Page 25 - IB JAN 2019

Opinion

flag as insisted by the state. However, the
fact that majority of Fijians did not only
reject this proposition but displayed that
they had moved from imposed resistance
to reclaiming and recreating their owner-
ship of these symbols as part and parcel
of their history. In a way all Fijians reas-
serted their ownership and pride in these
symbols not for its colonially tainted and
haunted past but for what it now means
for all Fijians. It now has been reclaimed
and recreated to symbolise unity in our tri-
umphs and tribulations and a collectively
owned sense of belonging. In 2016, our
tribulation was the devastation of Cyclone
Winston but Fijians emphasised that we
are ‘Stronger than Winston’ in the best
way we knew how, we raised that ‘noble
banner blue,’ some were in tatters but all
still had those colonial symbols.
Our triumph in the same year was the
Rio 7s gold win and yet again, Fijians
waved the noble banner blue with those
colonial symbols. The Prime Minister
himself had to admit this, when he finally
relented stating “It has been deeply mov-
ing for me as Prime Minister to witness
the way Fijians have rallied around the How long will the dignity and distinction within Fiji’s indigenousness be continuously overlooked and reduced to the
national flag as our Rugby Sevens team misplaced political baggage of the past, the author asks.
brought home Olympic Gold for Fiji. And
I know this sentiment is shared by most
Fijians… it has been apparent to the indigenous Fijians to have these changes form of ‘decolonisation’. The irony in these
government since February that the flag continuously imposed without any sense incidents is the complicity of certain indig-
should not be changed for the foreseeable for consultation and far be it for consent. enous Fijian bureaucrats and some chiefly
future.” There is a continued and blatant disregard elites, who are evidently eager to please
In addition to this, the Prime Minister for consulting indigenous Fijians or at while undermining their own indigeneity.
invited the Duke and Duchess of Sus- least seeking some semblance of consent.
sex in May of (2018) and they were met Too often the default response to this is The long term risk
with widespread public euphoria and to fear the ‘political ills of the past’ and In the long run the ongoing, swift im-
acceptance. However, on this occasion in- run down any chance of balanced con- posed ‘changes’ is one (in the group of
digeneity, specifically indigenous cultural versations as ‘racist’ or ‘ethno-centric.’ many others) factor that would have an
representation was undermined through However, it is about time that indigeneity implication on the stability of our nation.
the change in protocol to not acknowledge in cultural protocol and its representation These continued changes that are largely
the three confederacies. must be distinguished from indigenous a matter of political expediency and petti-
political paramountcy. Indigenous political ness is slowly but surely feeding resent-
What the ‘colonial’ excuse hides paramountcy is the problematic notion of ment and the future of ethno-nationalistic
The ‘colonial’ excuse conceals two key Indigeneity because of its implications sentiment. Undermining and antagonis-
fundamentals in the ongoing changes on the nation-state. Indigenous political ing indigenousness only reaffirms the
brought on by the current establishment. paramountcy is effectively neutralised divisive and toxic convictions of hardcore
These changes, from the removal of the if not diminished in the current state of nationalists. If changes made need to be
BLV to the recent changes in the tradi- affairs. However, conflating these two justified, then let the people decide with
tional protocol, are all a result of political aspects diminishes the essence of cultural informed discussions instead of breaching
expediency. norms that have been embraced and ac- and undermining indigenousness. The
This underlying and known fact needs cepted. How long will the dignity and longer this modus operandi of breach-
to be reemphasised and amplified. distinction within Fiji’s indigenousness ing and undermining indigenousness
Changes to indigenous institutions and be continuously overlooked and reduced prevails, the more political ammunition
norms were done for the purpose of po- to the misplaced political baggage of the ethno-nationalism will have for the future
litical expediency of the incumbents. This past, especially of key actors in the current political landscape of Fiji.
has nothing to do with the long standing status quo. r jopetarai7@gmail.com
issues that indigenous Fijians have about At some point there needs to be clearer
these institutions and norms. distinctions within Fijian indigeneity and
The second fundamental that is veiled it cannot continue to pay for political ex- • The author is an academic at the University
under the ‘colonial’ excuse is the ongoing pediency and vindictiveness, while being of the South Pacific but the views expressed
here are his own, and not necessarily that of
practice of undermining the dignity of veiled as a superficial and problematic local his employer or of this magazine.

Islands Business, January 2019 25