it is under-development and under population. In Fiji, we have the problems connected with Indian growth, and the demand for self government. Political and develop mental problems have been created in New Guinea and Samoa by Trusteeship, and in New Hebrides by the Condominium.

In all of them, there is the problem of citizenship. These Islands people should have a more clearly defined status. Why should a Chinese, born and educated in New Guinea, be granted Australian citizenship, while an Indian, born and educated in Fiji, be denied even immigration rights in Australia?

Why should all these South Pacific countries, which have such a marked community of interest, all treat each other in trade and in exchange, as if they were complete strangers and foreigners? Together, there is so much they could do to help each other.

The need for some sort of union or federation has been apparent for years; but not one of our so-called national leaders has made the obvious move.

However, something soon must be done, to seek unity. The march of China’s millions will start something that commonsense and reason hitherto have failed to achieve. ☆

Bewildering Changes:

China as Root Cause

AUGUST’S quick changes in in ternational relationships directly affect conditions in the South Pacific countries, and could even alter the shape of our future.

They all stem from events and developments in China.

China, a compact nation of over 600 million people, increasing by lb millions per annum, and now by lar the world’s most populous country, is casting a sinister and growmg politico-economic shadow over a Southeast Asia, Indonesia and the countries of the South Pacm .

All this has been apparent io some years—since the Soviet, in it

wisdom, created Communist China.

The Western world was jarred into acceptance of unpleasant realities when, in July, Krushchev, having accepted a “summit” conference within UNO to discuss the Middle East problem, suddenly was called to Peking—and then went into re verse. China had issued instructions.

Other events followed swiftly. The UNO Assemby, without Krushchev, found an apparent solution of ME difficulties; United States supplied large quantities of arms to Indo nesia; Red Chinese forces began an intense bombardment of the islands guarding Formosa; the US Seventh P’leet, carrying at least 500 fighters, some with atomic weapons, moved into a handy position near Formosa.

There have been new discussions on West New Guinea, based on the supposition that the Dutch want to get out.

All these things are connected.

China, right now, is no military menace to the South Pacific. But, as has been pointed out here many times, a China capable of manu facturing ships, planes, armaments and nuclear weapons, could threaten our security and our future. And, under Russian direction, China is rapidly becoming industrialised.

America’s volte face over Indo nesia’s arms supply is as remarkable as Krushchev’s back somersault over the “summit” meeting. Both, actually, had the same source— China.

China’s thrust, southwards and south-eastwards, is great, and grow ing. Tibet is over-run, though still fighting. Burma and Malaya are be ing “peacefully” penetrated. All SE Asian countries now are under growing Chinese influence except Siam and Vietnam, and their doom is pealed. As the effect of handing Singapore over to that Island’s million Chinese is taking shape, British interests are moving out to Penang and North Borneo.

There are 3,000,000 Chinese in Indonesia. We pointed out here, years ago, that as the politically drunken Indonesians force the Dutch cut of the East Indies economic structure, it is the Chinese, not Indonesians, who take the places of the Dutch in trading, transport and finance. Indonesia is failing, admin istratively and economically; and, unless she is directly helped, she will collapse into the hands of the Soviet countries and the Chinese, whose connections with Red China are substantial and active.

It is estimated that in Burma, Malaya, Singapore, Indo-C hin a, North Borneo and Indonesia, com munities totalling at least 12 million Chinese are established. Politically, they seem dumb and indifferent.

Economically, they are strong and intensely active.

Rightly, or wrongly, America’s move towards helping Indonesia with arms and finance is calculated to help Australia and the South

Pacific. Militarily, 83 million Indo nesians are not much more danger ous than 83 million rabbits; but, under Chinese domination, those archipelagoes could become a chain of stepping-stones from Asia to Australia and the South Pacific Islands.

But (exclaim the bewildered Aus tralians) Indonesia could use those American arms in trying to take Western New Guinea from the Dutch. We want the Dutch —not the Indonesians—on our frontier.

The answer, of course, is that the Dutch are not eager to retain West New Guinea, which represents a heavy financial drain. Indonesians, as Indonesians, in New Guinea would be a nuisance, but not a seri ous danger; whereas Indonesians in New Guinea, directed by Red Asians, would be a real menace to our security and our way of life.

However, present policies indi cate Australian determination to support the Dutch in Western New Guinea—so long as the Dutch elect to remain there. ☆

Control Needed Over

Small 'Christian 7 Sects

lIE AMS of Jehovah’s Witnesses . (whom no one loves) from Fiji Colony centres were holding a “Bible Convention” in Suva in late August.

More and more, there are Mormons swarming in Samoa, and strangely-titled missionaries working in the Highlands of New Guinea.

The idea of carrying religious teaching to “the naked, untutored savage” seems to create strange excitements among the off-shoots of the established Churches in various countries —especially America.

Surely, this is an illustration of the need for wise, united action by the countries responsible for the advancement and welfare Pf the Islanders. This multiplicity of petty sects within the Islands is at once a reproach upon Christianity and a confusion to Islanders’ minds (and the minds of very many non islanders).

The teachings of Jesus Christ — and especially the phrase “Do unto others as ye would be done by”— is, or should be, the basis of the “civilisation” we impose upon the Islanders. Why should there be sectarianism?

The achievements of the Christian Church, in introducing religion to the Islanders, are too well known to be challenged or denied. But the greatest reproach upon the missionaries’ work in the Islands is that the workers went in there under a series of banners, separate and distinct and often mutually hostile.

There was only one Christ; His teachings are simple and direct; and the knowledge that men quarrel savagely about their interpretation and application probably has created more anti-religion bigots than any other factor.

However, the Western world philo sophically accepted these schisms; and the Christian missionaries entered the islands in three divisions —R oman Catholics, Established Church of England, and Non-con formists. Among them, they have done a magnificent job. Surely, there is need for no more, in the way of sects.

In most Territories, the job already is done. In Fiji, Samoa, New Caledonia, French Polynesia, for example, the mission organisations which provided religion, medical care and education have completed the pioneer work.

Most of the later sects that now are thrusting into the Islands, and inclined to be belligerent in their demands for admission, are harm less enough—but the standard of their thinking is seen in their argu ment—often fanatical in character —that there is only one way in which an Islander may save himself from perdition, and that is their way.

But not all are harmless. Some are socially undesirable, and some are cunningly subversive in character.

“Freedom of religion” is one of our Western fundamentals; and, like some other “freedoms”—especi ally those provided for in the Trusteeships—it is being increas ingly abused. Would it be possible for the South Pacific Commission to consider this subject, and seek a way of avoiding the social and political dangers and embarrass ments of a multiplicity of jealous little Christian sects?