Australia's Strong Pacific Commitment

Speech

Speech by the Hon Alexander Downer, MP, Minister for Foreign Affairs,
at the RIAP's Pacific Economic Outlook seminar, Sydney, 2 November 2000.

Australia's Strong Pacific Commitment

Introduction

I'm very pleased to have the opportunity to address you at this important seminar on the economic outlook for the Pacific.

I recently addressed another conference on the region at the Australian Defence Force Academy, and noted then that recent events in the South Pacific have highlighted the need for all relevant sectors of society - including the media and academia - to devote proper and sustained attention to the region. Sydney University and the Research Institute for Asia and the Pacific (RIAP) are therefore to be congratulated on their initiative in organising this seminar.

The initiative is, of course, a timely and useful one. Developments in the South Pacific, especially in Fiji and Solomon Islands, have received a high level of attention during recent months as a result of the dramatic events that have taken place there, and the devastating impact they have had on their respective economies.

All this has highlighted the South Pacific's importance to Australia - not that anyone at this Seminar needed any reminding. Quite naturally this has also caused our Government to take yet another look at the way we do business in the region. We have rigorously examined our role, responsibilities and responses, and have sought to ensure our approach is one that best meets our national interests, particularly in the face of the sorts of tensions and challenges that have emerged in recent months.

In my remarks today I want to examine three areas. First, I will explore how modern historical developments have led to the sorts of problems and conflicts we now see emerging in the region - using Solomon Islands as a case in point.

Secondly, I will consider Australia's role in the region, and how we have learned from the historical context in which we operate. Finally, I want to discuss how we have scrutinised our relations with the South Pacific and reaffirmed our conviction that the commitment of local communities is crucial in resolving emerging problems. It is incumbent on us to continue to work in partnership with our neighbours in pursuit of that key principle and, as you will see from our efforts in relation to Solomon Islands and more broadly in the South Pacific Forum, we have wasted no time.

Solomon Islands - a case study of the region's challenges

In late 1998, a series of disturbing incidents occurred in the Solomon Islands. Reports surfaced of armed men harassing inhabitants of Malaita Island who had settled in rural Guadalcanal. Some petty theft and burning of houses occurred but the reports included sightings of a gang of armed men dressed in camouflage clothing.

The incidents could easily have been mistaken for the emergence of raskol-type crime or the settling of personal scores. In fact, the incidents were far more serious, and the implications for Solomon Islands far more profound.

Since before Solomon Islands acquired independence in 1978, the Guadalcanal people had raised concerns about inter-island migration, land ownership, youth unemployment and poor service-delivery to rural areas. These issues had been raised and discussed on that island and, indeed, throughout the Solomons at regular intervals through the 1970s and 1980s. And anyone who has any connection with Melanesia will know that the issues that concerned the Guadalcanal people, and resulted in the near collapse of that country, are themes common to other countries in the Pacific, albeit in different forms and cultural contexts.

Discussion of the impact of colonialism is inevitable in this context. Under colonial governance, in the Solomons and in many other colonised countries, boundaries were drawn in arbitrary ways. Ethnic sensitivities were not always taken into account, and the colonial rulers also tried to change the very structures of ancient societies in ways that often were insensitive to indigenous traditions and norms.

Accompanying foreign contact with the Solomon Islands, as with other Melanesian countries, were mass movements of people to work on plantations. The two World Wars saw unprecedentedly large movements of people to provide support for armed forces in the region. Guadalcanal is a prime example of this phenomenon - many Malaitans resident on the island were second or third generation, and could trace their residency on Guadalcanal back to the early part of the Twentieth Century.

The poverty of colonial inheritance

Countries in the South Pacific were colonised relatively late in the Nineteenth Century, and remained on the margins of European maps, and European thinking. As a result, they did not really attract the "best and brightest" of colonial administrators, nor - in relative terms - did they have comparatively significant resources devoted to their development. You could say enthusiasm for the colonial experience in the South Pacific was distinctly lacking.

And then, when these countries came to claim their political inheritance, the process was rushed. They achieved nationhood but were not given the best support possible, in terms of either human or economic resources, for that move to the global stage.

At first, a buoyant international economy, stable commodity prices, generous aid and residual expatriate expertise helped. But from the mid-1980s, inadequate investment in human resources development, and a consequent weakening in governmental capacity, coincided with rapid population growth and adverse international economic conditions - particularly with respect to international prices for the region's main exports. As growth stagnated, institutions frayed and services declined.

The poverty of the colonial inheritance has also been felt in political or constitutional terms. All the Melanesian states have had to grapple with poorly laid out power-sharing arrangements between the centre and the provinces, as feelings of dispossession and of being denied a share of government resources have emerged in rural areas and outer islands. Frustration has found expression in vandalism and crime. High crime levels deter investors and hinder the development of tourism and other economic activity.

Uneven development and intense and rapid social change have left long-standing, deep and complex divisions between communities. And out of these deep rifts, in places like Solomon Islands, has sprung violent ethnic conflict.

Interventionist "big brother" or supportive partner?

I turn now to consider Australia's role in a region beset by such problems of history.

Commonly over the years, we have heard, throughout the countries of the South Pacific, references to Australia as the "big brother", throwing its weight around the region and dominating the affairs of its smaller neighbours. Imagine our confusion when, more recently, Australia has been criticised for not meddling in the affairs of its neighbours and not intervening militarily to address the security problems that have emerged in countries like Solomon Islands.

It is important, therefore, to clarify Australia's attitude to our role in the Pacific.

Australia is not a neo-colonial power. We are not going take over countries in the Pacific and run their affairs for them. We believe that to do so would be unacceptable.

Countries like Solomon Islands are independent sovereign states and, as our friends and neighbours, deserve more respect than that in any case. People sometimes ask me why we did not send the ADF into Fiji after the coup, or troops to Solomon Islands to separate forcibly the warring parties there. I think I need only point out the link between problems facing the region today and the actions of an earlier time when colonial powers did intervene - very directly but very ineffectively - in the affairs of the Pacific island countries. Australia is not prepared to take an overbearing interventionist approach. It has been proven not to work in the past and, worse still, to leave a terrible legacy behind.

This does not mean we are abandoning our friends. We do have a serious and weighty role in the Pacific and we do take our responsibilities in the region very seriously. We fully intend to support our neighbours, help them find answers and solutions to their problems, and lend a hand in implementing the decisions they take to address their own difficulties. This is particularly the case where the issues involved seriously threaten the well being of these nations and their peoples.

That is why, then, Australia has given a high level of support to peace efforts in Solomon Islands over the past two years. This has included security-related assistance, support for negotiations and funding for Commonwealth initiatives. We provided substantial assistance to the Royal Solomon Islands Police, including 11 advisers working in police headquarters, and met all the on-ground costs of the Commonwealth Multinational Police Assistance Group and its successor the Multinational Police Peace Monitoring Group.

Creative Australian support was critical in facilitating the ceasefire negotiations between militant groups, the Solomon Islands Government and community representatives. We provided advisers to such bodies as the Solomon Islands Churches Association (an organisation which played a crucial early role in bringing parties together and easing tensions in front line areas) and the home-grown Ceasefire Monitoring Council. We made neutral venues - such as HMAS Tobruk and Newcastle - available for discussions when mutual suspicion and distrust almost ruled out communication. Further discussions in Townsville between the parties led to the successful negotiation of the Townsville Peace Agreement, and we will now support that agreement by sending peace monitors to Solomon Islands.

We did decline requests from the Solomon Islands Government for Australian police to fill line positions in the Solomon Islands police force, on the grounds that foreign police would be ineffective. We agreed to help in every way we thought constructive, but considered that the security problem could only be resolved if Solomon Islanders addressed the underlying issues themselves.

With our support, Solomon Islanders have come to examine their problems and propose their own solutions. The Townsville Peace Agreement is an exceptional document - addressing as it does not only the cessation of hostilities, but also the important basic issues of constitutional reform, land ownership, social services, provincial governance and restructuring of the Royal Solomon Islands Police. It lays down mechanisms by which the people of Solomon Islands can sort out these problems once and for all.

Local communities ultimately must tackle local problems. Simply put, when the issues at stake are tightly bound to sensitive cultural traditions and ethnic loyalties, as is the case with land ownership in Solomon Islands, no-one but the local communities themselves understand the issues well enough to have any hope of coming up with a solution that will work on the ground. The peoples of the region need to come up with solutions that not only draw on the experience of other nations, such as Australia, but which also harmonise with their own cultural expectations.

Evaluating the relationship

Australia wants to conduct a mature relationship with its Pacific neighbours in appropriate recognition of their status as independent nations. We believe a constructive and pragmatic, but proactive, approach is the correct one. We are familiar with the region and its peoples, but we constantly seek to fine-tune our responses to ensure our approach best supports our neighbours and thus meets our own national interests. We aim to promote stability and peaceful development in the Pacific.

As I said in my opening remarks, the events of the last six months in Solomon Islands and Fiji have naturally led us to re-examine how we respond to emerging challenges in the South Pacific, with respect both to longer-term strategies and to crisis management. So, with our desire to be constructive and pragmatic, but also proactive, at the forefront of our minds, in June the Government instructed that a review be undertaken of Australia's response to emerging challenges in the South Pacific, with respect both to longer-term strategies and to crisis management.

The assessment was undertaken by a core group of senior Foreign Affairs and other agency officials with wide consultation between agencies including Defence, Attorney-General's, Immigration and Multicultural Affairs, Treasury, Prime Minister and Cabinet, the Australian Federal Police and AusAID.

The review concluded that the ingredients of this new phase of increased instability in the region underlined the extent to which the roots of conflict in the region were deep-seated and, in turn, confirmed the necessity of avoiding a "quick fix" approach. Instead, our best option for advancing Australia's interest in a stable and prosperous South Pacific was to recast and sharpen our already very constructive role, giving closer attention to appropriate support for internal security within our neighbours and to using our relations to support good governance more directly.

Let me make no bones about it: Australia recognises the mix of problems facing our neighbours and will continue to do all it can to help. We want to continue to support the countries of our region in addressing internal security, law enforcement, good governance and nation building. In doing so, we want to ensure our aid continues to be carefully targeted and linked to implementation of sustainable reform programs. Recent developments have also underlined the importance of our work in collaboration with our neighbours on policing, internal security, illegal people movements and defence matters.

But we want to keep up the pressure on ourselves to be smarter, more focused and more proactive. We have been reminded of the need to broaden our focus, and be more creative and flexible in our approach. For example, in our institutional strengthening efforts, we may need to provide more resources at local and provincial levels to shore up service delivery whilst central agencies improve their performance.

Events such as those in Solomon Islands mean our neighbours require support in new and unusual ways. Community suffering in Solomon Islands is enormous. Aside from humanitarian assistance, we can help with support for the reconciliation activities of women's and church groups. Over the medium-term, provided progress on the peace process is sustained, we envisage supporting rehabilitation activities in affected communities and the reintegration into productive civilian life of youth and men who have been actively involved in the conflict.

And we will not forget about the power of cooperation - in bilateral terms with our neighbours, as well as with key countries and multilateral organisations with interests in the South Pacific. The Government has always placed great emphasis on personal high-level contacts with our Pacific neighbours. I have, as Foreign Minister, visited nine countries on sixteen occasions in the South Pacific. These high level contacts will be maintained, including between South Pacific Forum Foreign Ministers, with a special emphasis on diversifying the range of ministerial contact, including in the areas of trade and law and order. The meeting of Forum Foreign Ministers in Apia in August demonstrated a welcome sense of shared responsibility and partnership and highlighted the value of such contact.

You might ask why we needed a review to tell us to exercise a little intellectual vigour in our role. Well, the short answer is - we didn't. The review process was significant for sharpening the focus of the energy and commitment the Government has attached to our dealings with the Pacific, particularly through the recent crises. But we have not wasted time.

Together with our neighbours we have pursued creative approaches to our shared problems throughout this period of difficulty - culminating most recently with the adoption of the Biketawa Declaration which is surely the most tangible sign of the Pacific nations commitment to deal head on with difficult issues. It is a milestone in Forum relations, providing a mechanism through which we can combine forces to uphold democratic principles and take targeted measures if a member state breaches those principles.

At the same time, we have sought to speak in actions as well as words. Our extension of the Pacific Patrol Boats program has been welcomed by Forum island countries. We have committed ourselves to hosting a small arms workshop in Australia next year to work hand in hand with our neighbours in combating the illegal spread of weapons through the region and prepare Forum members to support international efforts to stop illegal arms trafficking. And whilst we are pressing for the earliest possible restoration of democracy in Fiji, we have maintained a strong working level relationship in law enforcement which resulted last week in the seizure of a record haul of heroin in Suva.

We will continue to promote closer cooperation and engagement with key countries and multilateral organisations, including aid donors, the Commonwealth and the South Pacific Forum. These links will help us maximise combined support for better governance, sustainable development, internal stability and nation-building.

Conclusion

I think that my brief survey of our activities demonstrates that Australia remains actively engaged in assisting its Pacific neighbours. But if Pacific island countries do not themselves act simultaneously to address the problems of divisions between and within communities, of uneven economic development and of social unrest, our own efforts are unlikely to meet with outstanding success.

Australia cannot solve the problems of the region on its own. But we can make a positive and important contribution in assisting and working with our regional neighbours to meet the challenges that lie ahead.

Let me conclude my remarks today by restating Australia's strong commitment to our neighbours in the Pacific. We are together for the long haul, and for the mutual benefit of Australians and Pacific islanders alike.

This page last modified: Tuesday, 20-Nov-2007 14:45:17 EST

Local Date: Thursday, 24-May-2012 02:14:18 EST