Comments

Thanks for this interesting article! Is the basic needs poverty line (BNPL) referring to Fiji Dollar or US Dollar or any other unit?

Thanks for this truly interesting article that links the current developments with the broader history of regionalism in the Pacific. I agree, Satish Chand, that Fiji has a special role in the region and also the current situation. However, it appears that a lot of trust and confidence has been lost within the region and especially in Fiji, as the withdrawal of the Embassy of Palau shows. This is maybe due to the fact that Fiji not only supported Puna, but did so together with Australia and New Zealand despite its rivalry with the two higher countries and despite regularly blaiming them for their failure in supporting the islands states’ more in international climate policy. So I am wondering whether - despite the strong and usually central role Fiji plays in the region - the other Melanesian states that supposedly voted with the Micronesians are in a better position to mediate between the Micronesians and the other states of the region. However, as there are many more regional divisions than between sub-regional groups, including between Fiji and Samoa (who both voted for Puna as new SecGen) about USP, it’s probably not enough to mediate between the sub-regional groups but to look for a broader and more holistic reconciliation process to find ways out of the current crises.

I have always thought we need to review Regionalism in the Pacific with the following inquiry in mind: 1. Do we need regionalism? 2. If we need regionalism, what should be the goals for such association? How do these goals related to SDG priorities of member states. We already have issue based regional bodies dealing with environment, fisheries, socio-economic developments/security & law and Order/ human resource development etc What exactly is PIFS for and is the cost justified? 3. The PICs need ANZ but is there a better way to reflect their engagement then as presently the case. Palau and FSM implied in their recent comments that Australia’s influence in the recent appointment of the SG of PIFS was not good. As donor and members of PIFS there may be conflict issues and contrary policy issues in areas such climate change with PICs. 4. On staffing, merit based is always best. No job for the boys/girls. Even if we agree to have sub-regional rotation the person from the sub-region whose turn it is to select must undergo, an open merit based system from nationals within that subregion. 4. The origin of PIFS suggests that it was need to remove the unnecessary overreach of the colonial masters. Maybe that is now taking place again. 5. People Conveniently the forget that understanding that Micronesia build its case on is one of three understanding. Two others are: Australia and NZ not to be eligible for SG appointment. That was broken when Australia pushed for the appointment of Mr Greg Urwin to be SG of PIFS. Not one PICs raised any objection when that happened. The second understanding is that Fiji as host of the organization will not be eligible to submit candidate for SG. But as Colin observed in his comment it is time for more transparency and formal rules to cover these issues.

Thanks for a very informative blog Greg. PIF without the Micronesians will be weak in its arguments for action on climate change within the global forums. The effects of sea-level rise are the most damaging on the Micronesian states. The most vocal of the Pacific leaders on this issue is PM Bainimarama, and it is him who may be able to persuade the Micronesians to remain in the PIF-camp. Fiji, being at the junction of Melanesia and Polynesia, is not all that distant from Micronesia thus could be an effective interlocutor.

Thanks Dr Schram for pointing this out. I still don't know why the Pacific Data Hub doesn't have the DHS on.

Dear Paul: Thank you for your insightful remarks and further clarification about the then Shadow Treasurer's statement in 2018. We truly appreciate such a level of engagement with our analysis and hope to learn more in the future. We'll build on our study and look forward to further interactions. To add some clarification about our approach, while the World Bank and other Fragile States rankings are useful, in our paper, we assessed state fragility across five dimensions: state legitimacy, capacity, security and conflict, economy and resilience. We didn't use the term Failed State in our analysis because it was abandoned as it was largely seen to be politically offensive. The Failed State Index, for instance, was changed to Fragile State Index in 2019. Other sources also use the term fragile state. Also, PNG's achievements have been remarkable in some areas, such as sustaining democratic institutions and community resilience, which we argue in our paper. We, too, hope that a positive scenario prevails in PNG.

A recent statement from the president of Palau about the PIG process and Australia’s and New Zealand’s abject failure in statecraft seems to give an own goal to China which isn’t necessarily a bad thing, but given the Australian governments focus on Pacific step up seems not the wisest move, unless it has decided Micronesia doesn’t matter, which if the case is also seems ill thought through.

Good to read of your work, Kingtau. Well done!

Thank you!

Thank you.

Thank you Jacob. I hope we will see some positive change in the PNG's upcoming general elections

Without any high profile, or even low profile conviction, and the slow start of ICAC, how could there be a change in perception of corruption in PNG?