‘Pacific leaders

aren’t blind’

‘The Mediterranean is the ocean of the past, the Atlantic the ocean of the present, but the Pacific is the ocean of the future.' Thus spoke John Hay, US Secretary of State, 1898- 1905. ‘The Pacific is the most dynamic growth region in the world.' Thus spoke Walter Mondale, Vice-President of the United States. ‘lf there was ever an idea whose time has come, it is development in the Pacific.’

Thus spoke James Joseph, pres ent US Under-secretary of the Interior. ‘lt’s in the Pacific . . . where it all is, what it’s all about and where our future lies . . . The greatest potential in the world is in the Pacific . . . And in this respect, the Stale of Hawaii is in a very important geographic and economic position as this huge and relatively underdevel oped area grows.’ Thus spoke Mike Mansfield, current US Ambassador to Japan.

Pacific Islanders must be wondering why, after nearly a century of neglect, the United Slates is all of a sudden showing

such an intense interest in their homelands. And why Hawaii, a mid-Pacific island slate, has so arrogantly assumed the self appointed role of leader in this sudden move to influence and develop their territories and independent nations.

There is no question that the decade of the 'Bos will be the decade of the Pacific, and the 21st century the century of the Pacific due to its untapped potential for economic develop ment. According to Governor Carlos Camacho of the North ern Marianas; ‘Technologies, spurred by world shortages, are becoming available to harvest the immense potential wealth of our ocean floor and the ocean itself. And each island, each land mass, each square mile of ocean is now achieving strategic significance that we could not have foreseen or planned for as recently as 10 years ago.’

Yet Fiji’s Prime Minister Ratu Sir Kamisese Mara cau tions: ‘I hope we are planning for a society which will enable us to preserve our own unique character and quality of life, while accepting such contri

billions of modern technology and investment as are advan tageous to us. The nature and the measure of such contri bution should be for us to determine. Let the decisions be made in Apia, Nukualofa, Port Moresby, Honiara and Suva, rather than Sydney, New York and Tokyo.’

Apparently, the Pacific leaders themselves want to weigh the advantages of econ omic development against the threat to their Pacific way of life. Their desire is to control the development of their islands and the seas around them, thus maintaining their self-determ ination and contributing in their own way to the world community, but with a mini mum of outside influence. As Prime Minister Mara said, ‘When it comes to identifying the problems, who knows better than the wearer of the shoe that

pinches.’

As if to assuage the sus picions of Pacific Island leaders that America’s newly aroused concerns are just a clever disguise for further colonialism, Hawaii’s Myron Thompson, Governor George Ariyoshi’s special assistant for Pacific Island affairs, sheepishly pro claimed: ‘We are here to ad vance the quality of life of our Pacific peoples, whom we love.

It’s as simple as that. And by quality of life we do not mean only material progress. We are not here to impose alien econ omic or social methods on others; or to demonstrate better ways of harvesting coral to sell to tourists; or to help Pacific Islanders become unpaid care takers of nuclear waste from continents that don’t know what to do with such leftovers. No.

We are here to help our Pacific peoples to grow; to prosper; to advance spiritually, mentally, emotionally, physically, at their own pace and in their own place.’

Evidently, to many Pacific

sland leaders, Thompson’s vords rang hollow. Asi Aikeni, Vestern Samoa’s Justice Min ster, expressed doubts: ‘Our riend, the United States loesn’t really care . . . it’s not vhat you say, it’s what you do hat matters.’ And Guam’s Jovernor Paul Calvo summed ip his misgivings succinctly: Our collective fate as a people »n this island in the Pacific is leld in the hands of elected lational leaders in Washington )C for whom we do not even ote.’ The bottom line of course yas expressed by President barter himself: ‘All options for lolitical development should be ipen so long as their (Pacific slanders’) choices are im ilemented when economically easible and in a manner that loes not compromise the lational security of the United Jtates.’

The Pacific Island leaders are lot about to fall for the illusory iromises of the American )ream. Nobody knows better han they do that progress in he wrong direction is not irogress at all. They are not so

naive as not to know the real reasons why America is so suddenly interested in their affairs. It is clear as the ocean surrounding their islands that the United States wants some thing, in fact, needs something from them now desperately.

And that something is obvious; instant windfall profits from massive over-development; a place to store and dump nuclear garbage; greedy exploitation of ocean resources; and, most of all, forward strategic military outposts.

Nor are the Pacific leaders about to be fooled by Hawaii’s role in this American scheme.

They are not so blind as not to see Hawaii as it really is; a ‘super-colonised’ US island state, culturally barren, physically over-developed and over-populated, economically dependent on tourism and the US military, and spiritually dead. They see Hawaii as a place where indigenous peoples’ traditions and heritage have been raped and bastardised, crushed and demolished, all in the name of Progress and the

American Dream. Hawaii is no ‘role model’ for Pacific Island territories and emerging nations to imitate. If anything, it’s an example to avoid.

Indeed, as Governor Peter Coleman of American Samoa declared, ‘a new continent has arisen in the Pacific’. A 30million-square-mile continent of islands and ocean which covers more than a third of the globe and sustains nearly as much of the world’s population.

A vast, young and emerging continent, the last area on earth to break the stranglehold of colonialism.

Less than a century ago, American imperialists plucked the luscious pear that once was Hawaii. Let us hope America is not about to pluck the luscious mango of the New Pacific.

Wayne Kaumualii Westlake in Honolulu.

Vanuatu an

‘Algeria’?

Vanuatu could develop into an ‘Algeria of the Pacific’ if the sympathies of the ruling

Vanuaaku Pali for resistance groups in the region were al lowed to dominate govern mental attitudes, according to Hilda Lini.

Ms Lini, a sister of Vanuatu Prime Minister Father Walter Lini, represented the Vanuaaku Pati at a Nuclear-Free Pacific Forum held in Sydney in September.

After Algeria gained inde pendence from France in 1962 following an eight-year war, it developed into a crowded haven for rebel and insurgent groups from a large number of countries.

Interviewed by PIM in Syd ney, Ms Lini said that the Kanak independence move ment in New Caledonia, and independence forces in French Polynesia, wished to set up ‘consulates’ in Port-Vila, but it was unlikely that the Vanuatu Government would permit such a move.

France had indicated that it would withhold all aid if Vanuatu assisted liberation movements in French Pacific territories. The Australian

lovernment has also given pri ate indications that it would ut aid if such facilities were fforded the anti-Indonesian )PM movement in Irian Jaya.

One possibility was that a Dint information centre could e provided in Vanuatu for use y such groups. This idea was nder study by the government.

In one recent incident French epresentatives in Vanuatu /arned the government against ermitting the Kanaks to make scheduled propaganda broad est over Radio Vanuatu on September 24. On this occasion he warning was ignored, and he broadcast went ahead.

But the whole issue was ighly complex, said Ms Lini.

Ihe appealed for international nderstanding of the dilemma i which it placed the govern lenl.

On the matter of the much üblicised beatings by police of ebel prisoners brought to Port- Tla following the quelling of he revolt on Santo, she said the overnmenl had no inkling that he police intended to take such ction. Those involved had cted in retaliation for beatings hey had themselves received in ianto at the hands of rebels fter their capture at the begin ing of the secession. Tony 7 ole.

Shan stronger,

analysis says

official Australian analysis if the political situation in *apua New Guinea claims that he government of Sir Julius ffian has ‘significantly slren ;thened’ its position at the xpense of the Somare oppo ition. (But see neck and neck >opularity for Chan and Somare, Pacific Report, this ssue).

Mr Michael Somare, the oundation prime minister of >NG was defeated on a parlia nentary no-confidence motion :arly this year after more than ix years of leadership before md after independence. Mr Somare spoke optimistically at he time of his belief that he vould return to power as soon is constitutionally possible.

There were early indications, :00, that the new government of Sir Julius Chan was as vulner ible as Mr Somare believed.

But the Australian Depart ment of Foreign Affairs has now published a background analy sis which suggests that Sir Julius is consolidating his pos ition. The analysis does not carry the weight of an Aust ralian government statement, but it represents an authoritat ive assessment of current politi cal factors in PNG. It says: Towards the end of its first six months of office, Sir Julius Chan’s coalition government has recovered from what ap-

peared to be some slippage in political support in parliament, and now seems to be in a stronger position than at any time since it took office.

The motion of no confidence which brought Chan to power was carried by a vote of 57 to 49. The Chan government did not appear to have an easy settling down period. It had to contend with difficulties in the civil aviation area, especially with the operations of Air Niugini. Problems with the judiciary have not been fully resolved following the leaking in Parliament of a highly criti cal letter to the Prime Minister from Mr Justice Wilson. In addition, the Government felt obliged to make a number of important changes at senior levels in the Public Service.

The fineness of the politi cal balance was shown in parlia mentary defeats suffered by the Government in July on three divisions relating to the timing of the next parliamentary session.

However, the political out look has changed significantly, following the Government’s de cision to meet a request from the Prime Minister of Vanuatu, Father Walter Lini, for assist ance in restoring law and order on Santo Island. Prior to this decision, 150 troops of the

Papua New Guinea Defence Force (PNGDF) had been sent to participate in the Vanuatu independence celebrations.

As the deployment overseas on active service of the PNGDF required parliamentary ap proval, the Prime Minister called an emergency session of Parliament for August 5. At this session, Opposition Leader Somare opposed the use of the PNGDF in Vanuatu on the basis proposed. He claimed that the Prime Minister had contra vened the Constitution in send ing troops to the independence celebrations, knowing they would stay on to play a peace keeping role. Somare proposed instead a regional peacekeeping force, organised under the aus pices of the South Pacific Forum. It soon became clear that the Government had the numbers to get the legislation passed. In general, the voting pattern indicated that the Government’s position had strengthened significantly, and that it now had the support of up to 62 members, including the speaker, with 47 supporting the opposition.

A move

to Asia?

The island nations of the South Pacific are moving towards a closer relationship with Asia, particularly the non-communist states of South-east Asia, ac cording to a statement by Western Samoa Prime Minister Tupuola Efi, made in Honolulu in October.

Tupuola, who has travelled this year to India, China, Japan, the Philippines and

Malaysia, said the independent South Pacific countries were looking to Asia rather than to the West for assistance in developing their economies.

Tupuola said South Pacific governments were pursuing approaches to the non communist states belonging to the Association of South-east Asian Nations (ASEAN), made up of Thailand, Malaysia, Singapore, the Philippines and Indonesia.

Sir Julius Chan