Page 26 - IB May 2021

Opinion Opinion
MANAGING LEADERSHIP FOR

PACIFIC REGIONALISM

By Ambassador Kaliopate Tavola be bound by them otherwise – in the interest, for example,
of the countries and fellow nationals they represent that
If there was a time when leadership was critical for Pacific have committed themselves to working cooperatively at the
regionalism, it would be now. A new Secretary General (SG), regional level, as a collective for the greater benefit and good
former Cook Islands Prime Minister, Henry Puna, is taking over for all concerned.
the reins of the Pacific Islands Forum Secretariat (PIFS). But Of the two levels of leadership being addressed here, I have
the organisation, Pacific Islands Forum (PIF) he will manage, chosen to focus on the latter – political leadership. Leader-
is weakened by the withdrawal of five Micronesian members ship at the PIFS level is one that can be better and easily
following Puna’s election to the position. There is however managed. The divisive experience of the last election of the
the prospect of the return of the aggrieved five should the SG is likely to be a twist of fate which can open doors for
ratification processes in the five countries concerned favour self-analysis that will introduce fairer and a more transparent
such a return. selection processes for the SG. That will ensure unity within
The issue of leadership of the Forum has also come to the the membership and can also bring about long-term solidarity.
fore during this period when Forum members are nostalgically That can translate to members’ qualitative expectations that
reflective about the Forum’s existence in the last 50 years, es- will drive the appointments of new qualified and politically-
pecially about the able leaders who had graced the early days neutral SGs in future elections.
of Pacific regionalism and to whom the success of regionalism The requirements for political leaders for Pacific regional-
can be attributed. ism to be both strong and committed can be a hit and miss
Having experienced six years of leadership of PIFS and affair. A strong and committed political leader at the national
having assessed its specific requirements, outgoing Secretary level and who can be zealous, forceful, cogent and persuasive
{ “The group should operate on the basis that even though Pacific

regionalism is voluntary, there is a deep sense of commitment on the
part of members to cooperate and integrate their respective economies
and polities, not only because our geography demands it but especially
because through our collective efforts, we can increase the benefits to
all concerned than otherwise possible.” {

General, Dame Meg Taylor has identified two leadership quali- can turn out to be an obstructionist and interventionist at the
ties essential for Pacific regionalism. Speaking at the Blue regional level. This can happen if a leader wishes to exert his/
Pacific Futures Webinar on 3 November 2020, she said: “Re- her influence that is heavily tainted with political economy,
gionalism can only work if we have strong leaders who remain ethnic or geopolitical considerations. In such case, Pacific
committed to this ideal.” regionalism would be undermined.
More recently, in January 2021, in his article ‘The Unfin- On the other hand, a national political leader who is com-
ished Business of PACER Plus’ (see IB January 2021 issue), mitted and benefits from consistently high voting results in
Professor Wadan Narsey concluded: “More than ever, there is national elections may not have the time and aspiration to
a need for leadership at Forum Secretariat to be more com- become immersed in regional issues, since the latter does not
mitted to FIC interests.” win elections.
In the context that these comments were made, such Such has been the case in Pacific regionalism for the last 50
earnest pleas would apply for both leadership levels - at the years. Consequently, one is likely to see significant implemen-
technical and managerial level at PIFS and at the political lev- tation gaps of regional issues at the national levels.
el – the national leaders, immersed in their own nationalistic The free trade agreement, Pacific Island Countries Trade
politics and who double up as regional leaders under Pacific Agreement, PICTA, for example, was signed in 2001 and
regionalism. Regional politics, in this case, can be heavily and came into force in 2003. But implementation was delayed
easily subverted by national politics. until 2007. In 2020, only seven Pacific Island Countries (PICs)
Furthermore, Dame Meg herself would have made this were trading under the agreement. There has not been any
remark with a clear understanding of the nature of Pacific re- announced improvement in the number of implementing
gionalism: it is voluntary. This essentially means that national countries since then.
political leaders who make decisions for the region are not PICTA was intended to bring about the formation of an eco-
legally bound by the decisions they make. However, they can nomic union that the foundation regional leaders had identi-

26 Islands Business, May 2021