Letters

Free Speech

I find it quite amusing that Mr Chatterton (PIM, September) is now so concerned about the future of free speech in PNG.

It seems he has forgotten that, just over three years ago, he was a most vocal supporter of the moves which led to the demise of “Black & White” magazine.

But, of course, censorship is only ever for opposing views and never for one’s own.

John R. Horne.

Leadville, NSW.

One Hundred Basic Books

I am glad you reviewed my book, Pacific Islands Literature: One Hundred Basic Books (PIM, Oct., p. 77). So far, the volume has not lost me any literary friends.

I am sorry, however, that you repeated the snide remarks of my friend, History Professor James Davidson of the Australian National University. He sounds like the “this will-never-do” school of nineteenth century Scottish reviewers.

Jim evidently did not read the part of my preface in which I pointed out that my chief criterion for selec tion of 100 basic books was “literary” merit. My main list, therefore, was chosen as contributions to belles lettres about Oceania.

If Professor Davidson would like to give me a better list of 100 Pacific literary classics, I’ll give a list of 100 classics of Pacific historiography.

And why not join the game yourself?

Any number can play. Maybe we could get more people actually to read the books we ‘'old Pacific hands” like to talk about!

A. Grove Day.

Senior Professor of English, Emeritus.

University of Hawaii, Honolulu.

All Clear In The Cooks

Why is such sinister emphasis always placed on happenings in the Cook Islands? Recently the Editor of Debates (Hansard Office) and Editor of the Press, exchanged jobs. Each having been 3 years in very demand ing positions, and obviously “a change was as good as a rest”.

At the same time during necessary repairs to the radio transmitter, there was staff pruning and reorganisation of the whole Broadcasting and News paper Corporation for economy

reasons. Shortly afterwards gales severely damaged the transmitting mast at Matavera, and the high winds made it impossible for anyone to climb the rigging for repairs until the wind abated some days later.

Meanwhile, while on vacation in Fiji I heard alarming rumours about riots and revolutions in the Cooks!

Fortunately I know Polynesia well enough to refute these, but they seem to have spread to your offices.

Don’t believe all you hear on the Coconut Radio, even if it is the only transmitter available!

Mary Gentle.

Rarotonga, Cook Islands.

Minervans V Tongans

I am a philatelist and have col lected the stamps of the Pacific Islands for many years. At the same time, I have made an in-depth study of the history of the Islands and its peoples. I have come to know several of the Minervans and am impressed with their sincerity and honesty.

It is time that the situation involv ing the Republic of Minerva and the Kingdom of Tonga is brought into proper perspective.

The Minervans are an international group organised for the purpose of establishing a free society—greater personal liberty, freedom from taxa tion, promotion of tourism, and establishment of tax-free business enterprises.

They searched the world for a place to settle and, having found it, formally announced the Republic of Minerva in a Declaration of Sovereignty on January 19, 1972.

In the declaration, the Minervans laid claim to the North and South Minerva Reefs, which lay in a remote part of the Pacific Ocean, about half way between New Zealand and the Fiji Islands. They noted that the reefs had remained unoccupied and un claimed by any nation.

To further support their claim, the Minervans raised portions of the two reefs so they would protrude above sea level at high tide. These “islands” were marked with plaques set in concrete.

In addition, navigation warning lights and radar equipment were erected to warn off-course shipping of the treacherous reefs. All this was done prior to the declaration of sovereignty in accordance with inter national law.

Perhaps the Minervans were un wise in not further consolidating their position on the reefs before the declaration was made, but they wanted to be straight-forward about their intentions. Be that as it may, certain forces were afoot to destroy what the Minervans were attempting to build.

Whether at the instigation of outsiders or simply for selfish reasons, the king of Tonga objected to the Minervan presence. Under the guise of investigation, King Taufa’ahau Tupou IV sent a fleet of ships to the reefs the latter part of May, 1972.

In supposed secrecy, “islands” were built on North and South Minerva by Tongan prison labour.

When the king returned to Nukualofa, he carried on the sub terfuge for a time, only stating that Tonga did not want unknowns in the area and declaring that Tonga had the right to choose its neighbours.

Then, in an announcement that was not in the least surprising, the king disclosed what had taken place at the Minerva Reefs and declared that the reefs were to be annexed to the kingdom. He added that the reefs were vital to the Tonga shipping lanes to Australia and New Zealand, and that fishing in the Minerva waters was very important to the Tonga economy.

The king’s statements were rubber stamped by the Tonga Legislative Assembly which met in special session on June 15.

In the annexation proclamation, it was noted that the Minerva Reefs had long been regarded as belonging to the Kingdom of Tonga. North Minerva was renamed Teleki Tokelau and South Minerva became Teleki Tonga.

Acting rapidly after the legislative action, annexation ceremonies were staged at the reefs on June 26, 1972.

Despite the Tonga king’s ruthless tactics and apparent victory over the Minervans, the international aspects of the situation must be considered.

The Minervans followed inter national law in laying claim to the Minerva Reefs. The chronological order of events and the facts show that the Minervans were FIRST.

Merely because it was stated that the reefs had long been regarded as belonging to Tonga does not make it so. The Tonga Government never had made a claim previously and only did so after the Minerva Republic’s declaration. Thus, the Tonga king flagrantly violated international law by proceeding with his invasion of other people’s rights.

Many of the king’s statements have been refuted in the book, Minerva Reef, by Olaf Ruhen. Contrary to what the king has said, Minerva is not vital to Tonga’s sea lanes. Ruhen said the sea route between Tonga and New Zealand lays to the east of Minerva, while the Tonga-Australia route is to the north. Inter-island shipping also is north and no air routes go anywhere near Minerva.

About 10 years after the tragic shipwreck described in Minerva Reef,

Minerva Could Be "Good" Neighbour

the Tonga Government set up a tubular relief station on South Minerva. If it took 10 years to do this, certainly Minerva was not of too great an interest to Tonga.

Although Captain Tevita Fifita, of the ill-fated Tuaikaepau, stopped at the reefs in 1966 and declared them annexed to Tonga, this was a private venture and there is no record that the Tonga Government approved this annexation. In fact, the Tonga Government redefined its territorial waters and the Minerva Reefs were not included!

That the Minerva fishing grounds are very important to the Tongan economy is a falsehood also. Excellent fishing abounds around the un inhabited Tonga island of ’Ata, ac cording to Ruhen, and it is un necessary for fishermen to travel the additional 180 miles to Minerva, It would seem much more sensible for the Tonga king to exert his country’s energies and money on redeveloping the resource-studded island of ’Ata, particularly when there is a land shortage on other islands of the king dom.

The king’s statement that Tonga has the right to choose its neigbours is quite ridiculous and a very foolish remark for a king, no less, to make.

Who in today’s world determines who his neighbours might be?

Rather than being “possibly un desirable” neighbours, the Minervans could be of great benefit to the Island nations in the area. Construction at the reefs would provide employment for many and would help solve the present serious unemployment prob lem. This influx of money, plus the need for transportation of supplies and people, would boost the economy of the area considerably, particularly in Tonga where even the unemployed must pay taxes.

While the king of the Not-so- Friendly Islands of Tonga sits con tentedly on his throne, smug in his hollow victory over the Minervans, there are those who are not content to see a “banana and coconut king dom” destroy their dreams. Some Minervans are willing to fight for their rights, if need be.

However, the Minervans would much prefer an amicable settlement.

Recently, the Minervan president went to Tonga and sought an audience with King Taufa’ahau, in an effort to reach a compromise, but was unable to see the king. The president was told to submit his proposals in writing if he wanted any considera tion. This procedure had been fol lowed some months before, but there was no response from the Tonga Government.

It can only be concluded that the king and his government do not want to negotiate, considering themselves in control of the situation.

While naked aggression is rampant in various parts of the world, that which the king of Tonga has initiated is no different. While it may be a small matter in comparison with other world situations, the pattern is the same and, therefore, the wrong is just as large.

Apparently, the Minervans are not too perturbed over the Tonga king’s actions, for they expect to proceed with the development of their reefs as planned.

They say that they did not search for a place to settle without the resolve and the means to protect themselves.

“The king of Tonga is free to try to dispossess us,” they say, “but neither he nor his advisers are free to evade the consequences of their action.”

This isn’t a threat; it is a response to one.

Robert D. West.

Chillicothe, Ohio,

Usa.