Page 237 of 819
From Peter Callan on The Solomons security shambles, and what it says about us
Excellent article, Terence! As with the French Revolution it's too early to tell what the real consequences will be, but the squawking from some Australian politicians tells us a lot about their paranoia and ignorance, and about this country's loss of skill and capacity in diplomacy, particularly in relation to the Pacific.
From Marco Antonio Soares de Moraes on Paradise squandered – what really happened to Sri Lanka’s economy
I think that it's very important to the South Asia and Pacific Region the stability of Sri Lanka 'cause the strategic position of the country. India, United Kingdom (former colonial power), Australia and so on (other ones) have interest in Sri Lanka and the geopolitical equilibrium may need a neutral Sri Lanka in political subjects for Asia. These countries above (I should include Japan and South Korea and Taiwan too) may help Sri Lanka for helping to maintain its political stability .
From Terence Wood on The Solomons security shambles, and what it says about us
Never mind what he wants - the most important thing is what he needs, and he needs China's economy to keep growing. That's the crucial part of the political settlement that keeps him in power. And, for the economy to keep growing, he needs trade, not empire.
I will concede, however, that his interests are neo-imperial in a specific sense: that is, he wants Chinese business interests in countries like Solomons to do well. And he wants those business interests to be safe. That's what's in the security agreement for China.
For what it's worth, this isn't good news, as some of those business interests, particularly loggers, are not good for Solomons.
But it's all a rather different story from the one painted by our security pundits: that the security agreement poses a major threat to Australia and NZ's safety. It doesn't.
From Terence Wood on The Solomons security shambles, and what it says about us
Thank you Bernard, that's a fascinating reflection on the economics of international engagement as felt in countries like Solomons and PNG.
Thanks again. I appreciate your insights.
Terence
From Bernard Yegiora on The Solomons security shambles, and what it says about us
Interesting point of view.
The issue is being used by Australian politicians for political points scoring. This has created a negative image of Melanesian countries.
Solomon Islands is trying to address the real issue of economic security. There needs to be a stable Honiara so Chinese investors or investors from anywhere can operate their businesses and employ Solomon Islanders.
PNG has a similar problem. We have a lot of young people graduating from universities and completing their year 12 every year. Many of these young people are looking for employment opportunities.
I do not see any Australian or New Zealand retail or wholesale businesses operating in towns and cities around PNG. Coles and Woolworths do not have franchises in PNG, which is a bigger economy compared to other Pacific Island countries. However, we see Chinese retail and wholesale businesses selling Australian and New Zealand products in all economic centers around PNG.
For the sake of their citizens and their investments, China will need to work with PNG or Solomon Islands to create a stable environment, which will help foster economic growth and most importantly address the issue of economic security.
From Sara Webb on Solomon Islands’ first female premier: lessons learned
You have crystallised a number of crucial aspects of this work, this movement, and how we as outsiders can and can't be helpful. Thank you for articulating it so clearly, Sonia.
From Andy A Mako on The Solomons security shambles, and what it says about us
Excellent perspective, Terence!
From Terence Wood on The Solomons security shambles, and what it says about us
Hi Kien,
Thank you for taking the time to make a comment.
I think you make a useful point: Western crimes deserve as much scrutiny as China's. I agree. Indeed, I took to the streets of Sydney to protest the invasion of Afghanistan (not technically a crime, but I didn't think it would end well). I took to the streets in Wellington multiple times to protest the invasion of Iraq. And I've protested in Canberra numerous times against Australia's treatment of asylum seekers.
However, just because Western countries also commit morally deplorable actions doesn't mean that it is ok for China to do so. And there is ample evidence of what China has done in Tibet, Xinjang and to a lesser extent in Hong Kong.
I am ardently opposed to any war between the West and China. And I am in favour of constructive dialogue between the two "sides". (You'll see the most of my blog post is a critique of Australia and NZ's overreaction to the non-base in Solomons). However, crimes against human rights do still need to be called-out regardless of who has committed them.
Thank you again for sharing your thoughts.
Terence
From Patrick Kaiku on New Ireland in PNG’s election year
You state: “PNG politics is indeed centred on personalities, but these personalities have often definite positions with respect to natural resources policies.”
Response: Sir Julius Chan’s position on natural resource policies was specifically referenced for the purposes of the autonomy agenda. It was the subject of the original commentary, correcting the misconception that Nautilus was the basis for New Ireland’s bid for autonomy, when in fact it is a continuing leveraging rhetoric (together with natural resource law reforms). What can you make for Abel’s position on natural resources? Maybe you can look up the national development blueprint he oversaw (the writing of) when he was Minister for Planning and Monitoring. During his time in the aforementioned department, he oversaw the writing of the STaRs, a development blueprint that envisages economic diversification and green growth (I don’t know if that constitutes what you called “definite positions” on “natural resource policies”).
You state: “There is a temptation to use the common phrases about patron client relationships etc. and overlook the crucial issues of PNG politics”.
Response: Patron-client relationship is useful in explaining contemporary governance in Melanesia. The same features of patron-client relationships are seen in the New Ireland province. Terence Wood makes informative comparative study of PNG and the Solomon Islands to demonstrate the correlation between the localized support that MPs get from supporters and the detrimental effects this has on governing in the national interest ( read here: The clientelism trap in Solomon Islands and Papua New Guinea, and its impact on aid policy - Wood - 2018 - Asia & the Pacific Policy Studies - Wiley Online Library). Governance is one of the “crucial issues of PNG politics” and patron-client relationship is one of many useful frameworks in understanding the governance issue in PNG.
You state: “Natural resources policy and the financial situation of the country were core issues when Marape’s succeeded O’Neill and this was the case as well during the failed vote of no confidence led by Pruaitch”.
Response: Indeed, nobody is denying that. But that was not the subject of the original commentary. Those issues have been covered in greater detail elsewhere by other commentators and more credible observers of PNG politics. The whole Take Back PNG slogan and the associated rhetoric of “Rich Black Christian nation” came out of that period.
From Bernard Yegiora on The Solomons security shambles, and what it says about us