Page 24 - IB MAY 2017
P. 24

Fisheries
         Opinion
         PACER-Plus





         A wedgie in regional geopolitics

                                           for them”.                          evolved in recent years and follows an
                                             Some of Fiji and Papua New Guinea’s   expansion  by  Fiji  of  its  international
                                           concerns about PACER Plus have, howev-  relations following expulsion from the
                                           er, been echoed by non-governmental or-  Pacific Islands Forum at what some Pacific
                                           ganisations and by a New Zealand Green   leaders suggest was “Australia’s behest”
                                           Party parliamentarian, Barry Coates, who   following Fiji’s 2006 coup.
                                           says the agreement offers only a few ben-  Fiji has introduced new non-traditional
               by Dennis Rounds            efits for Pacific island countries.  players  such  as  Russia,  China,  India,

         FIJI and Papua New Guinea’s exclusion   Coates claims most of the gains will go   Indonesia and Middle Eastern countries
         from the recently concluded Pacific Agree-  to New Zealand and Australia with market   to the region and into its stable of inter-
         ment on Closer Economic Relations, or   access into Australia for many fruits and   national partners.
         PACER Plus, raises some interesting ques-  vegetables still being denied under the   In response, the “new players” have
         tions about the changing geopolitics of the   agreement.              funded Fiji’s initiatives to establish bud-
         region and whether Australia is adopting   The agreement, Coates says, also lacks   ding regional organisations, such as the
         a divide-and-rule approach.       a “long-term commitment towards visas   Pacific Islands Development Forum – a
          PACER Plus was meant to be an op-  for seasonal labourers” – an element that   concerted effort by Fiji to dilute Australia
         portunity to help Pacific Islands Forum   Fiji and a number of Pacific countries were   and  New  Zealand’s  dominance  in  the
         countries benefit from enhanced regional   insistent on.              region’s geopolitics.
         trade and economic integration. Its key   The fact that Australia and New Zea-  In her report, Dr Wallis argues that
         objectives were to provide long-term op-  land have opted to conclude the agree-  Australia’s  proximity  to  and  strategic
         portunity to create jobs, enhance private   ment with only 12 of the Pacific Islands   importance in the South Pacific make it
         sector growth, raise standards of living,   Forum countries and without participation   imperative that Australia not be “compla-
         and boost economic growth in Forum   by Fiji and Papua New Guinea is viewed   cent about these geopolitical challenges”.
         Island Countries.                 with great interest around the region.  “Australians,  and  particularly  the
          Another  element  of  the  agreement   While the Pacific Islands Forum remains   Australian Government, need to be more
         was to enhance trade capacity building   the pre-eminent regional political and   aware of and focused on the South Pacific.
         and  trade  development  assistance  to   security institution, Fiji’s “selective par-  Our attention to the region has peaked at
         strengthen the Forum Island countries’   ticipation” in it and a greater choice by   moments when the region was perceived
         ability to trade.                 Pacific states of non-traditional external   to  pose  an  imminent  potential  threat.
          Both, Fiji and Papua New Guinea have,   partners has left PIF in somewhat of a   Beyond those moments, our foreign and
         over the years, expressed reservations   quandary over whether it is dominated   strategic policy in the region has been
         about some of the objectives of the PACER   and heavily influenced by Australia and   characterised by unclear, inconsistent and
         Plus trade agreement and in particular   New Zealand.                 competing interests and intentions, which
         whether real benefits would accrue for   Fiji’s Prime Minister, Frank Bainima-  has reduced its effectiveness and under-
         the islanders or for Australia and New   rama, has in fact vowed never to attend   mined Australia’s influence. If Australia
         Zealand.                           a Pacific Islands Forum Leaders meeting   is going to ensure that it’s able to respond
          Following eight years of negotiations,   as long as Australia and New Zealand   to the complex and crowded geopolitics
         an  agreement  was  reached  mid-April   remain a part of it.         of the South Pacific, it needs to prioritise
         between Australia and New Zealand on   In a recently released special report, Dr   the region in a clear, consistent and sus-
         one side of the table and 12 Pacific Islands   Joanne Wallis of the Strategic and Defence   tained way in its foreign and strategic
         Forum countries on the other – minus the   Studies Centre at the Australian National   policy planning” Dr Wallis emphasized
         region’s two prominent countries, Fiji and   University suggests “Australia faces an   in her report.
         Papua New Guinea which, together, repre-  increasingly crowded and complex geopo-  Fiji and Papua New Guinea’s exclusion
         sent the South Pacific’s largest economies.  litical environment in the South Pacific”.  from the final PACR Plus negotiations
          Australia’s  Trade  Minister,  Steven   She  points  out  that  Fiji  and  Papua   begs the question: Have Australia and
         Ciobo,  dismissed  Fiji  and  Papua  New   New Guinea in particular, are emerging   New  Zealand  chosen  to  ignore  warn-
         Guinea’s non-inclusion in the final talks   as regional powers with the potential “to   ings about complacency over regional
         saying they had elected not to sign the   constrain Australian influence” over the   geopolitics? Or, is it a calculated move to
         agreement. Fiji’s Trade Minister Faizal   region.                     drive a “diversionary wedge” in what Dr
         Koya, however, argues that Fiji was in fact   On the international stage and in par-  Wallis describes as an already “crowded
         “excluded” from the final negotiations.  ticular in the United Nations, the island   and complex geopolitical environment”?
          New Zealand’s Trade Minister, Todd   states are also moving in a direction which   (Note:  Dr  Wallis’  Special  report  is
         McClay, adopted a more diplomatic ap-  is  taking  them  outside  of  Australia’s   available for viewing at: www.aspi.org.
         proach by suggesting that although Fiji   sphere of influence.        au/publications/crowded-and-complex-
         and Papua New Guinea were not present   Interestingly, much of that “watering   the-changing-geopolitics-of-the-south-
         for the conclusion, the door “is still open   down” of Australian influence has only   pacific/SR103_South-Pacific.pdf)
                                                                               r dennis.rounds@gmail.com

        24 Islands Business,  May 2017
   19   20   21   22   23   24   25   26   27   28   29