The Roger Fowler whānau singers prepare to share a song at the Ponsonby People's Union book launch. Image: Asia Pacific Report
This book launch speech was delivered today for Ponsonby People’s Union: At the Frontline of Community Activism in the 1970s, by Roger Fowler, whānau and fellow activists, at the Whare Wānanga, Tāmaki Pātaka Kōrero — Auckland Central Library.
COMMENTARY: By Nick Bollinger
I have to confess to a degree of imposter syndrome.
I was the wrong age and in the wrong place to be any part of this visionary organisation.
When the small group first gathered in the 1970s to plan what would be the foundations of the Ponsonby People’s Union (PPU), I would have been 12 or 13 and just starting secondary school at Onslow College in Johnsonville, near Wellington.
Writer Nick Bollinger speaking at the Roger Fowler whānau’s book launch . . . “The PPU for Survival and Freedom stands out as perhaps the most practical, principled, and inspiring example of countercultural ideals put into action.” Image: Asia Pacific Report
But even then, it would have been hard not to notice that there were things going on, out in the world beyond our school walls, that were challenging the way society was being run; that sought fairness and justice and peace.
For the past five or six years New Zealand had been involved in a war, waged by America against the Vietnamese, and it didn’t take much to see that this was completely wrong. There were marches through town on Friday nights, organised by people just a few years older than me; some who our government were trying to force into military training, perhaps even to fight in this unjust war.
And these were some of the first activities that me and my Onslow friends would join in on, that could be seen as part of the challenge to the powers that governed our society.
There were other things happening too that I wanted to be part of. Some were deadly serious, like the movement against nuclear weapons or apartheid in South Africa. And there were others that just looked like more fun than the mainstream version of life in New Zealand that was being offered – rock concerts and festivals, communes, sex, drugs and rock’n’roll.
Hope, ideas, action
It was a time of hope, ideas, and action.
It felt, however loosely, like a movement.
It looked to me like an attempt to change the world.
And in many ways I think it did.
The Roger Fowler whānau singers prepare to share a song at the book launch. Image: Asia Pacific Report
Sometimes that things that changed would change back again, as the forces of the establishment regrouped. Some things may have had destructive side-effects that no one really questioned enough at the time.
But there were also lives that were meaningfully improved, perhaps even saved, because of the ideals and the efforts of people who, in different ways, made up this movement.
It would take me a good few decades to get around to it, but a few years ago I set out to write a history of all of this, which I loosely termed the counterculture (because that is how other historians around the world had defined it — and versions of this movement did take place all over the world.)
Community activist Desmond Abrahams reflects on the South African antiapartheid struggle and racism in Aotearoa New Zealand. Image: Asia Pacific Report
Just too young
As I had been just too young to really be more than an observer, I wanted to fill in some gaps in my experience. I wanted to know more about the people who had driven the movement in this country, where their ideas had come from, how they had developed them and put them into action and, ultimately, what had happened as a result.
I began interviewing people who had been involved – whether it had been in the protest activities, or the early bookshops, or the music festivals.
And I would always ask these people who they thought I should talk to; who else had been involved and might have valuable stories to share?
A name that would come up with amazing frequency was that of Roger Fowler.
Ponsonby People’s Union book cover – designed by Kahu Fowler.
Now as I’ve said in the introduction to this book, Roger would no doubt have been embarrassed to find his name in the first sentence because – as I discovered when I met him – his ethos was always one of co-operation, the power of people working together to achieve a common goal rather that the celebration of the individual.
As I worked on my project I began to see that sometimes a shared energy and sense of purpose can help unite a group of likeminded people who might not otherwise have found a focus for their own energies.
And I’m sure that for many people that is what Roger provided, and that was one of his great gifts.
Roger was involved in many, many causes and projects, both before and after the PPU, but it’s the PPU that we’re celebrating here today and it is a great example of something he achieved and how it was achieved.
Jumping Sundays
When I completed my book about the counterculture in Aotearoa, I named it after something else Roger was involved with, something perhaps more frivolous but which seemed to me to be a symbol of those times: I called it Jumping Sundays, which was the name by which people referred to the Sunday afternoon people’s festivals that took place in Albert Park, and where Roger would often perform with his band, the Frank E. Evans Memorial Lunchtime Entertainment Band.
In Jumping Sundays, I attempted, perhaps over-ambitiously, to look at all the aspects of this movement and show some of the connections and even contradictions between its different facets. So there’s a chapter on the Vietnam War but also one on communes; a chapter about alternative media – the underground newspapers and the Resistance Bookshop (something else Roger was involved with) – but there are also chapters on drugs and sex and rock’n’roll.
To fit it all in, I had to compress an awful lot of information. I believe that in the index to Jumping Sundays there are four entries for the People’s Union, but really it adds up to just a couple of pages in which I couldn’t do much more than outline how this organisation came about, who was involved and a few of the things that they did.
So I’m very glad that this new book has been put together from the memories and stories and writings and photographs of the people who were actually there. It’s like zooming in on those few paragraphs I wrote and expanding it to show us all the detail and colour that I could only hint at.
I’m hoping other people today will talk about some of the specific things the Ponsonby People’s Union achieved – whether it was providing cheap food for hungry families or staging occupations of substandard housing when landlords needed an extra nudge; the bus visits to prisons, or the way they worked with other groups like the Polynesian Panthers to fight racism on this city’s streets.
But the final thing I’d like to say is that, looking back on the counterculture era, in all its different dimensions, which ranged from the revolutionary to the ridiculous, the PPU for Survival and Freedom stands out as perhaps the most practical, principled, and inspiring example of countercultural ideals put into action.
This book is a reminder of what is possible. I believe that back then they used to call it “survival pending revolution”.
And we’ve never needed that more than now.
Nick Bollinger is a Wellington-based writer, historian, broadcaster and critic. He was a music columnist for The Listener for more than 20 years, has written for Mojo and been the voice of Radio New Zealand’s music review programme The Sampler.
Activist and research Barry Lee shares memories on the Progressive Youth Movement (PYM) and Ponsonby People’s Union (PPU) in the 1860s-70s. Image: Asia Pacific Report
Seeking to discredit reports of its unprecedented killing of journalists in Gaza, the Israel Defense Forces last week published a list of 170 slain Palestinians it claimed were not legitimate media workers but members of “terrorist groups”.
Palestinian political analyst Muhammad Shehada, a visiting fellow at the European Council on Foreign Relations, reviewed every single entry on the list.
He called it “the most sloppy shameless fraud possible.”
Israeli officials and Western supporters have trumpeted the IDF’s list as a counter to findings by groups like the International Federation of Journalists, which has described Israel’s nearly-three-year-old-war in Gaza as “the deadliest period in the history of journalism” and cataloged at least 240 journalists and media workers killed.
Other global media watchdogs have cited an even higher number while the Qatar-based Al Jazeera news channel has reported at least 270 killed — 12 of them being its own journalists.
Paris-based Reporters Without Borders (RSF) has found dozens of cases in which it concluded journalists were targeted deliberately because of their reporting and filed multiple complaints with the International Criminal Court (ICC) alleging war crimes against the press.
The database, which the IDF refers to as the “Press Files,” says “that claim does not tell the full story” and alleges that “individuals presented as innocent journalists were, in fact, militants in the military wings of Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ) and other terrorist organisations.”
Investigating war crimes in Gaza Video: Al Jazeera
Claims ‘in-depth’ list
The IDF claims the list was the product of an “in-depth investigation” consisting of open-source information, documents recovered by Israeli forces in Gaza, interrogations of alleged Palestinian militants, and intelligence gathered during military operations.
But as Shehada explained in a thread posted to social media on Sunday, “in the overwhelming majority of those listed, the IDF presents ZERO credible evidence. In most of them, their pages are literally blank”.
In 59 cases, Shehada found that the IDF did not provide any evidence for its claim that a journalist was a member of Hamas or PIJ other than that the claim was “based on multiple intelligence sources”.
Shehada said this amounted to essentially saying “trust me, bro,” which is especially insufficient given thenumerousinstances in which the IDF has been found to have misled the public about its responsibility for certain attacks, like the killing of 5-year-old Hind Rajab in 2024.
In another 42 cases, Shehada found that the IDF provided only decontextualized “snippets” of files, which were “undated and unspecified”. Without more information, Shehada said, this is “not… evidence of anything”.
“Those snippets could be taken from random files; they could be outdated or fabricated,” Shehada said, pointing to previous cases in which purported Hamas intelligence circulated by Israeli sources was later revealed to be misleadingly presented as fabricated.
Shehada pointed to specific cases in which Israel’s allegations against specific journalists have been undermined by the underlying evidence.
Israel claimed that Al Jazeera reporter Ismail al-Ghoul, whom the IDF killed in July 2024, was an operative with Hamas’ elite Nukhba wing and released a supposed Hamas personnel document as proof.
Debunked by RSF
But as Reporters Without Borders has previously explained, the document says al-Ghoul, born in 1997, received a military rank in 2007, when he was 10, while elsewhere saying he joined in 2014.
It also identifies him as an engineer, contradicting the IDF’s description of him as a Nukhba fighter. Israeli troops also detained al-Ghoul at al-Shifa hospital months before he was killed but released him after 12 hours.
The case of Anas al-Sharif, another Al Jazeera journalist killed in 2025, is similar. As Shehada documented for +972 magazine last year, al-Sharif was seriously injured in 2017, listed in a military context in 2019, but described as “suspended” and “unassigned” by 2023 — while another document nevertheless portrays him as an elite Nukhba fighter. He was also reportedly detained and released by Israeli forces during the 2024 al-Shifa raid.
In other cases, the IDF’s evidence outright debunks the military’s own claims. For instance, Israel labeled photojournalist Hassan Aslih — killed by an airstrike at Nasser Hospital in Khan Yunis in May 2025 — as a “military operative.”
But the 2019 Hamas document provided as evidence for this lists him as a “photographer” involved with “media services”.
While the document, if authentic, does establish a relationship between Aslih and Hamas’ Qassam Brigades at least six years before his death, this does not make him a legitimate target under international humanitarian law, which distinguishes between those who have a “continuous combat function” and those who provide political or other indirect forms of support, like media coverage.
Shehada found at least seven cases in which the only evidence provided by the IDF was photos of slain journalists holding guns. In another 12 cases, the IDF provided undated photos of journalists allegedly taking part in Hamas or PIJ military activities.
Israeli journalists’ military service
Shehada noted that many prominent Israeli journalists also have past military service, such as Axios correspondent Barak Ravid, who was an IDF reservist until 2023. “Does that make him a ‘legitimate target’? or a non-civilian forever?” Shehada asked.
The distinction between past military affiliation and active combatant status has been a repeated source of dispute for press freedom groups that have attempted to tally the number of journalists killed.
Last month, the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) completed a sweeping review of 229 deaths after Hamas and PIJ published obituaries identifying some people listed as journalists as members of armed groups.
CPJ ultimately removed 22 people from its list, including some it found had participated in combat — but retained others despite militant obituaries, gun photos, or past organisational ties when the evidence did not establish active combatant status.
The “Press Files” database contains 49 cases in which the main piece of evidence is one of these obituaries. Among them are people who CPJ examined and concluded were not active combatants, such as photojournalist Amr Abu Odeh — a 26-year-old freelance photographer for the Anadolu Agency and Reuters — whom the IDF database labels a Hamas “squad commander”.
CPJ examined photos of Odeh wearing a military uniform, which came from a 2021 military training course with Gaza’s Ministry of the Interior. The group noted that “No armed factions in Gaza have claimed Abu Odeh as being affiliated with them, and the IDF has not alleged he was involved in combat”.
‘NOT engaged’ militarily
“In multiple cases, despite obituaries by Hamas/PIJ, the Committee to Protect Journalists investigated thoroughly and concluded those journalists were NOT engaged in any militant activity during the genocide,” Shehada wrote.
“They may have in the past. That doesn’t make them combatants forever.”
He added that the flimsiness of the IDF’s evidence was more striking given the sophistication of the intelligence unit it uses to “dig up dirt” on journalists to provide post hoc justification for their killings, which has been referred to internally as the “Legitimisation Cell,” which was revealed in a +972 investigation.
“If that’s all they can provide as ”evidence“ (e.g. blank pages, random snippets, outdated docs) despite having formidable resources,” Shehada wrote, “then it’s a vindication of Gaza’s journalists!”
Stephen Prager is a staff writer for Common Dreams. Republished under Creative Commons.
A section of the cover of the new book Ponsonby People’s Union designed by Kahu Fowler, one of PU founding activists Roger Fowler and Lyn Doherty's four children. Image: screenshot APR
REVIEW: By David Robie
The seeds of resistance and later community empowerment began in Tāmaki Makaurau in a humble but lively bookshop in a rundown two-storeyed shop at 436 Queen Street. Called the Resistance Bookshop, it became the headquarters for protesters in 1969 for three years as anti-Vietnam War action grew and grew.
This was where many students, workers and radicals gathered — including the young Roger Fowler — to plan their protest action. Many of them lived in dilapidated inner-city flats within a stone’s throw of the bookshop.
As the anti-war movement gained momentum, many young men faced conscription into the New Zealand army and there were fears that conscripts would be drafted to fight in Vietnam — as was their fate in the United States and Australia.
A section of the cover of the new book Ponsonby People’s Union designed by Kahu Fowler, one of PU founding activists Roger Fowler and Lyn Doherty’s four children. Image: screenshot APR
Fowler, an icon of Aotearoa protest and community empowerment, recalled how those men whose “number came up” in the archaic Compulsory Military Training (CMT) “lottery law” were ordered to report to a special train at Auckland Railway Station.
They were “transported to the Waiouru army camp to endure a harsh, three-month course of military training plus follow-up camps,” wrote Fowler.
“My number was drawn and I refused to go; instead burning my draft card at a demonstration at the US Consul’s Paritai Drive mansion.
“I organised a protest at the railway station, where fellow Resistance supporters and I handed out leaflets, encouraging the young conscripts on the train to disembark and refuse to go.
“I was later arrested for refusing to attend the army call-up, then locked up in Mt Eden prison for about three weeks for refusing the pay the fine.”
Fowler recalled that this period of “defiant non-compliance” by conscripts led to the founding of the Organisation to Halt Military Service (OHMS). Eventually, the pressure paid off when the Norman Kirk-led Labour government was elected in November 1972 — and it immediately scrapped CMT.
This saga is one of many stories of the people’s resistance that are recounted in a new book being launched tomorrow, Ponsonby People’s Union: At the Frontline of Community Activism in the 1970s, with an overview written by Roger Fowler in the months before he died earlier this year. Many activists from the era, including his wife and fellow campaigner, Dr Lyn Doherty (Ngati Porou and Ngāpuhi), have also contributed.
Arrested 20 times
He was arrested or charged more than 20 times “during those turbulent years”, and was imprisoned four times for refusing to pay fines — a political prisoner.
A report of PU’s Roger Fowler – pictured here working on food co-op orders – being jailed for opposing militarism. Image: Earwig Magazine
Reading about this period was particularly poignant for me because in 1969 I was living in Melbourne as the young activist editor of the independent Sunday Observer and being threatened with prosecution for writing an editorial urging young Australians to burn their draft cards.
The Ponsonby People’s Union book cover – designed by Kahu Fowler.
I didn’t know Roger, Lyn and their whānau then. This came many years later, especially when we crossed paths over our Palestine activism with Roger founding and campaigning with the Kia Ora Gaza project in a sustained effort to break the cruel Israeli siege of the Gaza enclave to deliver humanitarian aid.
Veteran activist Roger Fowler, co-founder of the Ponsonby People’s Union and a founding member of the Palestine Human Rights Campaign, died on 21 February 2026, aged 77. His whānau have put in tremendous mahi in their effort to try to complete this remarkable book before his death, and it is a compelling testament to his life, and to the comrades and activist supporters.
Fowler’s “vision, energy and guitar helped sustain a remarkable initiative in collective action” for a fairer and better community.
The Auckland Resistance Bookshop . . . a centre for political and social justice activism. Image: Ans Westra/Ponsonby People’s Union
Back to the Resistance Bookshop.
In fact, there were three of them – one each in Auckland, Wellington and Christchurch. They were at the “forefront of this vibrant groundswell of protest and rebellion”. Young people, including many students, spearheaded new forms of activism such as “sit-ins, street theatre, graffiti, leaflets, protest songs and pickets”.
‘Bowels of the underground’
Countless leaflets and screen-printed posters were produced from what was dubbed “the bowels of the underground”.
Auckland’s Resistance Bookshop was also a popular rendezvous for Australian and US draft dodgers who had fled to New Zealand to escape the Vietnam War.
An Auckland Resistance Bookshop flyer. Image: Roger Fowler Collection
The Progressive Youth Movement (PYM) was at the forefront of street protests venting outrage at the pointless slaughter in Vietnam and the “brutal oppression in apartheid South Africa”.
Within walking distance of the Resistance Bookshop — few protesters had cars back then — were two popular hangouts: the Babel restaurant in Victoria Street, and the Kiwi Tavern pub in Symonds Street.
The Vietnam War protests peaked with about 35,000 taking part but eased off as NZ troops were gradually withdrawn from 1971 onwards. Committed activists began looking for a fresh “meaningful direction”.
Many of the serious radicals who had left the bookshop formed an inner city Marxist study group exploring works by Mao Zedong and Lenin, and other more modern authors analysing class struggles against capitalism.
“PMY activist and secretary Cliff Kelsall and I became friends and workmates as labourers on various building sites,” wrote Fowler. ”We started exploring ideas about urban activism, especially inspired by the appeal of Huey P. Newton, Bobby Seale and George Jackson to ‘bring the war back home’, by Newton’s concept of grassroots community organising, building a global network of ‘revolutionary intercommunalism’, and by Seale’s clarion call to ‘Seize the time’.”
North Vietnamese meeting
In 1972, a group of the “young radicals” were invited to meet a visiting North Vietnamese delegation, including the mayor of Hanoi, at the Auckland University Student Union building.
“Among issues discussed,” recalled Fowler, “I asked about the idea that had been quietly floating about, of organising an international militia to support the Vietnamese struggle — similar to the International Brigades that about a dozen young Kiwis had joined up with in the 1930s to fight Franco’s fascists during the Spanish Civil War.”
Several New Zealand medics had volunteered then too, explained Fowler, including the activist and late Invercargill Mayor Tim Shadbolt’s aunt, Rene Shadbolt.
“The startled visitors politely responded: “Thanks, but no thanks.” The Vietnamese suggested that the New Zealanders should instead support their struggle by building a “homegrown revolutionary movement”.
“Advice some of us took to heart,” noted Fowler.
This led to the foundation of an urban movement to organise around “real life struggles and developing survival skills” — useful for the then working class neighbourhoods of Ponsonby, Grey Lynn, Freeman’s Bay and Newton.
The Ponsonby People’s Union . . . headquarters for the food co-op and activism against landlord abuses. Image: Roger Fowler collection
From the Resistance Bookshop, the movement had now graduated to become the Ponsonby People’s Union for Survival and Freedom (PU, for short), with its headquarters at 15 Ponsonby Road in a rundown block of shops skirting Western Park, a block long since demolished to provide more space in the reserve.
‘Clear sense of purpose’
“We decided we needed to start with a clear unified sense of purpose,” wrote Fowler. “A Ten Point Statement of Direction evolved, inspired by the Ten Point Programme adopted earlier by the US Black Panther Party.
“This statement was to become our set of guiding principles for positive practical actions and for addressing the key issues facing our community – such as substandard housing, police harassment, poor education and health services, racism, women’s rights, costly food, arbitrary evictions, and the isolation of prisoners, often in faraway prisons, from their families and loved ones, and advancing social cohesion.”
Part of the People’s Union 10 Point Statement of Direction. Image: Roger Fowler Collection
As Fowler summed up the problem-solving objective, “we aimed to advance the wellbeing, resilience, social cohesion and survival of our community and to strive for civil liberties and freedom from oppression”.
Although clearly influenced by Newton and the Black Panthers — but never a “copycat” movement, PU often operated as a “sister organisation” cooperating with the Polynesian Panthers — of anti-Dawn Raids fame — the Communist Party of New Zealand (CPNZ), PYM, Ngā Tamatoa, ACORD and “other left activist groups of the day”.
Co-founder Roger Fowler doing the mahi in the Ponsonby People’s Union office in Ponsonby Road. Image: Roger Fowler Collection
While deciding on PU’s programmes, Cliff Kelsall and Fowler met Polynesian Panthers leaders at their office in Three Lamps, Ponsonby (honoured today with a pavement panther tile), and forged a warm rapport and community partnership that lasted for the seven-year life of the union and beyond. First up for collaboration was a community food co-op.
“We wanted the co-op to engage with people and encourage them to work together as volunteers around the common goal of sustaining our households with fresh, low-cost food,” wrote Fowler.
And the movement introduced itself in 1972 through leaflets as “a community-based group of people getting together to try to solve common problems and build a real community with control over its own destiny”.
Borrowed old trucks
The Ponsonby headquarters had four upstairs bedrooms and a meeting room (plus garage space and a courtyard), so Kelsall and Fowler immediately moved in with others to help pay the rent — at $15 a week!
Activists Murray Lee and Susan Wilson sorting market produce for the PU food co-op. Image: John Miller
To get the food co-op underway, the collective borrowed old trucks from their networks, collated food orders and bought fresh vegetables and fruit in bulk from the downtown Turners & Growers markets each Monday morning.
“By cutting out the middlemen, up to half of the retail prices were slashed. And we knew the goods were fresh,” Fowler wrote.
“We would choose to buy – at rock bottom prices – spotted apples and misshapen pumpkins that no retailer wanted on their display shelves.”
The co-op was an ideal platform for supporting other struggles, especially during the 1977 Timber Workers’ Union dispute — “when we dispatched our truck packed to the roof with donated food to support workers on the picket line at Kawerau”.
The PU also helped about 300 locked out workers at the NZMC Honda car assembly plant and set up a co-op distribution depot at the Panmure Town Hall.
Jo Bruce-Smith’s posters for the People’s Union food co-op. Image: Roger Fowler Collection
People’s Union activists carried on taking part in anti-Vietnam War protests and over “other issues of the day”. One of the memorable banners read: “Learn from the Vietnamese — unite to defeat our common enemies”.
China ‘educational tour’
In 1975, the NZ China Friendship Society facilitated a “workers’ educational tour” of China, which included six People’s Union activists — including Roger Fowler, his wife Lyn Doherty, and the late mayor Tim Shadbolt of Invercargill: “We visited communal farms, big worksites, and met renowned NZ author Rewi Alley.”
This was six years before I also — now living back in Aotearoa after several years in Paris, France, following the 1968 student riots — went on a Friendship Society visit to China and wrote a series of articles for The Auckland Star.
Now as a semi-retired journalist with also strong beliefs about community-owned and independent media, I was heartened to read Roger Fowler’s chapter on the PU’s independent information efforts.
Fowler wrote about this PU initiative saying: “The People’s Union started to attract the interest of some established media, though unlike other left organisations, we never courted the media. We believed it was more important for people to develop our own independent ‘people’s media’.
“However, a journalist from the Women’s Weekly followed the food co-op for her scoop one day and wrote a sympathetic article.”
Polynesian Panther Tigilau Ness and Roger Fowler at the launch of his “Songs of Struggle and Solidarity” album in September 2025. Ness recorded his version of Fowler’s signature song “We Are All Palestinians” here. Image: Asia Pacific Report
In 2016, Roger Fowler and former Polynesian Panther Party members Tigilau Ness and Tuu’ulenana Iluli attended the 50th anniversary of the Black Panther Party in Oakland, California.
Prison whānau bus trips
Among the many projects of the PU was in 1972 starting a visitors’ weekly free bus run to Pāremoremo maximum security prison near Albany, and a monthly bus trip to Waikēria Borstal near Te Awamutu.
“These services were very popular, as both prisons were purposely located far away from any viable public transport, making family or community relationships difficult for many,” Fowler wrote.
Passengers on the free People’s Union weekly bus for visitors to Pāremoremo Prison. Image: John Miller
“We once crowded about 80 people into a 55-seater bus to Waikēria. Polynesian Panther Party leader Tigilau Ness brought along his guitar and would get a big singalong going from the back seat – his ‘American Pie’ got everyone joining in the chorus, ‘Bye, Bye, Miss American Pie . . . “
The People’s Union food co-op became a key organising tool and platform, recalled Fowler, for another important “problem solving” programme – defending tenants. The PU centre became the “go-to place for local people facing issues inflicted by rapacious landlords, a major problem that plagued the area”.
“Fight for community control” . . . a cartoon in the People’s Union newspaper. Cartoon: Roger Fowler Collection
Fowler pays tribute to community activist Betty Wark and her 1976 Tole Street “tent city” occupation of a public park in Ponsonby in protest for “decent housing”.
In a page devoted to her campaigning, Helene Connor is quoted saying; “Housing the homeless and utilising the buildings to their full extent became a passion for Betty. The Tole Street tent ‘village’ kept going for several months while Betty continued to look for suitable accommodation to house the group.”
Vasau family eviction
Fowler recalled “one of our most high-profile housing cases was the eviction of the Vasau family from their home in Norfolk Street, Ponsonby, in 1974”.
“A new owner had told the family to leave their family home of five years, so he could bang the rent up. They had nowhere to go, so had no choice but to stay and fight.
“One day when nobody was home the landlord seized the chance to break in and toss the family’s furniture and belongings outside.”
The People’s Union was called and activists along with neighbours moved the family’s belongings back inside and barricaded the house. Eventually, six months later the landlord returned along with a senior police officer and a court order.
The good news was that the court order along with community support actually helped the family gain a new state house in South Auckland for their home.
Police harassment “was often a problem for some of the people we worked with,” recalled Fowler. A police “task force” would parade through the streets and stop outside local pubs.
“They would intimidate people, usually in an arrogant, racist manner. They called this ‘team policing’, but the People’s Union newspaper compared them to an invading army.”
Ōkaihau College student Scotty Alexander, with his bagpipes, took the morning off school to support the Māori Land March in 1975 when it passed his family farm in the Waihou Valley. Lyn Doherty of the Ponsonby People’s Union is front right. Tama Poata is at left, then Ngā Tamatoa members Tiata Witehira and Vern Winitana (checked jacket, holding Kahn’s leash). Image: Christian Heinegg/Ponsonby People’s Union
Defining historical event
The Māori Land March in 1975 “was a defining event in the history of Aotearoa — People’s Union members supported the march in many ways, whether joining with the marchers on the road, feeding them, or supplying the bus so that kaumatua could rest when they needed to”.
Fowler devoted an inspired chapter to the struggle of Takaparawhau–Bastion Point. On 6 January 1977, Ngāti Whātua’s Ōrākei Action Committee “put out an urgent call for supporters to join a tent protest” at Takaparawhau, Bastion Point.
“The vast area of open fields was under direct threat by the Muldoon government, which intended to develop the land as elite real estate for upmarket housing.”
Fowler quoted Sharon Hawke, one of the protest occupiers and the daughter of Joe Hawke, one of the leaders, declaring in Takaparawhau, the people’s story: “This was to become one of the greatest shows of strength in modern [NZ] history.”
Doc Ngaheu and Roger Fowler (top left) on the lookout on the roof of Arohanui, the whare nui at Bastion Point, during the eviction on 25 May 1978. They set off orange flares as the police convoy arrived (below). Police remove Roger Fowler (top right). Images: Roger Fowler Collection
“The protest camp evolved into a formidable village occupation that stood firm on the disputed land, until evicted by 600 police 506 days later. The uniting catchcry was: ‘Bastion Point is Māori Land’.”
People’s Union activists were there in the protest from the beginning. The land was “unprotected, windswept terrain exposed to the elements which can be very harsh”. The PU advocated the need to build shelters and huts rather than relying on tents. Some people were able to bring on caravans.
Activists from the PU hired a large rotary hoe to help dig vegetable gardens and the protest community rapidly grew into a “living village” — it was “transformed into a vibrant marae”.
Lyn Doherty and Roger Fowler lived in the protest village “in a little tin shack at the rear of Arohanui [the wharenui] — cooking toasted sandwiches for breakfast on a small methylated spirits burner each morning”.
Shameful Bastion Point raid
On 25 May 1978, a massive police operation moved to evict and demolish the village. On that fateful morning, 222 Ngāti Whātua and supporters were arrested and all the buildings were demolished and removed in a shameful repressive action by the state.
“But although we lost the battle,” recalled Fowler, “we won the war — the land remains as public space under Ngāti Whātua control.”
The Ponsonby food co-op grew until about 600 local households were taking part by the end of the 1970s. But the inner Auckland suburbs of Ponsonby and Grey Lynn and their demographics were rapidly changing. Old houses were being sold and renovated as the suburbs were being “gentrified” and rundown shops were being converted into cafes, restaurants and fashion boutiques.
The special final edition in April 1979 of the People’s Union Community Information Service – and of the demise of the PU itself. Roger Fowler Collection
Sadly, the final edition of People’s Union community newspaper in April 1979 announced the closure of the Ponsonby People’s Union, saying “the need for an ‘umbrella’ organisation to coordinate a wide range of community action (from prison visiting to food co-ops) is no longer necessary”.
However, Roger Fowler and whānau expanded their community activism to their new home in Māngere East, where Roger drove buses and was an Engineers Union delegate before managing the Mangere East Community Learning Centre.
In 1999, he was awarded the Queens Service Medal for community service.
Roger and Lyn have four children — Tawera, Hone, Maia and Kahutia — and 11 mokopuna.
Besides the book’s overview by Roger Fowler, there are 22 contributed chapters by activists in an 18-page section titled “Other activists’ voices”. This includes essays by Sir Bob Harvey, David Williams, Dr Lyn Doherty (“The shooting of Daniel Houpapa – a gross miscarriage of justice”), Vivian Hutchinson, Wayne Toleafoa, Rod Davis, Reverend Mua Strickson-Pua, Anna and Barry Lee, Catherine Manning (a profile on her mother Pat Hammond), Joris de Bres, Fuimaono Norman Tuiasau, and Tigilau Ness (“A legacy to pass onto our children”).
As well as the historical record of a remarkable era in the 1970s, the book is adorned with a superb gallery of photographs and graphic art. The Fowler whānau have worked extraordinarily hard to bring this publication to fruition after Roger’s death. A labour of love.
Roger Fowler and his wife, Dr Lyn Doherty, with whānau and friends at an East Mangere community concert in his honour in November 2025. Image: Hone Fowler
Something new that I learned from reading the book is that along with being such an influential activist and strategic organiser, protest entertainer and singer, Roger Fowler was also a gifted political cartoonist. Such extraordinary talent.
In the foreword, Nick Bollinger sums up: “Even though Roger writes in this book that ‘we never considered ourselves as part of a “youth culture” or so-called “alternative counterculture”, when I look back the People’s Union for Survival and Freedom stands out as perhaps the most inspiring application of countercultural ideals. I am very glad its story — and Roger’s — is at last being told in these pages.”
A montage graphic produced for the Te Ao with Moana programme on the delegation to Israel broadcast last Monday. Delegates Neil Waka (left) and Renata Hakiwai. Image: Te Ao with Moana
At a time when the International Court of Justice (ICJ) has found Israel’s actions in Gaza plausibly constitute genocide, and the United Nations has determined Israel’s occupation of Palestinian territory to be unlawful, the optics and implications of this visit is fundamentally flawed.
This was not a Māori delegation. It was a political act dressed in cultural clothing — and ALL New Zealanders deserve an explanation of why that matters.
The individuals who travelled to Israel did so without any formal Māori mandate. They were not appointed by iwi, hapū, or national Māori organisations. They did not carry the authority of Māori governance structures, nor were they empowered to speak on behalf of Māori people.
They were Māori individuals, not representatives of Māori.
Yet their hosts presented them as if they carried the collective voice of Māori. This misrepresentation is politically dangerous. It allows foreign governments to claim Māori endorsement where none exists, and it undermines the integrity of Māori political autonomy.
It is a responsibility. When individuals allow themselves to be framed as representatives of an entire Indigenous people, without consent or mandate, they participate in a distortion of democratic and cultural legitimacy.
Turning a blind eye to genocide The International Court of Justice (ICJ) findings regarding Israel are unequivocal:
1. 26 January 2024: Order on Provisional Measures:
The ICJ found that South Africa’s genocide allegations against Israel were plausible, and ordered Israel to comply with the Genocide Convention, prevent genocidal acts, and allow humanitarian aid.
2. 28 March 2024: Second Order on Provisional Measures:
The Court reaffirmed its January orders and added further measures, including requiring Israel to ensure humanitarian access and prevent destruction of evidence.
3. 24 May 2024: Order Modifying Provisional Measures (Rafah Offensive):
The ICJ ordered Israel to immediately halt its military offensive in Rafah, maintain open humanitarian corridors, and allow UN investigative bodies access to Gaza.
4. 19 July 2024: Advisory Opinion on Israel’s Occupation of Palestinian Territory:
The Court ruled that Israel’s occupation of Palestinian territory — including East Jerusalem — is unlawful, that Israel must end its presence “as rapidly as possible,” and that all states must refrain from recognising or supporting the occupation.
Recent International Findings (2025–2026): What the delegation also ignored, ICJ Compliance Reviews (2025)
Throughout 2025, the International Court of Justice issued several compliance reviews confirming that Israel had not complied with the provisional measures ordered in January, March, and May 2024. These reviews found:
Humanitarian access was still blocked.
Civilian displacement and death rates continued to rise.
Israel failed to demonstrate any meaningful adherence to the Genocide Convention.
These findings strengthened the Court’s earlier conclusion that Israel’s conduct remained in breach of international law.
ICJ Clarification on State Responsibility (Late 2025)
In late 2025, the ICJ clarified that:
States providing military, financial, or political support to Israel may themselves breach the Genocide Convention.
States must actively prevent genocide, not simply avoid participation.
All states must distinguish between Israel’s sovereign territory and the occupied Palestinian territory.
This clarification directly addresses the risks of political legitimisation, including diplomatic visits framed as Indigenous endorsement.
UN Human Rights Council Findings (2025–2026) The UN Human Rights Council issued two major reports:
2025 Report: Concluded Israel’s actions meet the legal thresholds for genocide, ethnic cleansing, and domicide.
2026 Report: Found Israel’s occupation policies constitute apartheid, persecution, and systematic demographic engineering.
These findings align with and reinforce the ICJ’s conclusions.
UN General Assembly Resolution (December 2025)
The UNGA reaffirmed the ICJ’s July 2024 advisory opinion and called on all states to:
Cease military, economic, and political support enabling Israel’s occupation.
Sanction entities involved in settlement expansion.
Uphold obligations under the UN Charter and international humanitarian law.
This resolution passed with a significant majority, demonstrating global consensus.
UN Security Council Statements (2025–2026) Despite ongoing vetoes blocking binding resolutions, the UNSC issued Presidential
Statements acknowledging:
Israel’s non‐compliance with ICJ orders.
The catastrophic humanitarian collapse in Gaza.
The threat Israel’s occupation poses to international peace and security.
Presidential Statements reflect broad Council agreement, excluding the vetoing state.
CERD Findings (2026)
In 2026, the UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination found:
Israel’s treatment of Palestinians constitutes racial segregation, apartheid, and systematic discrimination.
Israel is in breach of Articles 2, 3, and 5 of CERD.
States must avoid legitimising discriminatory practices — including through diplomatic visits that imply endorsement.
This highlights political risks of the Māori delegation’s visit.
UN Special Committee on Israeli Practices (2026) The Committee reported:
Israel’s occupation is now the longest ongoing military occupation in modern history.
Settlement expansion accelerated in 2025–2026 that forced displacement in the West Bank increased by over 40 percent.
These findings further confirm the unlawfulness of Israel’s occupation.
What does this mean?
1. Israel must comply with the Genocide Convention.
2. Israel must allow humanitarian aid and prevent genocidal acts.
3. Israel must halt its military offensive in Rafah.
4. Israel’s occupation of Palestinian territory — including East Jerusalem — is unlawful.
5. Israel remains in longstanding breach of international law compliance of genocide to Palestinian state.
These are not fringe opinions. They are the highest judicial determinations in international law. Yet the Māori individuals who travelled to Israel chose to ignore this.They attended with pre‐existing biases, accepted a curated narrative, and returned with statements that contradict the findings of the ICJ, the UN, and global human rights bodies.
To turn a blind eye to genocide is not neutrality — it is complicity.
Why Tangata Whenua/Zealanders should be concerned 1. It undermines New Zealand’s international credibility
New Zealand has historically upheld international law and human rights.
When individuals present themselves as Māori representatives abroad — without mandate — they risk creating the false impression that Māori communities support positions that contradict New Zealand’s obligations under the UN Charter and the Genocide Convention.
2. It misuses Māori identity for political propaganda
Indigenous identity carries moral weight.
When Māori identity is used to legitimise a state currently under ICJ scrutiny for genocide, it becomes a political tool — not a cultural expression.
3. It risks silencing Māori who oppose genocide
Many Māori have expressed solidarity with Palestinians, drawing parallels between Indigenous dispossession in Aotearoa and the occupation of Palestinian land.
The unauthorised delegation’s visit risks drowning out these voices by presenting a false narrative of Māori consensus.
4. It erodes trust in Māori governance
If anyone can claim to represent Māori internationally without mandate, then the authority of iwi, hapū, and national Māori organisations becomes vulnerable to political hijacking.
What those who attended must now reconcile
For the Māori individuals who travelled to Israel, they must now confront the reality that presenting themselves — even implicitly — as representatives of Māori, while acting in a private capacity, carries consequences.
They must now explain better how their personal impressions align with the overwhelming international consensus that genocide is occurring in Gaza.
If they reject that consensus, they must articulate why — and on what authority — they believe their curated tour outweighs the findings of the ICJ, the UN, and global human rights monitors.
Collectively they need to redeem themselves better or hand in their iwitanga. Perhaps extreme; but you get what I mean. They shouldn’t have gone and this is why. Because if they didn’t go to offer peace‐change agency committed to alleviating suffering only to be a PR propagandist team of incognisant kumara from the māra (which is seemingly possible!).
The reality is they were simply tourists of torture, tragedy, and torment, walking through the other side of Gaza Strip devastation without regard for humanity, covered with a temporary state of convenient dismissal of the responsibility that comes with claiming Indigenous representation.
That surely is not the tikanga on any account.
Raewyn L. Kapa writes from the standpoint of legal research in public international law, international Indigenous law, Treaty of Waitangi, Ngā Tikanga Māori / Māori Customary Law. Her research includes analysis of the International Court of Justice’s genocide findings, the legal status of occupation under international humanitarian law, and the obligations of states under the UN Charter. This article is republished with the author’s permission.
New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani has hit back after Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu took to the UN General Assembly podium to accuse him of supporting Hamas and making Jewish New Yorkers “feel unsafe” — remarks that came after delegates from scores of countries walked out of the chamber to protest against the far-right fugitive’s presence.
Refuting allegations that Israel is committing genocide in Gaza — where Israeli forces have killed more than 75,000 Palestinians, including more than 21,500 children, since the Hamas-led attack of October 2023 — Netanyahu said: “To all those spreading these lies about my country and about our brave soldiers, whether they sit in this hall or in the office of the antisemitic mayor of New York City, I say this: Shame on you.”
“Mr Mamdani, since you were elected mayor of this city, many Jews no longer feel safe in New York,” the prime minister claimed. “It’s no wonder … You falsely and repeatedly accuse Israel of genocide. Israel didn’t commit genocide. Israel prevented genocide.
“And that’s exactly what Mr Mamdani’s Hamas buddies would have done to us had we not stopped them. They would have killed every last one of us.”
Mamdani issued a statement later saying: “As he has done time and again, Prime Minister Netanyahu used his speech to repeat baseless lies meant to sanitise his genocide of Palestinians.
“Yet no lie can change the fact that he remains the subject of an International Criminal Court arrest warrant alleging war crimes and crimes against humanity.”
Netanyahu and Yoav Gallant, his former defence minister, are fugitives from the International Criminal Court, where they are accused of murder and forced starvation of Palestinians in Gaza. The ICC also issued arrest warrants for three Hamas leaders, but Israel assassinated them.
Third country arrest
While neither Israel nor the United States is a party to the Rome Statute governing the ICC, the treaty states that people from nonsignatory states who commit alleged crimes in states that are party to the treaty — as Palestine is — can be arrested in third countries and subsequently tried by the court.
Israel’s war on Gaza: Abbas and Netanyahu address the UNGA Video: Al Jazeera
Mamdani has said that Netanyahu should be arrested and brought before the Hague-based tribunal for trial, but that he lacks the legal authority to apprehend the prime minister in New York.
The International Court of Justice — also located in The Hague, Netherlands — is currently processing a genocide case filed against Israel by South Africa and formally supported by nearly 20 nations.
The case is based on what the ICJ called the “plausibility” that Israel is committing genocide in Gaza. The court has issued a series of provisional orders for Israel to adhere to the Genocide Convention — orders that critics say Israel has simply ignored.
Last year, an independent UN commission of inquiry found that Israel had committed genocide in Gaza, a conclusion shared by the International Association of Genocide Scholars and other experts, including many Israeli and diaspora Jewish academics, jurists, human rights campaigners, and others.
As Netanyahu prepared to deliver his UN speech on Thursday, delegates from a reported 77 nations walked out of the chamber in protest.
“If there are any other moral cowards who haven’t yet left this hall — please do so now,” the prime minister said. “Thank you very much.”
While some observers applauded the display of solidarity with Palestinians, others expressed disgust that Netanyahu was allowed to address the world body and that he has not yet been brought to justice.
War criminal Netanyahu has completely isolated Israel at the world stage – When he came today to UN General Assembly podium to speak, there was mass walkout and he was booed. Shamelessly, he called them ‘moral cowards’! pic.twitter.com/w5Oo78SeJv
UN failure to stop genocidal war
“The head of the genocidal Israeli apartheid regime, a fugitive indicted for crimes against humanity, was allowed to enter the US and to address the UNGA today, without arrest,” said Craig Mokhiber, a former senior UN official who resigned in protest of what he described as the world body’s failure to stop Israel’s genocidal war.
“Netanyahu insulted delegations, openly celebrated the regime’s many crimes, bragged about its terrorist pager attacks on Lebanon, repeated the regime’s debunked genocide propaganda, defended the illegal occupation of Palestine and Syria, lied incessantly, called violent, racist, illegal Zionist settlers ‘peaceful’ and ‘honorable people,’ labeled human rights defenders as ‘antisemites,’ even arrogantly attacked American citizens and officials for speaking out against the regime’s crimes,” he continued.
“This violent psychopath cannot hide behind [US President Donald] Trump’s skirts forever,” Mokhiber added. “He (and his collaborators) must be captured and brought to justice. And the UN must finally act to isolate the regime and hold it accountable. ”
Referring to Netanyahu’s address and Trump’s threat on Tuesday to “annihilate” Iran during his rambling, lie-laden General Assembly speech, University of Colorado Law School associate professor Maryam Jamshidi said on social media, “Between Trump threatening Iran w/annihilation and Netanyahu bragging about Israel’s pager attacks, the UN podium has become a venue for promoting genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes.”
Meanwhile, people took to the streets of New York to protest Netanyahu’s presence in the city, US complicity in Israeli crimes, and to show solidarity with Palestinians.
Hundreds of protesters gathered outside UN headquarters in Turtle Bay for a sit-in demonstration led by Jewish Voice for Peace. Demonstrators blocked roads while chanting slogans including, “Netanyahu you can’t hide, you are wanted for genocide!”
As Common Dreamsreported earlier on Thursday, more than 100 demonstrators were arrested.
Among those reportedly arrested were progressive congressional candidate Darializa Avila Chevalier; actors Susan Sarandon, Hannah Einbinder, and Cynthia Nixon; New York state Assemblymember Emily Gallagher (D-50); Democratic New York City Councilmembers Chi Ossé and Alexa Avilés; former Army whistleblower Chelsea Manning; and Palestinian American political activist Linda Sarsour.
“I will never, ever be silent,” Sarsour said on Facebook. “I will never just accept the world as it is. I want history to record for future generations of Palestinians that we fought. At every turn. In every way. When it was easy and when it was hard.”
“I want Palestinian girls in Gaza to see me in my hijab and my unapologetic Palestinian blood fighting for them to live FREE,” she added. “This is bigger than all of us. Netanyahu is a war criminal and belongs in The Hague, not the United Nations.”
Netanyahu faces a general election in Israel on October 27.
Brett Wilkins is a staff writer for Common Dreams. Republished from Common Dreams on a Creative Commons licence.
Delegates from scores of countries walk out of the UNGA chamber to protest against far-right fugitive Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s presence. Image: UN News
The Zionist Federation of Australia’s legal assault on Israel critic and journalist Mary Kostakidis was financed by the Israeli war machine via the World Zionist Organisation. Michael West Media reports.
INVESTIGATION: By Stephanie Tran and Michael West
The Zionist Federation of Australia’s chief executive Alon Cassuto has dropped his case against Australian journalist Mary Kostakidis, a high profile critic of Israel. The ZFA is the Australian arm of the World Zionist Organisation.
The World Zionist Organisation has a settlement division which is responsible for expanding illegal settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem — in contravention of international law.
It also has extensive ties to United Israel Appeal (UIA) and Jewish National Fund (JNF), organisations which
The Zionist Federation of Australia, whose chief executive Alon Cassuto brought a racial discrimination case against former SBS journalist and news anchor Mary Kostakidis, is financially dependent on the World Zionist Organisation and Keren Hayesod for the majority of its revenue, according to the federation’s latest financial report.
Cassuto is paid by the ZFA which is in turn funded by the WZO.
The ZFA’s 2025 financial report, states that the organisation is “dependent on the funding from the World Zionist Organisation and Keren Hayesod for the majority of its revenue used to operate the business”.
The ‘charity’ war chest The report says the directors “have no reason to believe that the World Zionist Organisation and Keren Hayesod will not continue to support Zionist Federation of Australia Limited”.
Extract from the Zionist Federation of Australia’s 2025 Financial Report.
The financial statements show that the ZFA received $3.44 million in total revenue in 2025, compared with $3.61 million the previous year. Of that 2025 total, $1.61 million was recorded as revenue and a further $1.746 million as subsidies.
It is cashed up, with a war chest approaching $5 million.
The report does not disclose the source of the subsidies nor does it identify the precise amount ZFA received from either Keren Hayesod or the World Zionist Organisation during 2025.
The ZFA has declined to respond to questions as to whether it also received “security funding” from ECAJ public grants.
The ZFA did not respond to questions about the precise amounts it received from the World Zionist Organisation and Keren Hayesod, or whether any of that funding was connected to the organisation’s legal action against Kostakidis.
STATEMENT RE MARY KOSTAKIDIS AND THE ZIONIST FEDERATION
After 2 years of utterly pointless legal proceedings against Mary Kostakidis, Alon Cassuto of the Zionist Federation pulled up stumps and ended the case on Friday.
There were no deeds, undertakings or apologies. There…
Peak Zionist body
The ZFA describes itself as the peak body for Zionist organisations in Australia and represents more than 200 affiliated organisations.
The federation also maintains an office in Israel. In 2025, the ZFA spent $190,189 on its Israel office.
The ZFA’s directors in 2025 included president Jeremy Leibler, treasurer Benjamin Simon, secretary Lauren Blecher, vice-presidents Paul Gould, Jeffery Lin, Ehud Hauben and Elyse Schachna, and immediate past president Danny Lamm.
The federation’s principal activity, according to its directors, was to “uphold and foster the aim of Zionism”.
The ZFA is the Australian branch of the World Zionist Organisation, which describes national Zionist federations as umbrella organisations for Zionist bodies in each country.
The WZO has a direct role in Israeli settlement activity.
According to reports by Israeli advocacy organisation Peace Now, the Israeli government “finances and operates the Settlement Division of the World Zionist Organisation”.
Established in 1971, the Settlement Division of the WZO has enabled Israel to “establish and develop settlements far from the public eye, using controversial means, with full funding from the state and without any oversight or control”.
Exhausted but victorious. Mary Kostakidis’ 2 year battle defending her right to free speech and political expression ended today with the case withdrawn at the federal court. From all of us at XD Mary, well done, get some rest…….hear from you soon! pic.twitter.com/HcLDahAZ59
Ties to UIA and JNF The ZFA’s constitution also commits the organisation to supporting the fundraising activities of the “National Funds”, defined as Keren Hayesod — United Israel Appeal and Keren Kayemeth LeIsrael — Jewish National Fund.
The constitution states that one of the federation’s objects is “to support the fundraising activities of the National Funds”.
It also requires state Zionist councils to work with Keren Hayesod’s state directorates to ensure the “maximum success” of United Israel campaigns.
The constitution further states that, state Zionist councils must “stipulate that all its member Zionist Organisations commit their members to fulfilling their obligations towards the National Funds and stipulate that all members of its executive shall have an obligation to take part in the work of the National Funds”.
The West Report on lawfare Video: Michael West Media
Investigations by MWM have found that United Israel Appeal and the Jewish National Fund are among a number of Australian charities that are raising tax-deductible funds for programmes supporting the IDF and illegal Israeli settlements in the occupied Palestinian territories.
The federation has also publicly rejected international legal findings that Israel has committed genocide in Gaza.
It described a UN Commission of Inquiry report alleging Israel committed genocide in Gaza as “a baseless and biased assault on truth and justice”, and rejected the ICJ’s advisory opinion as “politically driven” and “deeply flawed”.
Stephanie Tran is a journalist with a background in both law and journalism. She has worked at The Guardian and as a paralegal, where she assisted Crikey’s defence team in the high-profile defamation case brought by Lachlan Murdoch. Her reporting has been recognised nationally, earning her the 2021 Democracy’s Watchdogs Award for Student Investigative Reporting and a nomination for the 2021 Walkley Student Journalist of the Year Award.
Michael West established Michael West Media in 2016 to focus on journalism of high public interest, particularly the rising power of corporations over democracy. West was formerly a journalist and editor with Fairfax newspapers, a columnist for News Corp and even, once, a stockbroker.
This article is republished from Michael West Media with permission.
A pioneer of Palestine protest in Aotearoa New Zealand today warned against the IDF slaughter “obscenity” becoming accepted as normal in the world.
“It’s a particular obscenity watching a catastrophe unfold in Gaza, in the West Bank, and in Lebanon and for the world to get used to it — as our government does … voices, platitudes, and no action,” said Janfrie Wakim of the Palestine Solidarity Network Aotearoa (PSNA).
“Today we also want to remember those Palestinians who died in Shabra and Shatila refugee camps in Beirut — a massacre that occurred in September 1982.
A banner at today’s rally in Auckland’s Te Komititanga Square on the 154th consecutive week of protests against the Gaza genocide . . . “Palestine [experienced] 78 years of terror: 1948 Zionist invasion, Now Israeli genocide”. Image: Asia Pacific Report
Wakim, along with her late husband David, organised monthly Palestinian banners protests in Customs Street for 25 years and was coordinator and spokesperson for the Palestine Human Rights Campaign (PHRC) and backing “freedom flotilla” missions before PSNA was formally set up.
A former chair of PSNA, she has also long supported the global BDS (Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions) movement in opposition to Israel’s illegal occupation of the Palestine territories.
Speaking in Auckland’s Te Komititanga Square and acknowledging the protests against settler-colonialism at Takaparawha-Bastion Point in 1982 — “whose chief stands with us behind us” — Wakim gave a rundown on the Shabra and Shatila massacres that killed between 1300 and 3500 Palestinians and Lebanese Shias the same year.
Three months earlier, Israel had launched a massive invasion of Lebanon “spearheaded by the notorious defence minister Ariel Sharon who wanted to destroy the PLO [Palestine Liberation Organisation] based there at the time”.
‘Laid siege in Beirut’
“They laid siege to the part of Beirut where the PLO was headquartered near the Shabra and Shatila camps where Palestinian refugees from the 1948 Nakba [‘the Catastrophe’] lived.
In early September 1982, a ceasefire deal had been negotiated by US President Ronald Reagan’s administration between the Lebanese Phalangist militia and the PLO, which then evacuated from Lebanon to Tunisia.
The PLO had been given written reassurance from the US that hundreds of thousands of Palestinian civilians they were leaving behind would be safe, said Wakim.
Pro-Palestine activist Janfrie Wakim . . . “[The Shabra and Shatila massacre] was truly horrifying — and there was condemnation and outrage around the world. Here [in New Zealand] included.” Image: Asia Pacific Report
“But on September 14, the Israeli military broke the ceasefire and surrounded the camps. And two days later the Phalange, armed by Israel, were allowed to enter,” she said.“Known for their brutality, they murdered mostly women, children and the elderly — many were raped and mutilated.
“Israel did nothing to stop the massacre, in fact it encouraged it until the Phalangists left on September 18.
‘Truly horrifying’
“This was truly horrifying — and there was condemnation and outrage around the world. Here [in New Zealand] included. That was the time when my husband David and I became involved actively with the local PHRC.”
Part of the crowd at today’s Palestine rally in Te Komititanga Square. Image: Asia Pacific Report
Wakim said that after 18 years occupying southern Lebanon, leaving 18,000 killed, Israel withdrew its military forces in 2000 but attacked again in 2006 and also in 2024.
“Today we remember that hideous event 44 years ago and the victims,” Wakim said.
“The devastating trauma that each family witnessed and has borne in subsequent decades.
“The killing continues [today] with increasing ferocity mass displacement, destruction of homes and infrastructure and war crimes as Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch and the International Red Cross have proven.”
Background on the Sabra and Shatila massacre Video: Al Jazeera
Wakim quoted from an article by the Palestinian writer and editor of The Palestine Chronicle, Dr Ramzy Baroud, on the 40th anniversary of the massacre:
“Though Israeli massacres are meant to bring an end to Palestinian resistance, instead they unwittingly fuel it.
“While Israel continues to act with impunity, Palestinians continue to resist.
“This is not just the lesson of Sabra and Shatila, but also the bigger lesson of the Israeli occupation of Palestine.”
Lost opportunity for arrest
Wakim also spoke of a “crushing” opportunity lost by New Zealand in 2006 to arrest an alleged Israeli war criminal under universal jurisdiction.
“Former Israeli general and war minister Moshe Ya’alon, who faced charges of war crimes committed in Lebanon, visited New Zealand on a fundraising mission,” she said.
“Acting on a tip-off, in accordance with the principle of universal jurisdiction, and with help from a variety of legal experts, I successfully sought a private prosecution for his arrest and was delighted when a District Court judge agreed to issue a warrant for his arrest.
“Unfortunately, this reaction turned to dismay when the arrest did not proceed because the Attorney-General at the time, Michael Cullen, intervened. He quashed the warrant and allowed Ya’alon to leave the country.
“It was a crushing disappointment.”
An Amnesty International banner condemning the genocide . . . the death toll has risen to 73,470, with at least 174,540 wounded. Image: Asia Pacific Report
Since the “ceasefire” last October, at least 1344 people have been killed and 4464 injured while at least 815 bodies have been recovered from the rubble, according to the Health Ministry.
Critical of UK policy
Another speaker at the rally, Barry Lee, a long-time social justice activist since the Vietnam War, condemned the weaknesses of UK Foreign Secretary Ed Miliband’s dramatic “blind eye” change in British policy towards Israel last week.
The UK sanctions would ban settlement goods but also act against companies and individuals providing services for settlement expansion.
“Sounds great but we shouldn’t get too excited about this because as Dana Paterson’s letter in yesterday’s Herald stated its ‘too little too late’,” he said.
“But when you look at the fine print you see that this only applies to banning transactions with the so-called ‘illegal settlements’.
“This is a qualification which the Zionists, being highly skilled in devious deception, will most likely circumvent by concealing or manoeuvring so that the area of origin is concealed.”
However, this did not stop Britain from being “one of the greatest arms suppliers’ to Israel.
“And it doesn’t stop UK investment and trade with Israel which helps fuel the Zionist economy.”
Lee did acknowledge a couple of points of the new policy:
• The settlements are illegal under international law, and there has been a rise in violence towards Palestinians in the West Bank by settlers in recent months.
• That “The British government agrees that there is ethnic cleansing of Palestinians in areas of the West Bank, perpetrated by settler terrorists”.
Illegal settlements target
However, Miliband was careful to point out that that “the sanctions regime will target illegal settlements and settlement expansion, not Israel”.
Pro-Palestine activist Barry Lee . . . critical if the new UK change of policy over Israel . . . and the NZ coalition government. Image: Asia Pacific Report
The Foreign Secretary stated that “Israeli government has turned a blind eye to this and worse, members of it have made statements and taken actions to support the forced displacement of Palestinians”.
“This is pathetic. The Zionist regime has done more than ‘turn a blind eye’. Israeli soldiers have protected the so called settlers.
“And leading government figures, including Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu, have stated openly that they support the settlements. He has vowed to continue establishing the settlements — illegal under international law.
Lee criticised the Israeli Knesset (Parliament) for recently passed legislation to allow the so called area E1 settlement which will effectively cut the West Bank territory in half and undermine Palestine’s quest for statehood.
“Without this official support the settlements would not happen,” Lee said.
He described the current coalition government as being “completely politically and morally degenerate”.
“Like its Western ‘friends’, it is still waffling about the so-called ‘two-state solution’. There is no two-state solution — the Israelis ruled that out decades ago.
“And it was never a solution. Israel is occupied Palestine. The only solution is a secular one state — where all ethnicities and religions live together in equality.”
Kites for freedom in Gaza
After the downtown rally, a linked Global Sumud Aotearoa Kites for Freedom in Gaza action was staged at Mission Bay Beach.
This annual event honours the 12,000 children who flew kites on the Gaza beach to set a world record for simultaneous kite flying. More children were killed in the first five months of Gaza’s genocide than took part in the record.
Organisers of the Mission Bay event said the Israeli military was trying to deny one of the last fun-making events by “banning” flying kites in the ruins of Gaza.
The “Let Gaza Live” children’s kite day in Mission Bay today. Image: Del Abcede/Asia Pacific Report
Australian journalist Mary Kostakidis outside federal court in Adelaide in July 2025 . . . “Watching a people live stream their own genocide while the international community responsible for creating this mess offers the victims sympathy and the perpetrators bombs, diplomatic cover and impunity, has been disgusting." Image: Cathy Vogan/CN
The Zionist Federation of Australia has withdrawn its case of “racial hatred” against Australian journalist Mary Kostakidis, who called it a victory for free speech, reports Consortium News.
SPECIAL REPORT: By Joe Lauria
After a two-year legal battle to punish a prominent Australian journalist for her public criticism of Israel’s genocide in Gaza, the Zionist Federation of Australia (ZFA) has withdrawn its case.
“This is a win for every Australian who values our democratic right to freedom of political expression,” Kostakidis said on X. “Zionist zealotry has had to beat a retreat from what was going to be a highly damaging trial.
“The purpose of journalism is to get to the truth — fearlessly — and to hold power to account. This is a win for press freedom, which has prevailed.“
Kostakidis, who anchored the SBS national news for nearly 20 years, was a high-profile target for the Zionist Federation in its quest to silence outrage over Israel’s conduct in Gaza.
Alon Cassuto, the ZFA chief executive who brought the case against Kostakidis, claimed on X that he withdrew it on Thursday to deprive her of a platform. He wrote:
“I do not intend to spend another year taking Ms Kostakidis’ repugnant commentary from the dark corners of the internet and giving it a Federal Court platform in her pursuit of martyrdom. My job here is done.”
The majority of his statement was a continued attack on the journalist. He claimed that the action he brought against Kostakidis was satisfied by an apology she had issued. But that was two years ago and he pursued his case against her nonetheless.
What he did not mention is a recent series of court decisions in Australia by judges who upheld the right to criticise Zionism, which appears to have weakened his chances of winning.
Kostakidis had also won approval for full discovery of ZFA communications.
In claiming victory, Kostakidis wrote:
“Watching a people live stream their own genocide while the international community responsible for creating this mess offers the victims sympathy and the perpetrators bombs, diplomatic cover and impunity, has been disgusting.
“Thank you to the Jewish and Israeli people all over the world raging against this in recognition our common humanity trumps any form of tribalism.
“Australia must stop disregarding the Orders of the International Court of Justice which were clear: we are obliged under international law to take meaningful action to prevent genocide in Palestine and to do all in our power to bring about an end to apartheid.
“Hypocrisy, double standards and a lack of courage are aiding the destruction of a framework intended to protect against the worst excesses of state power.”
Joe Lauria is editor-in-chief of Consortium News and a former UN correspondent for The Wall Street Journal, Boston Globe, and other newspapers, including The Montreal Gazette, the London Daily Mail and The Star of Johannesburg. He was an investigative reporter for the Sunday Times of London.
Breaking: Zionists legal proceedings against me have been withdrawn after a 2 year battle.
This is a win for every Australian who values our democratic right to freedom of political expression. Zionist zealotry has had to beat a retreat from what was going to be a highly…
In citizen responses to this article published by Consortium News:
Anthony Kevin (September 11, 2026):
Whatever Cassuto’s rationalisations for their withdrawal, the Australian Zionist cause is bound to suffer big reputational damage over this. I am sure Joe Lauria is right that they ended the case because after the recent decision by NSW Supreme Judge Fagan, they were going to find it a hard case to sustain.
Especially as Zionist Israel keeps on humiliating and exploiting Australian governments and elites.
Mary was looking more and more like Joan of Arc. And the Zionists more and more like Torquemada of the Spanish Inquisition.
Graeme D (September 11, 2026): Mary stood where no Australian legacy MSM dared stand. Sycophants one and all, so ready to bend.
She showed courage and a dedication to telling the truth about a genocide when Australian legacy outlets banned journalists from using that word, even after the ICC unequivocally declared that a “plausible genocide” was being perpetrated.
Mary stood where most MPs feared to stand.
As Hunter S. Thompson — another fearless journalist — wrote, “anyone who goes to caught takes a wolf by the ears.”
Mary did this, and is one of the few to “win” at probably a heavy personal cost.
AMY GOODMAN: A federal judge has ruled the Trump administration has violated the constitutional rights of international students in seeking to deport them for their pro-Palestinian activism and criticism of Israel.
In her ruling, US District Judge Noël Wise wrote, “In the United States, free speech, including the freedom to criticise the government and its leaders, is not a sign of our democracy’s fragility. It is evidence of its strength. That strength is diminished when members of our society — citizens and noncitizens alike — must self-censor and ‘behave’ or suffer the government’s retaliation.”
The lawsuit was filed by The Stanford Daily, the student newspaper at Stanford University, which claimed some of its writers on student visas declined to cover pro-Palestinian protests or report on topics related to Israel, fearing deportation.
Student journalists also requested their published articles on such topics be removed from the paper’s website.
Stanford Daily editor-in-chief George Porteous . . . “What we said is, we can’t function as a newspaper if we don’t have [noncitizen] voices included in our newspaper. So, we filed a lawsuit, and last week the judge gave us a favourable ruling.” Image: Democracy Now! screenshot APR
The case raises broader questions about the climate of fear and political repression facing international students during the Trump administration. One of the most striking examples is Rümeysa Öztürk, a Turkish doctoral student at Tufts University.
Last year, masked plainclothes immigration agents snatched Öztürk off the streets of Somerville, Massachusetts. A year earlier, she had co-written an opinion piece for the Tufts student newspaper, The Tufts Daily, critical of the university’s response to campus protests over Gaza and the school’s failure to uphold student Senate resolutions on Palestine.
Tufts University later stated the op-ed did not violate university policy, that no complaints had been filed about it, and that Rümeysa Öztürk had been in good academic and immigration standing.
Nonetheless, her student visa was canceled, and she spent more than six weeks in an ICE jail in Louisiana. An immigration court eventually ruled in Rümeysa’s favor, saying the government failed to meet its burden of proof to deport her.
However, the message from the Trump administration to international students across the nation remained clear: Their ordinarily protected free political expression could now potentially cost them their immigration status and their freedom.
Well, for more, we’re joined by two guests who successfully challenged the Trump administration in court. Here in New York City, George Porteous is with us, editor-in-chief of The Stanford Daily. And in Moorestown, New Jersey, Will Creeley, legal director of FIRE, the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression, which represented The Stanford Daily in court.
George and Will, we welcome you both to Democracy Now! Let’s begin with you, George Porteous. You are a rising senior —
GEORGE PORTEOUS: Senior, yeah.
AMY GOODMAN: — at Stanford. You’re the editor-in-chief of the paper. Talk about why you brought this suit. What were the student reporters saying to you, the international students?
GEORGE PORTEOUS: Thank you for having me.
And what we were hearing from the noncitizens in our newsroom and from noncitizens across campus — current students, former students, alumni — was that they were genuinely frightened because of what they saw in the headlines, what they saw happen to Rümeysa Öztürk.
They were understandably frightened that if they reported the news, even if they weren’t writing an op-ed, even if they were just covering a protest or a vigil, if they put their name on a byline, they were frightened that they were going to lose their visa.
And so, what we said is, we can’t function as a newspaper if we don’t have these voices included in our newspaper. So, we filed suit, and last week the judge gave us a favorable ruling.
JUAN GONZÁLEZ:And, George, what was the initial response of the Stanford administration to your lawsuit? Did they — did they support your efforts?
GEORGE PORTEOUS: You know, the administration has remained relatively silent about this suit. We still haven’t heard any response from them since this decision. And we’re an independent organisation, so this was a suit filed by The Stanford Daily on our own, independently. And that’s really why we were in this case, not really because of the university.
JUAN GONZÁLEZ: And what has this all taught you in terms of the ability of folks to stand up and defend the First Amendment?
GEORGE PORTEOUS: Well, I think what it’s shown me is that it really has to begin locally, because we were dealing with a problem inside of our newsroom with our peers, and this was about solidarity, and also just the practical need to continue doing our jobs and to continue reporting the news.
So, it’s shown me that it really does begin with everyday people. It begins with students, too. Students, I think, have enormous power to stand up to what this administration has done in terms of civil liberties and constitutional rights. And we have real power, is what this ruling has shown us.
AMY GOODMAN: And are other students who have previously said they’re not going to cover a protest — are they willing to now? Has this made a difference, changed the climate in your newsroom?
GEORGE PORTEOUS: You know, it’s still, I think, too early to see. But I’m hopeful that this ruling, because it’s a very strong legal precedent, will carve out more room for noncitizens to feel that they can participate in democracy on campus.
AMY GOODMAN: Will Creeley, you are legal director at FIRE, the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression. Talk about why you approached The Stanford Daily, why this is such a significant decision.
WILL CREELEY: Well, it’s an honour to be here, Amy and Juan.
And I’m so proud listening to George now expound upon the importance of folks like George and his predecessor, Greta, standing up for First Amendment rights. It’s extremely important. When you see Rümeysa Öztürk in prison orange from a detention center in Louisiana for co-authoring an op-ed, you know something has gone terribly wrong.
With this administration, again and again, the chill is the point. These actions that they’re taking, these wanton violations of the First Amendment, are designed to get folks like George and his colleagues at The Stanford Daily to feel scared, to think twice, to ask that their names not appear on news reporting or opinion pieces.
That’s flatly un-American.
So, it was extremely important to us to fight back. And we’re so grateful for the bravery of The Stanford Daily folks and our Jane Doe colleague — Jane Doe plaintiff, who was a member of Students for Justice in Palestine and was no longer going to protest or flying a Palestinian flag or wearing shirts that expressed her political opinions.
She self-censored because of what the administration was doing. That’s a First Amendment violation every day of the week. It’s flatly un-American. And that’s why we’re very proud of last week’s victory.
JUAN GONZÁLEZ: Will, some members of the Trump administration responded. Stephen Miller posted on X, “A district court judge says America must admit and keep foreigners who hate America and hate Americans. Court-ordered civilisational suicide. It will not stand.”
Your response? And also the issue that you —
WILL CREELEY: Yeah.
JUAN GONZÁLEZ: If you could talk a little bit about the due process question you raised?
WILL CREELEY: Stephen Miller has got it exactly backwards. In the year 1800, Thomas Jefferson, in his inaugural address, made clear that in this country we protect the First Amendment rights of even those who call for the dissolution of this country, responding to the Alien and Sedition Acts.
We have a long history in this country of protecting that speech. That’s what makes this country special. We have to live those values. It’s Stephen Miller who’s un-American here, not folks who are expressing their political opinions.
The United States is supposed to be where folks from around the world, folks like Rümeysa Öztürk, Mohsen Mahdawi, Mahmoud Khalil, can come and learn about what it means to be able to speak out without fear of a midnight knock on the door or being whisked away by masked federal agents.
We’re going to continue fighting for those fundamental American rights, no matter who’s in office.
AMY GOODMAN: Well, we’re going to be talking about people being whisked away by federal agents in a moment when we go to Danbury, Connecticut. I want to thank you both for being with us, and just ask you, as you go into your senior year, George: What are you majoring in?
GEORGE PORTEOUS: I’m a history major.
AMY GOODMAN: So, what have you learned?
GEORGE PORTEOUS: Well, history repeats itself. And I think what we’ve seen is this administration has a clear agenda. They’re trying to instill fear on campuses. And they’ve done lasting damage. I mean, this lawsuit is a victory, but a lot of damage has already been done.
So, I think what I’ve learned is that we have a responsibility, especially as students. We have an opportunity to continue standing up for our peers, because when the most vulnerable among us is afraid to speak, we should all be deeply concerned.
AMY GOODMAN: George Porteous, editor-in-chief of The Stanford Daily. Will Creeley, legal director at FIRE, the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression.
The 55th Pacific Islands Forum Leaders’ Meeting in Koror, Palau, last week has pushed West Papua back to the centre of Pacific diplomacy.
At an Melanesian Spearhead Group (MSG) caucus held on the margins of the Forum, leaders reaffirmed their longstanding call for the United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) to visit the West Papuan provinces.
They urged Jakarta to facilitate the visit before 31 December 2026, the end of Indonesia’s term as president of the UN Human Rights Council.
Author Ali Mirin . . . “Indonesia’s sovereignty may be internationally recognised, but sovereignty should never become a shield against legitimate human rights scrutiny.” Image: APR
Crucially, the MSG said that if the requested steps were not undertaken, Indonesia’s associate member status would be reviewed at the 2027 MSG Summit.
The question is whether Jakarta is willing to allow independent international observers to see, hear, and assess conditions in West Papua?
Sovereignty cannot be the end of the conversation
For decades, Indonesia has relied heavily on sovereignty and territorial integrity when responding to international criticism of West Papua.
Jakarta maintains that Papua is an integral part of Indonesia and that its political status was settled through the international arrangements culminating in the 1969 Act of Free Choice.
From this perspective, calls for international intervention can be portrayed as challenges to Indonesia’s territorial integrity and interference in its domestic affairs.
But sovereignty and accountability are not mutually exclusive. Recognition of territorial sovereignty does not eliminate a state’s responsibility for human rights. Nor does it prevent international organisations from seeking access to investigate allegations of abuses.
The unresolved legacy of 1969
Indonesia’s sovereignty argument also rests heavily on history. Under the 1962 New York Agreement between Indonesia and the Netherlands, administration of West New Guinea was temporarily transferred to the United Nations before being transferred to Indonesia.
The agreement envisaged an act of self-determination before the end of 1969.
Rather than a territory-wide referendum involving universal and direct participation by the adult population, the process involved representative councils. UN records state that 1026 members of the enlarged representative councils were asked to express the population’s choice, and all chose continued association with Indonesia.
The UN General Assembly subsequently adopted Resolution 2504, taking note of the Secretary-General’s report and the agreement concerning West New Guinea.
The dispute, therefore, is not whether the 1969 process occurred. It clearly did. The deeper question is whether it represented a genuinely free expression of the political will of West Papuans.
This historical disagreement remains politically powerful because the competing narratives have never been reconciled.
For Jakarta, 1969 closed the question of sovereignty. For many West Papuans, it remains evidence that their political aspirations were never freely tested.
But contemporary Pacific diplomacy should not become trapped entirely in this historical dispute. Even if one accepts Indonesia’s present sovereignty over Papua, contemporary human rights questions remain legitimate.
West Papua calls on Pacific Islands Forum leaders: Stand with us before it’s too late Video: Free West Papua Campaign (The Netherlands)
Indonesia’s anti-colonial rhetoric
There is also an uncomfortable contradiction in Indonesia’s international rhetoric.
Indonesia has historically presented itself as an anti-colonial state and a supporter of the principle that peoples should be free from colonial domination.
At the UN Pacific Regional Seminar on Decolonisation in Bali in 2023, then-Foreign Minister Retno Marsudi stated that “independence is the inalienable right of all nations” and argued that colonialism must be abolished.
Indonesia’s response is that West Papua is not a colonial territory and that its political status was settled through an internationally recognised process.
That is a legitimate position for Indonesia to defend. But the political question remains: if self-determination is a universal principle, how should it be applied when Indigenous Papuans continue to challenge the political circumstances under which integration occurred?
Jakarta’s ‘right path’ needs a destination
Indonesia has responded by insisting that the proposed UN visit is progressing and is “on the right path.” Yet the phrase raises more questions than it answers.
What does “the right path” actually mean?
When will the visit occur?
Will UN officials have freedom of movement?
Will they be able to speak privately with Indigenous communities?
Will they meet civil-society organisations, church leaders, victims, local officials and political representatives?
Will they be able to visit areas affected by military operations and displacement?
And will their findings be published without political interference?
These are not unreasonable demands. They are the minimum conditions necessary for an assessment to have credibility.
If Jakarta is confident that conditions in Papua have improved, an independent UN assessment could actually strengthen Indonesia’s position.
Transparency is not necessarily a threat to sovereignty. In fact, it can reinforce legitimacy.
Why the MSG decision matters
The MSG is uniquely placed in this debate because West Papua is not merely a distant foreign policy issue for Melanesian governments.
West Papuans are Indigenous Melanesians, and the MSG was established to strengthen political, economic, and cultural cooperation among Melanesian peoples.
Indonesia’s associate membership has therefore always contained a political tension.
Jakarta seeks recognition and legitimacy within an organisation representing Melanesian interests, while some MSG members continue to raise concerns about the rights and welfare of Indigenous Melanesians inside Indonesia.
The organisation has not abandoned dialogue. Fiji has made clear that engagement with Jakarta remains necessary. But dialogue without measurable outcomes risks becoming a diplomatic holding pattern.
The proposed OHCHR visit provides a practical benchmark. The MSG has effectively placed a deadline on the issue. That changes the diplomatic calculation. Jakarta is no longer responding only to general statements of concern; it is responding to a specific request accompanied by a potential institutional consequence.
The Pacific is testing itself
Pacific governments increasingly speak of a regional order grounded in Indigenous rights, human security, climate justice and self-determination. They insist that Pacific priorities should not simply be dictated by larger external powers.
West Papua therefore presents a difficult consistency test. At the same time, Pacific diplomacy must avoid reducing every disagreement with Indonesia to a confrontation over sovereignty. Indonesia is too important to the region for that approach to be strategically sustainable.
The better approach is precisely what the MSG appears to be attempting: engagement combined with accountability.
A new phase in the West Papua debate
The significance of Koror is therefore not that the Pacific has suddenly endorsed West Papuan independence. Nor has the MSG decided to remove Indonesia. What has changed is the political language.
The debate is shifting from the binary question of “Indonesia or independence” towards the more immediate question of “sovereignty and accountability”.
That shift creates political space for Pacific governments to demand transparency without having to settle the final status question first. It also places greater responsibility on Jakarta.
Indonesia has spent decades defending its sovereignty over West Papua. It now has an opportunity to demonstrate that sovereignty is compatible with transparency.
The coming months will determine whether the Koror decision becomes another diplomatic statement or a genuine turning point.
For West Papuans, this is not merely a diplomatic dispute. It concerns whether their experiences can be independently heard and investigated.
For the MSG, it is a test of whether Melanesian solidarity has practical meaning.
For the Pacific Islands Forum, it is a test of whether its principles apply consistently.
For Indonesia, it is a test of whether sovereignty can coexist with scrutiny.
And for the United Nations, it is a test of whether international human rights mechanisms can gain meaningful access to one of the Pacific’s most enduring political disputes.
Indonesia’s sovereignty may be internationally recognised, but sovereignty should never become a shield against legitimate human rights scrutiny.
Ali Mirin is a West Papuan academic and writer from the Kimyal tribe of the highlands bordering the Star Mountains region of Papua New Guinea. He holds a Master of Arts in International Relations from Flinders University in Adelaide, South Australia.
