Page 29 - Islands Business January 2021

Opinion

DEROGATION OF STATE POWER TO THE

REGION NOT AN OPTION

By Ambassador Kaliopate Tavola The five Pacific Island Countries (PICs) rebelled against being
dominated by the metropolitan powers of the then South Pa-
In my last article in this magazine, I referred to the cific Commission. They wanted paramountcy and freedom in
structure of the Pacific Islands Forum (PIF) and its system of the exercise of their respective state power, especially when
decision-making as being antiquated. This was on the basis they were firmly on the road to being independent states.
that PIF’s type of regionalism is voluntary. Members are not Having acquired that power, they were reluctant to lose it –
legally bound to the decisions they make at the regional even derogating some of it to the SPF.
level. I suggested the prospect of its reconsideration as a That situation prevailed even after the SPF morphed into
means of enhancing the benefits to members. the enlarged Pacific Islands Forum (PIF) in 2000. The situation
I also pointed to the deficiencies in regional cooperation, continued after PIF’s membership expanded to include two
regional integration for example, in the last 49 years of PIF’s territories of one of the metropolitan powers, France (New
existence, as areas to be redressed for greater benefits to Caledonia and French Polynesia) in 2016.
members. In discussing the scenarios from which the various forms
The direct implication of that hinted at a decision-making of political significance emanated, Fry pointed to the recent
process that would be a reversal of the status quo: Involun- ‘new’ Pacific diplomacy that is transforming Pacific regional-
tary regionalism, which would mean binding decisions at the ism. This relates to the ascendancy of the PICs, especially in
regional level. Furthermore, that would necessitate deroga- championing climate change – an existential threat to their
tion of sufficient state power to the region to enable the homes, tradition and culture. Such ascendancy is not a one-
latter to make those decisions. off phenomenon. This reflects the parallel ascendancy of the
From my perspective, as one schooled in the classical Pacific Small Island States (PSIDs) in the work of the United
Barassa model of regionalism – linear, with regional economic Nations’ General Assembly. But it also reflects the extent to
integration—advanced economic union, for example—and which PICs have been extracting, over time, the benefit of
having worked 14 years in the European Union that exempli- Pacific regionalism.
fies such a model, my assumption of eventual derogation of Fry delved into benefits and beneficiaries in his book. He
power from the states to the region was one I had thought to went further. He concluded that due to the recent ascendan-
be a natural progression for Pacific regionalism. But it is not cy of PICs, the future of Pacific regionalism will pivot around
to be. issues and interests that matter to them. PICs’ ownership and
Professor Greg Fry, in his latest book: Framing the Islands custodianship of these issues are taken for granted. So, when
(2019, ANU Press) has done immense service to this region it comes to any structural changes needed for Pacific regional-
with his well-researched 14 chapters - a goldmine of much- ism, the non-classical approach is likely to pervade. This is
needed information about Pacific regionalism: from well the new normal.
before 1971 when the South Pacific Forum was established, The prospect of Fry’s ‘regional political community’ is
to the development we see today as well as prospects for the that which is likely to encapsulate the political significance
future. through which PICs will continue their ascendancy. This politi-
In Fry’s exhaustive study of Pacific regionalism over several cal scenario is neutral when it comes to any derogation of
decades, he concluded that Pacific regionalism has taken a power from the member states. Fry has demonstrated that.
non-classical approach. Despite occasional attempts at foster- I would suggest that this matter is taken up seriously in the
ing regional integration which requires derogation of power formulation of the 2050 Strategy. A proposal underlying the
from the states to the region, this has not happened at all. PICs’ ascendancy has already been advanced by former Prime
Pacific regionalism has evolved in ways that has acquired its Minister Sopoaga of Tuvalu in the form of an ‘United States of
own political significance that is recognised by member states the Pacific’ (USoP). The former Prime Minister advanced his
without the latter derogating their power to it. Fry stated proposal to counter that made by former Prime Minister Kevin
that states, for instance, have used the regional structures Rudd of Australia: for the islands of Tuvalu, Kiribati and Nauru
as means of networking. Fry identified such forms of politi- to swap Australian citizenship for maritime resources owned
cal significance, for example: one which exudes a ‘strategic by these Pacific Island states. I discussed this proposal in the
political arena’; that which portrays its own ‘regional gov- June 2019 issue of this magazine.
ernance’; a ‘regional political community’ and a ‘diplomatic In the December 2019 issue of Islands Business I discussed
block’. the convergence of this proposal in the context of the general
It is interesting that Pacific regionalism has evolved in this invocation of the Forum Leaders’ decisions from the 2019
manner. In retrospect, however, such a non-classical approach Leaders’ meeting in Funafuti. This could easily be seen as an
may have been a product of its own history. The South Pacific extended part of the general conjunction I talked about last
Forum (SPF) of 1971 resulted from the Lae Rebellion (1965). month when I mentioned the initiative: ‘Reweaving the Eco-

Islands Business, January 2021 29