Up Front

with the Editor

Papua New Guinea is in ferment.

If it wasn’t, we’d have cause to worry! With formal self-government only a few months away (it comes in December) and independence to follow soon after, that vast conglome rate of islands and mountains would have to be inhabited by deaf, dumb and blind if parts of it were not now considerably uncertain and appre hensive.

With Australia’s withdrawal there is to be a new ball game, but the teams aren’t finally selected and no body is sure of the rules. And even with the rules decided, in a country of 700 languages we are bound to have a communication problem.

Miss Josephine Abaijah’s Papuan independence movement is a symptom of the present ferment.

As a Papuan, Miss Abaijah doesn’t want to be dominated by New Guineans when Papua New Guinea goes forward to independence as one state, and she is not prepared to give union a try. She doesn’t support Papuan membership even of a system of Papua New Guinea states in a loose kind of federalism. Better that Papua should have complete indepen dence, she says, although she is not clear on the details of independence and appears not to hold out hope that the present Australian Government would have sympathy for such a de mand anyway.

That’s the gist of Miss Abaijah’s views as expressed in the interview on P 4.

Her attitude is neither new nor re cent. Papuan resentment against New Guineans (those with what Miss Abaijah slightingly refers to as a “kanaka language”) has manifested it self over the years, but Miss Abaijah happens to be particularly colourful, particularly vocal, and at a particu larly sensitive period, and her revolu tionary (and I believe sincere) zeal is bound to capture headlines.

What none of us knows, including Miss Abaijah, is just how large or how significant is her support.

I don’t support Miss Abaijah. I believe her tactics are fomenting

race hatred, and that way lies tragedy. She is not the first in Paput New Guinea to espouse a secessior movement and Papua’s situation i; not so desperate that there need b( talk of revolution. if Papuans really feel as strongly as Miss Abaijah says they do, then must surely be room for serious dis cussion with the government in ar effort to find a solution.

Meanwhile, exaggerations such a: “cur girls are stoned every day the} go to work” (presumably by Nev Guineans) are not going to relieve tensions. New Guineans in For Moresby might argue that man} Papuans are prone to treat Nev Guineans as inferior—but there is nc joy for anyone in encouraging those kinds of racial exchanges. Papuan; and New Guineans in fact rub alonj together pretty well, and what i; needed are further reminders of the things they share in common, no their differences.

But I’m preaching now. Mis; Abaijah, being sincere, is going tc have to do it her way, even though I can see no way that Papua car achieve independence of the kinc Miss Abaijah has in mind. (Which is not the same thing a< saying that it can’t be done. Hammei Deßoburt led the Nauruans to inde pendence in what looked equally im

possible circumstances.)

Myself, I support the pragmatic attitude of those experienced colonial ists, the British, who believe that once political borders have been drawr it is best to keep them intact unti independence, unless a majority of al the people within those borders democratically opt for a division meanwhile. What the state decides to do about its borders after inde pendence is another matter.

And myself, I support one possible solution to Papua’s troubles put for ward by Percy Chatterton to PNG’s Constitutional Planning Committee ir August, because I think it’s a plan that has a practical chance.

He proposes a Papua-New Guinea Community with, initially, five pro

winces Papua, The Highlands, [Coastal New Guinea, New Guinea ilslands, and Bougainville. The Southern Highlanders could choose between being included in the Papua ;or The Highlands provinces, and the 'Northern District people would shoose between Papua or Coastal New Guinea.

Each province would have a Pro vincial Assembly, elected by common roll, with the electorates substantially Ithe same as those in the present Ihcuse.

There would be a High Council of the Community on which all provinces would be equally repre sented by members chosen by the Provincial Assembly—say four from each province.

The High Council would specialise in vital government matters such as fiscal and economic policy and all external affairs, leaving the As semblies to take the main work load of parish pump matters —in fact on all matters not specifically reserved for the High Council.

Each province would have its own lower court and police force, and possibly its own public service.

Collection and expenditure of revenue would solely be a matter for the High Council, which would dis tribute money to the provinces in accordance with a formula prescribed in the constitution. The High Council would also operate a Common Market and control the armed forces, and maintain a Supreme Court and a Court of Appeal.

The number of provinces could be increased, or new ones admitted, only by unanimous agreement of the pro vinces. A province could secede only after consultation with the High Council and a referendum within the province.

Percy Chatterton sees additional provinces being formed from outside the present PNG borders—possibly the Solomons or the New Hebrides might want to ioin, in which case it :ould become the Melanesian Com munity.

But from what 1 hear, there is not much hope of the constitutional com mittee going along with it, as there is a fear that if units are allowed to become too strong in themselves, there is less chance of there being a united nation. There seems to have been widespread support for the re tention of the present 18 districts as middle tier of government.

Nevertheless, it’s all worth serious study by the Miss Abaijahs of the ;erritory who predict bloodshed as the onlv alternative to a unitary Papua New Guinea.

Stuart Inder