"Unfree flags" . . . Kanaky New Caledonia (from left), West Papuan and Aboriginal banners. Members of the Australia West Papua Association protesting outside Sydney's Leichhardt Town Hall on West Papua Independence Day on 1 December 2022. Image: AWPA
An Australian advocacy group has called for West Papua to be reinscribed on the United Nations list of “non self-governing territories”, citing the “sham” vote in 1969 and the worsening human rights violations in the Indonesian-ruled Melanesian region.
Tomorrow the annual International Week of Solidarity with the Peoples of Non-Self-Governing Territories is due to begin tomorrow and will end on May 31.
“It’s 60 years since UNTEA transferred West Papua to Indonesian administration, which then unceremoniously removed it from the list.
“As for the so-called Act of Free Choice held in 1969, it was a sham and is referred to by West Papuans as the ‘act of no choice’.”
‘Seriously deteriorating’
Collins said in a statement today that the situation in West Papua was “seriously deteriorating” with ongoing human rights abuses in the territory.
“There are regular armed clashes between the Free Papua Movement [OPM] and the Indonesian security forces,” he said.
“West Papuans continue to be arrested at peaceful demonstrations and Papuans risk being charged with treason for taking part in the rallies.
“The military operations in the highlands have created up to 60,000 internally displaced people (IDPs), many facing starvation because they fear returning to their food gardens because of the Indonesian security forces.
“Recent armed clashes have also created new IDPs.
Collins cited New Zealand pilot Philip Mehrtens, who has been held hostage by the West Papuan National Liberation Army (TPNPB) for more than three months.
According to Mehrtens as quoted by ABC News on April 26, the Indonesian military had been “dropping bombs” in the area where he was being held, making it “dangerous for me and everybody here”.
‘French’ Polynesia an example
“We cannot expect the [UN Decolonisation Committee] to review the situation of West Papua at this stage as it would only bring to attention the complete failure by the UN to protect the people of West Papua.
However, territories had been reinscribed in the past as in the case of “French” Polynesia in 2013, Collins said.
But Collins said it was hoped that the UN committee could take some action.
“As they meet in Bali, it is hoped that the C24 members — who would be well aware of the ongoing human rights abuses in West Papua committed by the Indonesian security forces — will urge Jakarta to allow the High Commissioner for Human Rights to visit West Papua on a fact-finding mission to report on the deteriorating human rights situation in the territory.”
“It’s the least they could do.”
The work of the UN Special Committee on Decolonisation . . . Current Pacific members include Fiji, Papua New Guinea and Timor-Leste – and Indonesia is also a sitting member. Graphic: UN C24
New Caledonia's Congress President Roch Wamytan . . . questions whether French Interior Minister Gérald Darmanin was serious when he said it could take two generations, or 50 years, for self-determination. Image: RNZ Pacific/Xose Bouzas/AFP
By Walter Zweifel
New Caledonia’s largest pro-independence party says the latest French pronouncement on self-determination is an insult to the decolonisation process.
Amid a dispute over the validity of the referendum process under the Noumea Accord, French Interior Minister Gérald Darmanin told the United Nations last week that self-determination might take “one or two generations”.
The Caledonian Union said the statement contradicted the 1998 Noumea Accord which was to conclude after 20 years with New Caledonia’s full emancipation.
However, three referendums on independence from France between 2018 and 2021 to complete the Accord resulted in the rejection of full sovereignty.
But the Caledonian Union says the trajectory set out in the Noumea Accord has not changed and the process must conclude with New Caledonia attaining full sovereignty.
In a statement, the party has accused France of being contradictory by defending peoples’ right to self-determination at the UN while not respecting the colonised Kanak people’s request and imposing the 2021 referendum.
The date was set by Paris but because of the impact of the covid-19 pandemic on the indigenous Kanak population, the pro-independence parties asked for the vote to be postponed.
The French government refused to accede to the plea and as a consequence the pro-independence parties stayed away from the poll in protest.
Although more than 96 percent voted against full sovereignty, the turnout was 43 percent, with record abstention among Kanaks at the centre of the decolonisation issue.
Pro-independence parties therefore refuse to recognise the result as a legitimate outcome of the decolonisation process.
They insist that the vote is not valid despite France’s highest administrative court finding the referendum was legal and binding.
Darmanin due back in Noumea The latest meeting of the Caledonian Union’s leadership this week was to prepare for next week’s talks with Darmanin, who is due in Noumea for a second time in three months.
In its statement, the Caledonian Union said it wanted France to specify what its policies for New Caledonia would be, adding that for the party, they had to be in line with the provisions of the Noumea Accord.
The party said fresh talk of self-determination should not be a pretext of France to divert from the commitments in the Accord.
It also said it would not yet enter into formal discussions with the anti-independence parties about the way forward although they also were Noumea Accord signatories.
The party also said it would not discuss the make-up of New Caledonia’s electoral rolls until after a path to full sovereignty had been drawn up in bilateral talks with the French government.
On La Premiere television on Sunday night, Congress President Roch Wamytan, who is a Noumea Accord signatory and a Caledonian Union member, said his side had a different timetable than Paris.
While the French government was focused on next year’s provincial elections, Wamytan said it was not possible to discuss in the space of a month or two the future of a country or of a people that had been colonised.
He also wondered if Darmanin was serious when he said it could take two generations, or 50 years, for self-determination.
Wamytan said after the failed 2021 referendum, the two sides had diametrically opposed positions.
However, he hoped at some point a common platform could be found so that in the coming months a way would be found as a “win-win for New Caledonia”.
Walter Zweifel is a RNZ Pacific reporter. This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.
French Interior Minister Gérald Darmanin seated next to pro-independence New Caledonian Congress President Roch Wamytan in Noumea . . . upset pro-independence parties with his “two generations” comment. Image: RNZ Pacific/Delphine Mayeur/AFP
Fiji's President Ratu Wiliame Katonivere (front centre) arrrives on Bau Island for the reinstatement ceremony of the Great Council of Chiefs. Image: Fiji govt/RNZ Pacific
By Iliesa Tora and Kelvin Anthony
Chiefs are to serve people and not to be served, Fiji President Ratu Wiliame Katonivere told the Great Council of Chiefs (GCC) on Bau Island in Fiji today.
The Council — regarded as the apex of traditional Fijian leadership and also accused of being a racist institution — was discarded by former prime minister Voreqe Bainimarama following his 2006 military coup.
Today, 16 years since it was removed, the Great Council is returning under Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka’s coalition government.
Ratu Wiliame Katonivere said the Great Council was now challenged more than ever in their decision making as traditional leaders to safeguard, collaborate and promote inclusivity in the dynamics of an evolving Fiji.
He said the Turaga Tui Macuata urged chiefs to stand to together in unity in their service, while expecting challenges and changes.
Ratu Wiliame said the chiefs met in a new dawn and they needed to welcome those who made up Fiji’s multicultural society and have made Fiji their home.
“We are chiefs in our own right — we have subjects, we are inheritors of our land, sea, and its flora and fauna,” Ratu Wiliame said.
‘Unifying vision’
“As we meet, we bring with us the hopes and the needs of our people and our land that depend on our vision in unifying our wise deliberations that shall lead to inclusive decisions that encompasses all that we treasure as a people and a nation.”
“As it reconvenes, the GCC must focus on two principles, firstly, we need to be conscious of the existence of those who will challenge the status quo; and secondly, to encourage our people to work together for our advancement as a people, where no one is left behind,” he said.
Ratu Wiliame said the reinstatment of the Great Council was happening at a critical stage in Fiji’s development and the challenge was for the chiefs to stand up and be counted by playing their roles that they were born into, reminding them of the words of the late Ratu Sir Lala Sukuna that being a chief was not an ornament.
“The title of chief is not an ornament. An ornament is adorned to be marveled and admired, or as fashionable wear, rather as chiefs we are bound by duty and responsibility that require our intentional and undivided attention,” he said.
With this new beginning, it was “paramount that we reflect on our traditional ties with one another as iTaukei, to the government of the day and to the church.”
He said it was crucial that the reconvened Great Council of Chiefs delivered on the very purpose with which it was initially established, for the preservation of the iTaukei land, marine and natural ecosystem, guided by relevant legislation.
“The Great Council of Chiefs is duty-bound to safeguard, defend, liberate all-encompassing matters of all Fijians respecting the rule of law,” Ratu Williame said.
Ratu Sukuna’s legacy Speaking to the gathering on Bau Island, Ratu Wiliame also referred to the late Ratu Sir Lala Sukuna.
“He was predestined for leadership that included military training and he was awarded the Croix de Guerre for his gallant role in World War I under the French Foreign Legion.
“The preordained life of Ratu Sir Lala Sukuna became the gateway to his life of servitude to his people, the land and the crown.”
He said these were traits that the late Ratu Sir Lala Sukuna was renowned for, a visionary, decisive and intellectual leader that was indicative only of a leader who was divinely anointed.
Ratu Sukuna was Fiji’s older statesman and he helped in setting up iTaukei leadership and land systems.
New vision and mission Ratu Wiliame said it was therefore crucial that the Great Council of Chiefs establish and build on its previous accomplishments and embark on a new vision and mission to be able to better navigate the new changes and developments as we chart our way forward.
He said their role as leaders remained to be the fiercest defender of Fiji’s natural resources both on land and at sea, particularly with protecting their frontier from the current effects and impact of climate change.
He also called on chiefs to remember their role equally lay in encouraging iTaukei and people to contribute to growing the economy and to promote economic empowerment and stability to better enhance their livelihoods.
“Should we want a better Fiji, it is pertinent that our younger generations are groomed in iTaukei protocol, leadership and all mannerism befitting a servant leader,” he said.
“The Great Council of Chiefs is now challenged more than ever in our decision making as traditional leaders to safeguard, collaborate and promote inclusivity in the dynamics of our evolving Fiji.”
Ratu Wiliame acknowledged the Turaga na Vunivalu na Tui Kaba, Ratu Epenisa Cakobau for inviting the Great Council to be held on Bau Island.
Ratu Epenisa is the paramount chief of Fiji in his traditional title as the high chief of the Kubuna Confederacy.
The Fiji government apologises (presenting a matanigasau) for the actions of the previous government and for any offence it had caused to the chiefs. Image: Kelvin Anthony/RNZ Pacific
Forgiveness The opening ceremony also saw the seeking of forgiveness from government and the Christian churches in Fiji for past events that had caused splits within the Great Council and Fiji as a nation.
The government’s traditional apology, or matanigasau, was presented by Apimeleki Tola, Acting Commissioner of the Native Lands Commission and was accepted by the Marama Bale Na Roko Tui Dreketi, Ro Teimumu Kepa, the traditional head of the Burebasaga confederacy.
Tola asked the chiefs to forgive the past government and its decision to de-establish the Great Council and also asked for their blessings and support in the work that government is doing for the people of Fiji.
Ro Teimumu accepted on behalf of the chiefs and urged government and civil servants to continue their service to the people of Fiji.
Two other apologies were presented and accepted.
The first was from the government to the church and religious leaders and the second from the religious leaders to the chiefs of Fiji.
The official opening ceremony was preceded by a church service conducted by the president of the Methodist Church in Fiji and Rotuma and full traditional Fijian ceremony of welcome.
Iliesa Tora is an RNZ Pacific journalist and Kelvin Anthony is lead digital and social media journalist. This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.
Xanana Gusmao's CNRT party is expected to form a coalition with the Democratic Party, which won six seats in the Timor-Leste election. Image: Mitchell Woolnough/ABC News
ABC Pacific Beat
Timor-Leste independence hero Xanana Gusmao has won the parliamentary election, but the country’s first president may contest the count after his party fell short of an outright majority.
The result of Sunday’s election paves the way for a return to power for the 76-year-old, Timor-Leste’s first president, if he can form a coalition.
Fellow independence figure Dr Mari Alkatiri’s incumbent Fretilin party, formerly the Revolutionary Front for an Independent East Timor, won only 25.7 percent, according to the Electoral Commission.
French Interior Minister Gérald Darmanin at the UN . . . invitation for Decolonisation Committee members to visit New Caledonia. Image: UN
By Walter Zweifel
French Interior Minister Gérald Darmanin has invited the United Nations Decolonisation Committee members to visit New Caledonia.
Controlled by France since 1853, New Caledonia was returned to the UN decolonisation list as prolonged political violence threatened in 1986 — 39 years after France had withdrawn it and its other major Pacific colony from the 19th century, French Polynesia, from the list.
France says it has complied with the UN decolonisation process and regularly exchanged with the UN about New Caledonia.
During a visit to the United States last week, Darmanin stopped at the UN in New York to discuss the aftermath of the three referendums on independence which France organised in New Caledonia between 2018 and 2021.
Darmanin, who as Interior Minister is also responsible for France’s overseas possessions, said he had a constructive exchange, without elaborating.
He said, however, he wondered how “to trigger this right to self-determination on the scale of one or two generations”.
Darmanin also told the committee that after the referendums, France was trying to negotiate with both the pro- and anti-independence camps to formulate a future status for New Caledonia.
What next for New Caledonia? The outcome of the referendum process as outlined in the 1998 Noumea Accord is in dispute, with the pro-independence parties claiming the rejection of independence is illegitimate because of the low turn-out of the colonised Kanak people in the last vote.
French Interior Minister Gérald Darmanin (left) in Noumea . . . asking how to “trigger this right to self-determination on the scale of one or two generations”. Image: RNZ Pacific/AFP
France had gone ahead with the third referendum despite a plea by pro-independence parties to postpone it because of the impact of the covid-19 pandemic on the Kanak population.
The pro-independence side refuses to recognise the result, saying that the referendum was not in the spirit of the 1998 Noumea Accord and the UN resolutions on the territory’s decolonisation.
It said the path of dialogue had been broken by the stubbornness of the French government, which was unable to reconcile its geostrategic interests in the Pacific with its obligation to decolonise New Caledonia.
The pro-independence camp has been lobbying for support to get the referendum outcome annulled.
However, a legal challenge in Paris last year by the customary Kanak Senate was unsuccessful while a further challenge of the referendum result filed with the International Court of Justice is pending.
PIF leaders meet in Nadi, Fiji, for a retreat in February 2023. Image: PIF
New PIF chair taking ‘neutral’ position This month, the Pacific Islands Forum said it would “not intrude” into New Caledonia’s affairs although a subgroup, the Melanesian Spearhead Group, had earlier backed calls for the UN to declare the result null and void.
Asked for the Forum’s view, its chair, Cook Islands Prime Minister Mark Brown, said the “Forum respects the due process of each country”.
“It is not the Forum’s role to intrude into the domestic matters of countries as they determine their independence or their dependence on other countries,” Brown said.
The pro-independence side has refused to engage with the anti-independence side in discussions about any new statute. Instead, it has insisted on having bilateral talks with only the French government on a timetable to conclude the decolonisation process and restore New Caledonia’s sovereignty.
In March, Darmanin visited New Caledonia for talks with a cross-section of society, and last month New Caledonia’s political leaders were in Paris for more discussions.
None of these meetings have yielded a consensus on a way forward.
Audition cet après-midi à l’@ONU_fr par le C24, comité des Nations Unies en charge des sujets de décolonisation, afin de faire le point sur la Nouvelle-Calédonie.
Merci à la présidente du comité et aux pays membres pour cet échange riche et constructif. Au nom du Gouvernement,… pic.twitter.com/Ya5BY1k9Kc
Next week, Darmanin is due back in Noumea in a renewed effort to advance discussions on New Caledonia’s future status.
The anti-independence parties want Paris to honour the referendum result and move towards reintegration of New Caledonia into France by abolishing the restricted rolls created with the Noumea Accord.
The push received support last week from the deputy leader of France’s Republicans François Xavier Bellamy who visited Noumea.
He said his side would support changes to the French constitution to allow for the rolls to be opened up — a move firmly resisted by the pro-independence side.
French Polynesia marks 10th reinscription anniversary
Pro-independence leader and former president of French Polynesia Oscar Temaru (in facemask) celebrates the pro-independence Tavini Huira’atira party’s victory following the second round of the territorial elections. Image: RNZ Pacific/Suliane Favennec/AFP
The ruling pro-independence Tavini Huira’atira party in French Polynesia marked the 10th anniversary of the territory’s reinscription in Faa’a where the party founder and leader Oscar Temaru is mayor.
His decades-long campaign succeeded in 2013 when the UN General Assembly approved a resolution — sponsored by Solomon Islands — and re-inscribed French Polynesia on the world body’s decolonisation list.
The decision, which came in the dying days of the last government led by Temaru, was vehemently criticised by the Tahitian government, which succeeded his, as well as France, which labelled the UN decision an “interference”.
While France has refused to attend any UN discussion on French Polynesia, the pro-autonomy government of the past decade regularly sent delegates to the annual gathering in New York.
Marking the anniversary this year, Tavini’s youngest assembly member Tematai Le Gayic told Tahiti Nui TV he was disappointed that the “French state agrees to negotiate when there is bloodshed”, referring to New Caledonia’s unrest of the 1980s.
“But when it’s with respect of law and democracy, France denies the process,” he added.
The opposition Tapura’s Tepuaraurii Teriitahi said that it would be good “if France accepted once and for all, to avoid any controversy, that UN observers could come to French Polynesia”.
While viewing independence as a long-term goal, the newly elected President Moetai Brotherson has been critical of France shunning the UN process, having described it as a “bad look”.
At the event in Faa’a, Brotherson said they went to ask the UN “to give us the possibility of choice, with a neutral arbiter”.
He said it was then up to his party to awaken consciences so that an overwhelming majority would vote for independence, which he said was not an end in itself but an essential step to building a nation.
“We don’t want a 50 percent-plus-one-vote victory,” he said.
Walter Zweifel is a RNZ Pacific reporter. This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.
US Secretary of State Antony Blinken (from left), PNG Prime Minister James Marape (standing) and Defence Minister Win Daki after signing the US-PNG defence cooperation pact and a ship rider agreement to combat illegal fishing and drug running in Port Moresby last night. Image: Kennedy Bani/The National
The National, Papua New Guinea
Papua New Guinea yesterday intialled a defence cooperation agreement with the United States amid day-long protests against the signing by university students and opposition MPs.
The agreement was signed by PNG Defence Minister Win Daki and US Secretary of State Antony Blinken.
A statement by the US State Department said the signing, when it comes into force, “will serve as a foundational framework upon which our two countries can enhance security cooperation and further strengthen our bilateral relationship, improve the capacity of the PNG Defence Force and increase stability and security in the region”.
The US will publish the contents of the document when it enters into force as provided by US law, the statement declared.
Protests and demonstrations were held at four universities — the University of Papua New Guinea, University of Technology in Lae, Divine Word University in Madang and at the University of Goroka.
The UPNG protests spilled out on the streets last night stopping traffic.
Opposition Leader Joseph Lelang cautioned the government not to “sacrifice Papua New Guinea’s sovereignty” in the haste to sign international agreements with other nations, whatever the motivation.
In ‘crosshairs of China’
Former prime minister Peter O’Neill said the government was putting the country squarely in the “crosshairs of China and the United States” in their struggle for geopolitical supremacy in the region.
The US government will work with Congress to provide more than US$45 million (about K159 million, or NZ$72 million) in new programming as PNG and the US enter a new era as “partners for peace and prosperity in the region”.
Divine Word University students during their peaceful protest over the US-PNG defence pact at the Madang campus yesterday. Image: The National
The US will provide an additional US$10 million (about K35.3 million) to implement the strategy to “prevent conflict and promote stability” in PNG, bringing total planned funding to US$30 million (about K106 million) over three years.
Blinken and PNG Prime Minister Marape also signed a comprehensive bilateral agreement to counter illicit transnational maritime activity through joint at-sea operations, the US statement revealed.
“This agreement will enable the US Coast Guard’s ship-rider programme to partner with and enhance PNG’s maritime governance capacity.
Marape said before the signing that the agreement would not encroach on the country’s sovereignty.
“The US and PNG have a long history, with shared experiences and this will be a continuation of that same path.
Generic SOFA in 1989
“PNG signed a generic SOFA [status of forces] agreement with other countries in 1989 and today with the signing of the defence cooperation and the maritime cooperation (ship-rider agreement) it will only elevate the SOFA.
“And this cooperation will help build the country’s defence capacity and capabilities and also address issues such as illegal fishing, logging and drug smuggling in PNG waters.”
Blinken said the agreement would help PNG mitigate the effects of climate change, tackle transnational crime and improve public health.
“We are proud to partner with PNG, driving economic opportunities and are committed to all aspects of the defence and maritime cooperation,” he said.
US Secretary of State Antony Blinken and PNG Defence Minister Win Bakri Daki sign the US-PNG Defence Cooperation pact in Port Moresby last night after a day of countrywide student protests criticising the lack of transparency. Image: Samuel Rillstone/RNZ Pacific
By Lydia Lewis and Scott Waide in Port Moresby
Papua New Guinea Prime Minister James Marape says the increased United States security involvement in Papua New Guinea is driven primarily by the need to build up the Papua New Guinea Defence Force and not US-China geopolitics.
Last night, despite calls for more public consultation, the US Secretary of State Antony Blinken and Papua New Guinea’s Minister for Defence, Win Bakri Daki, penned the Bilateral Defence Cooperation and Shiprider agreements at APEC House in Port Moresby.
Prime Minister Marape said the milestone agreements were “important for the continued partnership of Papua New Guinea and the United states.”
“It’s mutually beneficial, it secures our national interests,” he said.
PNG Prime Minister James Marape . . . maintains that the controversial defence agreement is constitutional in spite of public criticism and a nationwide day of protests by university students. Image: Samuel Rillstone/RNZ Pacific
He said the penning of the new defence pact elevated prior security arrangements with the US under the 1989 Status of Forces Agreement.
Despite public criticism, Marape maintains the agreements are constitutional and will benefit PNG.
He said it had taken “many, many months and weeks” and passed through legal experts to reach this point.
The Shiprider agreement will act as a vital mechanism to tackle illegal fishing and drug trafficking alongside the US, which is a big issue that PNG faces in its waters, Marape said.
“I have a lot of illegal shipping engagements in the waters of Papua New Guinea, unregulated, unmonitored transactions take place, including drug trafficking,” he said
“This new Shiprider agreement now gives Papua New Guinea’s shipping authority, the Defence Force and Navy ‘full knowledge’ of what is happening in waters, something PNG has not had since 1975 [at independence],” Marape said.
Secretary of State Antony Blinken . . . “Papua New Guinea is playing a critical role in shaping our future.” Image: RNZ Pacific/Getty/AFP
Secretary of State Antony Blinken echoed those sentiments and stressed that the US was committing to the growing of all aspects of the relationship.
“Papua New Guinea is playing a critical role in shaping our future,” Blinken told the media.
He said the defence pact was drafted by both nations as “equal and sovereign partners”.
It was set to enhance PNG’s Defence Force capabilities, making it easy for both forces to train together.
He too stressed the US would be transparent.
For all their reassurances, both leaders steered clear of any mention of US troop deployments in PNG despite Marape having alluded to it in the lead up to the signing.
Reactions to the security pact Although celebrated by the governments of the US and PNG as milestone security agreements the lead up to the signings was marked by a day of university student protests across the country calling for greater transparency from the PNG government around the defence pact.
The students’ president at the University of Technology in Lae, Kenzie Walipi, had called for the government to explain exactly what was in the deal ahead of the signing.
“If such an agreement is going to affect us in any way, we have to be made aware,” Walipi said.
Just before the pen hit the paper last night, Marape again sought to reassure the public.
“This signing in no way, state or form terminates us from relating to other defence cooperations we have or other defence relationships or bilateral relationships that we have,” Marape said.
He added “this is a two-way highway”.
Students from the University of Goroka stage an early morning protest yesterday against the signing of the PNG-US Bilateral Defence Cooperation Agreement. Image: RNZ Pacific
Students at the University of Papua New Guinea ended a forum late last night and blocked off the main entrance to the campus as Prime Minister Marape and State Secretary Blinken signed the Defence Cooperation agreement.
They are maintaining a call for transparency and for a proper debate on the decision.
Hours before the signing, they presented a petition to the Planning Minister, Renbo Paita, who received their demands on behalf of the Prime Minister.
Students at the University of Technology in Lae met late into the night. Students posted live videos on Facebook of the forum as the signing happened in Port Moresby.
The potential impact of the agreements signed in Port Moresby overnight on Papua New Guinea and the Pacific will become more apparent once the full texts are made available online as promised by both the United States and Papua New Guinea.
Lydia Lewis is a RNZ Pacific journalist and Scott Waide is RNZ Pacific’s PNG correspondent. This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.
Extending my heartfelt thanks to Prime Minister Marape and the people of Papua New Guinea for hosting me. I am grateful to have met with Pacific Islands leaders and to demonstrate our commitment to working together with our Pacific neighbors to address our shared challenges. pic.twitter.com/mpVCnIGDAT
— Secretary Antony Blinken (@SecBlinken) May 22, 2023
The proposed Voice for Australia is the opposite of apartheid . . . it will ensure First Nations peoples have their views heard by Parliament. Image: Wikimedia Commons, CC BY-SA
ANALYSIS:By Dominic O’Sullivan
Many different arguments for and against the Voice to Parliament have been heard in the lead-up to this year’s referendum in Australia. This has included some media and politicians drawing comparisons between the Voice and South Africa’s apartheid regime.
Cory Bernardi, a Sky News commentator, argued, for instance, that by implementing the Voice, “we’re effectively announcing an apartheid-type state, where some citizens have more legal rights or more rights in general than others”.
As legal scholar Bede Harris has pointed out, it’s quite clear Bernardi doesn’t understand apartheid. He said,
How the Voice could be described as creating such a system is unfathomable.
Comparisons to apartheid
Apartheid was a system of racial segregation implemented by the South African government to control and restrict the lives of the non-white populations, and to stop them from voting.
During apartheid, non-white people could not freely visit the same beaches, live in the same neighbourhoods, attend the same schools or queue in the same lines as white people. My wife recalls her white parents being questioned by police after visiting the home of a Black colleague.
The proposed Voice will ensure First Nations peoples have their views heard by Parliament.
It won’t have the power to stop people swimming at the same beaches or living, studying or shopping together. It won’t stop interracial marriages as the apartheid regime did. It doesn’t give anybody extra political rights.
It simply provides First Nations people, who have previously had no say in developing the country’s system of government, with an opportunity to participate in a way that many say is meaningful and respectful.
Apartheid and the Voice are polar opposites. The Voice is a path towards democratic participation, while apartheid eliminated any opportunity for this.
Evoking emotional responses, like Bernardi attempted to do, can inspire people to quickly align with a political cause that moderation and reason might not encourage. This means opinions may be formed from limited understanding and misinformation.
🗣️ “Whether you vote yes or no in the coming referendum, your choice deserves respect.” #CharlesSturtUni constitutional law expert has challenged claims made by a SKY TV host likening the proposed Voice to Parliament to an apartheid-type state.https://t.co/EePzMcIksO
— Charles Sturt University (@CharlesSturtUni) May 9, 2023
Misinformation doesn’t stop at apartheid comparisons The Institute of Public Affairs, a conservative lobby group, has published a “research” paper claiming the Voice would be like New Zealand’s Waitangi Tribunal and be able to veto decisions of the Parliament.
The truth is the tribunal is not a “Maori Voice to Parliament”. It can’t veto Parliament.
The Waitangi Tribunal is a permanent commission of inquiry. It is chaired by a judge and has Māori and non-Māori membership. Its job is to investigate alleged breaches of the Treaty of Waitangi.
The tribunal’s task is an independent search for truth. When it upholds a claim, its recommended remedies become the subject of political negotiation between government and claimants.
The Voice in Australia would make representations to Parliament. This is also not a veto. A veto is to stop Parliament making a law.
We need to raise the quality of debate Unlike the apartheid and Waitangi arguments, many objections to the Voice are grounded in fact.
Making representations to Parliament and the government is a standard and necessary democratic practice. There are already many ways of doing this, but in the judgment of the First Nations’ people who developed the Voice proposal, a constitutionally enshrined Voice would be a better way of making these representations.
Many people disagree with this judgment. The National Party argues a Voice won’t actually improve people’s lives.
Independent Senator Lidia Thorpe says she speaks for a Black Sovereignty movement when she advocates for a treaty to come first. The argument is that without a treaty, the system of government isn’t morally legitimate.
Other people support the Voice in principle but think it will have too much power; others think it won’t have enough.
Thinking about honest differences of opinion helps us to understand and critique a proposal for what it is, rather than what it is not. Our vote then stands a better chance of reflecting what we really think.
Lies can mask people’s real reasons for holding a particular point of view. When people’s true reasons can’t be scrutinised and tested, it prevents an honest exchange of ideas.
Collective wisdom can’t emerge, and the final decision doesn’t demonstrate each voter’s full reflection on other perspectives.
Altering the Constitution is very serious, and deliberately difficult to do. Whatever the referendum’s outcome, confidence in our collective judgment is more likely when truth and reason inform our debate.
In my recently published book, Indigeneity, Culture and the UN Sustainable Development Goals, I argue the Voice could contribute to a more just and democratic system of government through ensuring decision-making is informed by what First Nations’ people want and why.
Informed, also, by deep knowledge of what works and why.
People may agree or disagree. But one thing is clear: deliberate misinformation doesn’t make a counter argument. It diminishes democracy.
Stan Grant was one the few diverse journalists employed in the Australian media industry. Yet his story of relentless racial abuse is one shared by other journalists who are Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander, culturally and racially marginalised, LGBTQIA+ and/or living with disability. Image: The Conversation twitter feed/ABC
ANALYSIS: By Bronwyn Carlson, Faith Valencia-Forrester, Madi Day and Susan Forde
Stan Grant, a well-known Aboriginal journalist and soon-to-be former host of Q+A, has made a stand against racist abuse, saying he is “stepping away” from the media industry. Grant said he has paid a heavy price for being a journalist and has been a media target for racism.
As authors of a recent Media Diversity Australia report investigating online abuse and safety of diverse journalists, we’re not surprised.
Grant was one the few diverse journalists employed in the Australian media industry. Yet his story of relentless racial abuse is one shared by other journalists who are Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander, culturally and racially marginalised, LGBTQIA+ and/or living with disability.
I want no part of it. I want to find a place of grace far from the stench of the media. I want to go where I am not reminded of the social media sewer.
ABC management has finally condemned the racist abuse directed at Stan Grant and apologised to him, but it has come far too late.
ABC staff have taken matters into their own hands, walking out in support of Grant.
Since the King’s coronation, I have seen people in the media lie and distort my words. They have tried to depict me as hate filled. They have accused me of maligning Australia.
When Elizabeth II died, many Indigenous journalists and newsreaders were targeted for not sharing the same grief many non-Indigenous people expressed. Narelda Jacobs was one of many Aboriginal journalists who received abuse across social media and was also targeted by mainstream media.
Grant called the ABC’s lack of support an “institutional failure”, saying:
I am writing this because no-one at the ABC — whose producers invited me onto their coronation coverage as a guest — has uttered one word of public support.
In response to Grant’s column, a statement was issued from the ABC’s Director News, Justin Stevens, conceding Grant has, over many months, been subject to grotesque racist abuse, including threats to his safety.
The ABC’s Bonner Committee has recommended a full review into the ABC’s responses to racism affecting staff and how they can better support their staff.
What our research found Our report, Online Safety of Diverse Journalists, commissioned by Media Diversity Australia and released this month, focused on Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander, culturally and racially marginalised, LGBTQIA+ and/or people living with disability.
This new research followed a 2022 Media Diversity Australia report, Who Gets to Tell Australian Stories 2.0, which detailed significant under-representation of diverse journalists in the industry, particularly Indigenous people and those from culturally and racially marginalised groups.
Our new report focused more on online safety and the high cost for diverse journalists who are often not supported or protected in the workplace. It found 85 percent of participants had experienced either personal or professional abuse online.
As one participant said:
It’s so ingrained within all parts of society, all the pillars within society, all professions, which includes the media, and I think women, particularly women of colour and from Indigenous backgrounds, they receive the most horrific and vile abuse.
The report has not yet gained interest from the Australian media other than Fourth Estate which expressed alarm at the findings.
One of the key findings from this research was that diverse journalists often accepted that online harassment and abuse from the public was “just part of the job”. Many reported they were working in what they considered “hostile work environments”.
One participant expressed:
As soon as you say you are a journalist, the response is: you are asking for it.
It was concerning to find the normalisation of online harassment and abuse, and many diverse journalists were reluctant to report their experiences for fear of being considered a problem. Many felt if they raised the issue it would impact any chance of career progression.
A participant commented:
I am cautious revealing my struggles because I don’t want people to think I can’t handle my job.
Aboriginal people learn to tough it out. That’s the price of survival.
Organisations have a duty of care to their employees. Online harassment and abuse of diverse journalists is a work health and safety issue and needs to be urgently treated as such.
The impact and cost to diverse journalists is high, and many make the same choice as Grant — to leave the industry to protect themselves and their health. Many spoke about how harassment and abuse was not only online; 39 percent reported the abuse moved offline.
The racist attacks on Stan Grant are sickening and sad. All of us in the media must play our part in helping quell the stench of the sewer. I am so sorry Stan. @walkleyshttps://t.co/TfUANxk3Ny
When it comes to thinking about who gets to tell Australian stories or who gets to have a career as a journalist free of harassment and abuse, the Media Diversity Australia report evidences the hostility of the media industry for those who are not white, able bodied, and/or cis-gender and/or heterosexual.
The report also shows, as Grant points out, that online harassment and abuse actively and incessantly targets Indigenous journalists. Although many of the participants stated they were unofficially warned by their workplace to expect online violence, they said they received little support to protect and defend them from racial harassment and abuse.
I started to see exactly what I’d been warned about (…) But there was no mechanism to flag that to say that you had received a racist email to send it somewhere where that person could be put on a watch list or whatever it is, you know, where they’re going to become a serial offender.
Grant echoes the experiences of many participants when he says:
Barely a week goes by when I am not racially targeted.
After Stan Grant’s stand against racist abuse, Chinese Australian author Louisa Lim was left shocked and upset at racial harassment during a local restaurant incident while in New Zealand at the weekend as a guest speaker for the Auckland Writers Festival. Image: NZ Herald screenshot APR
The research report also reveals that workplace and online harassment in media industry involves fairly predictable culprits. As one participant highlighted, they come from a similar demographic — white men.
Grant’s resignation is a huge loss to Australian journalism. He and other diverse journalists nationally are crying out for action on the part of media bodies and organisations.
There are many other diverse journalists who have left the profession prior to Grant’s departure. One of our interviewees contacted us to say:
If a serious and well respected journalist feels the best thing to do is leave and has had no support from work — what does that mean for the rest of us?
Let’s hope the media industry is finally paying attention.
University of Papua New Guinea students protest against the US-PNG defence pact in Port Moresby today. Image: TV1 News screenshot APR
ANALYSIS: By Barbara Dreaver in Port Moresby
When I was growing up in Kiribati, then known as the Gilbert Islands, New Zealand divers came to safely detonate unexploded munitions from World War II.
Decades on from when US Marines fought and won the Battle of Tarawa against Japan, war was still very much a part of everyday life.
Our school bell was a bombshell. We’d find bullet casings.
In fact, my grandmother’s leg was badly injured when she lit a fire on the beach, and an unexploded ordnance went off. There are Japanese bunkers and US machine gun mounts along the Betio shoreline, and bones are still being found — even today.
Stories are told . . . so many people died . . . these things are not forgotten.
That’s why the security and defence pacts being drawn up around the Pacific are worrying much of the region, as the US and Australia partner up to counter China’s growing influence.
You only have to read Australia’s Defence Strategic Review 2023 to see they are preparing for conflict.
The battle is climate change which is impacting their everyday life. The bigger powers will most certainly go through the motions of at least hearing their voices.
— Barbara Dreaver
Secret pact changed landscape
While in the last few years we have seen China put big money into the Pacific, it was primarily about diplomatic weight and ensuring Taiwan wasn’t recognised. But the secret security pact with the Solomon Islands changed the landscape dramatically.
There was a point where it stopped being about just aid and influence — and openly started to become much more serious.
Since then, the escalation has been rapid as the US and Australia have amped up their activities — and other state actors have as well.
In some cases, lobbying and negotiating have been covertly aggressive. Many Pacific countries are concerned about the militarisation of the region — and whether we like it or not, that’s where it’s headed.
Tuvalu’s Foreign Minister Simon Kofe said he understands why his country, which sits between Hawai’i and Australia, is of strategic interest to the superpowers.
Worried about militarisation, he admits they are coming under pressure from all sides — not just China but the West as well.
“In World War II, the war came to the Pacific even though we played no part at all in the conflict, and we became victims of a war that was not of our making,” he said.
Important Pacific doesn’t forget
“So it’s important for the Pacific not to forget that experience now we are seeing things that are happening in this part of the world, and it’s best we are prepared for that situation.”
Academic Dr Anna Powles, a long-time Pacific specialist, said she was very concerned at the situation, which was a “slippery slope” to militarisation.
She said Pacific capitals were being flooded with officials from around the region and from further afield who want to engage.
Pacific priorities are being undermined, and there is a growing disconnect in the region between national interest and the interest of the political elites.
Today in Papua New Guinea, we see first-hand how we are on the cusp of change.
They include big meetings spearheaded by the US Secretary of State Antony Blinken, another one by India’s Prime Minister Narendra Modi and a defence deal that will allow US military access through ports and airports. In exchange, the US is providing an extra US$45 million (NZ$72 million) in funding a raft of initiatives, some of which include battling the effects of climate change.
Equipment boost
The PNG Defence Force is also getting an equipment boost, and there’s a focus on combatting law and order issues — which domestically is a big challenge — and protecting communities, particularly women, from violence.
There is much in these initiatives that the PNG government and the people here will find attractive. It may well be the balance between PNG’s national interest and US ambitions is met — it will be interesting to see if other Pacific leaders agree.
Because some Pacific leaders are happy to be courted and enjoy being at the centre of global attention (and we know who you are), others are determined to do the best for their people. The fight for them is not geopolitical, and it’s on the land they live on.
The battle is climate change which is impacting their everyday life. The bigger powers will most certainly go through the motions of at least hearing their voices.
What that will translate to remains to be seen.
Barbara Dreaver is TV1’s Pacific correspondent and is in Papua New Guinea with the New Zealand delegation. Republished with permission.
