These include the changing role of the Parties to the Nauru Agreement, a grouping of eight ‘tuna-rich’ Pacific Island states that is transforming the dynamics of regional fisheries the emergence of a more activist Melanesian Spearhead Group, which comprises the four largest economies of the Pacific Islands and is leading the process of regional economic integration and the establishment of the Pacific Islands Development Forum, which promises a more inclusive ‘regionalism through partnerships’ approach in addressing climate change and sustainable development issues. Institutional developments in Pacific Islands regionalism have been dramatic in recent years. It is about reaching a regional political settlement between Australia–New The dialogue leading up to, and during, the Sydney conference is therefore one about the fundamentals of how the region is governed. While it is not likely that there will be significant support among the island states for the exclusion of Australia and New Zealand from the PIF - indeed, Prime Minister O'Neill has already made clear that Papua New Guinea would not support such a stance (ABC News 2014) - there is a longstanding and widely felt concern among Pacific leaders about the need to gain more Pacific control on issues of strategic concern. The configuration of the regional architecture is not just about economics and efficiency it is about regional governance - about who controls the regional agenda and how crucial issues such as Pacific positions on carbon emissions targets are to be handled and represented. For the Pacific island states, there are also crucial strategic stakes in the outcome of these discussions. If Australia's bid to win support for continued participation in the PIF for Australia and New Zealand succeeds, Australia risks Fiji following through on its threat not to resume its membership of the PIF. There is no obvious solution that could satisfy both these strategic objectives. There is, then, a lot at stake strategically for Canberra in Fiji's challenge on the question of regional governance.
Politicats forum full#
However, Canberra also sees Fiji as the hub of the Pacific islands region and regards as crucial Fiji's return to full membership in the PIF rather than remaining outside the PIF tent fostering an alternative regional institutional architecture. As Foreign Minister Bishop warned in a press conference in Suva in November, she was 'not going to take that lying down' (Pacnews 2014b). Australia sees the PIF as the main vehicle for regional management it sees its own membership of the PIF as crucial to that management. The Sydney Conference: What Is at Stake? For Canberra, Fiji's dramatic demand creates an issue of the highest priority. Her Fijian host, Prime Minister Bainimarama, accepted her proposal, and the meeting is now set for early 2015 in Sydney. As a way of defusing the impasse on this significant issue, and of garnering support from other Pacific leaders for Australia's continued participation in the PIF, Foreign Minister Bishop proposed that Fiji and Australia jointly host a summit for Pacific leaders to discuss whether and how the regional architecture should be reconfigured to meet the needs of the Pacific islands states in the 21st century (Callick 2014).
There was, however, one issue that was unresolved: that of Fiji's reported refusal to accept the invitation to resume its membership of the Pacific Islands Forum (PIF) unless Australia and New Zealand ceased their membership (Pacnews 2014a). By the end of her visit, diplomatic, economic, and defence relations had been fully restored with the newly elected Bainimarama government (Bishop and Kubuabola 2014). During her visit to Suva in November 2014, Australian foreign minister, Julie Bishop, received a very warm reception to her attempts to achieve a rapprochement in Australia–Fiji relations.
0 kommentar(er)
