Reform or Revolution

PACIFIC POLICY

We are still in the era of Big Man politics in Melanesia, where people generally vote according to tribal, chiefly and personal loyalties, not because of any policy platforms linked to political parties. Roland Rich has summarised a core underlying issue: As in Africa, the elites leading the independence movements re-imagined their lands and islands in accordance with the maps drawn by their colonisers.

The debate was not about the return to the pre-national existence of pre- colonialism, but rather the demand to take over the local institutions of colonial governance. The national revolution took place by way of this thought transfer. All at once, disparate peoples became ni-Vanuatu or Solomon Islanders or Papua New Guineans. The problem with this conceptual revolution is that it has been restricted to a small band of urban educated leaders.

The majority of the people of these nations think of themselves primarily and perhaps at times exclusively in terms of their village, their island or their wantok. The nation suggested by map-makers remains a sparsely imagined construct. Little wonder that we do not see broadly based political parties emerging

Another factor is the absence of any substantial, educated middleclass in Melanesia, which is generally made up of ‘leaders’ and‘grassroots’ instead. In this respect, some observers suggest that the Pacific now is where the Middle East was 30 years ago. Until such time as we see a middle class evolve in Melanesia, the trend will likely continue towards the ‘stability’ of Big Man autocracy rather than vibrant democracy. The struggle between communal values and individual rights remains a deep faultline of modern politics in the region. 

Last month, 14 years after the Sandline crisis, former defence force commander Brigadier General (retired) Jerry Singirok wrote an opinion piece for the PNG Post Courier saying none of the lessons had been learnt and also warns of the demographic challenges ahead.

While Papua New Guinea continues to go down a path of self destruction based on omissions, self serving and false proclamation of the wealth creation for only a few, the reality is that the next generation of Papua New Guineas may turn out to be a generation of disgruntled, misfits, uneducated, city roamers who may see those in authority as tyrants, self serving and may decide to take up arms to engage in a prolonged armed resurrection against the Government, foreign investors and exploiters.

In any case this security quagmire scenarios anticipated in the coming decade would be very difficult to deal with as lessons in the past have never been learnt. In Vanuatu, a new political movement is emerging, led by former heads of state and proponents of a national presidential system – that aims for a directly elected president with four levels of leadership: President, Governor, District and Chiefly level according to one its leaders, Denny Arksai

The model appears to be closer to the American and French presidential systems than the British Westminster system. Of course there is no guarantee that a shift to a presidential system will bring better results or reduce corruption but clearly there is a desire to initiate reform, which is positive. Putting ideas on the table and generating debate aimed at reform is important in order to define a political model that suits the local social, cultural and political context.

At the same time, Australia and its allies would do well to prioritise Melanesia. Entering the debate on no-fly zones in Libya might be worthwhile, however entering the debate on the future of Melanesia is essential.