Thakur Ranjit Singh, Auckland, New Zealand
Every man and his dog, and their leaders in New Zealand, Australia, USA, United Kingdom, EU and other corners of the Pacific and the world are crying for elections in Fiji.
It appears that these gurus and proponents of democracy simply believe that democracy measured by elections is panacea and solutions to all problems in Fiji. As Father Kelvin Barr, a learned commentator and respected Reverend and elder in Fiji recently said, the great flurry of activity in hastily pushing Fiji to supposedly democratic elections has become very interesting and perhaps amusing. It seems the international community and the supporters of democracy think that no sooner Fiji holds elections and returns to democracy than all its problems will be over. All the international organisations will accept it with open arms, there would be great rejoicing and partying and international community will sit back satisfied that democracy has been restored in Fiji.
It is such a great pity that what we learn from history is that we do not learn anything from history. By now, Fiji and the world should have learnt that democracy measured by elections is not a panacea.
History is repeating itself in Fiji. After coups of 1987 and 2000, similar pressures were exerted on Fiji to return to parliamentary democracy as quickly as possible. This happened and the international community was overjoyed to welcome Fiji back into the democratic fold. But Fiji’s basic problems were not solved by mere elections. When these problems raised their ugly head under a racist, nepotistic and corrupt Qarase regime that was dragging the country to economic and moral decay and bankruptcy, the international community which had urged Fiji towards elections were in deep slumber. The now vocal neighbours New Zealand and Australia seemed unconcerned.
No fact finding missions came from the Commonwealth or the UN. No Eminent Persons were selected to look into the problems. Helen Clark, Winston Peters, John Howard and Alexander Downer did little to put pressure on a racist regime to act in the interests of all its citizens and deliver social justice that a democracy was supposed to deliver to all its people, irrespective of race and social status. New Zealand was in a state of deep democratic slumber because they had seen to it that a democratically elected government was in place and that was all that was required. They were only jolted to reality when the horse had already bolted and they hastily ran to lock the stable door by sending a special air force jet to Fiji to fetch Qarase and set up a king maker and peace-broker deal in Wellington. When Bainimarama refused to agree to the sleepy deal, that incident became the sour grape for Helen Clark and Winston Peters. Therefore the unprecedented vindictive venom against Fiji in general and Bainimarama in particular by them and their unforgiving and inflexible attitude towards Fiji is understandable.
But how about the fundamental problems in Fiji that are the root cause of the so called coup culture? Who will go to the bottom of that? Nobody seems to be interested in the multitudes of fundamental issues that Father Kelvin Barr had identified in his recent writing. Among them are the agenda of the nationalist who want Fiji for Fijians and declare Fiji a Christian state, the racially explosive mix of fundamentalist religion and extreme nationalism found in Assembly of Christian Churches in Fiji which has a strong influence on the political and social process, the inherent conflicts and tensions within Fijian chiefly families and confederacies, the culture of corruption, nepotism and cronyism, the economic policy which makes rich richer and poor poorer and the racially divisive electoral process.
Apart from the above, there is an urgent need of a well conducted census and leading from that, creation of fair and proper electoral boundaries. And most fundamental of all is the voter education about the nature and purpose of democracy.
Mere timetables for elections are not permanent solutions to Fiji’s problems. What we need is serious consideration and strategies to address the fundamental problems identified above. That is what Frank Bainimarama and the Interim Administration has been working towards. However, the international community has been so obsessed with the elections and democracy that they are blind to see the fundamental ills that the clean-up process is supposed to address. Setting up of the Council for Building a Better Fiji for All is a positive step in this direction, to attempt to root out the evils of the coup culture.
The recent statement from the deposed Prime Minister against this charter from his safety and exile in Mavana in Lau is understandable. This is because such a charter and clean up will remove the fodder of deceit and racial divisiveness which has been putting Qarase’s fundamentalist nationalist party in power under the guise of democracy. It is guise of democracy because in remote villages there is little semblance of democracy, people vote who the chiefs tell them to vote. In addition the nationalist propaganda and handout mentality under the guise of the racist affirmative action ensures that the vote could be easily bought at taxpayer expense from improvised simple villagers. The poverty in rural and urban Fiji have gone from bad to worse under past nationalist regimes where a new breed of rich favoured indigenous Fijians, the Fijian Holdings club, have been getting richer and have now created a new Fijian elite under Qarase regime. They have been the recipients of fruits of the racist affirmative action! Apart from New Zealand’s myopic views on Fiji, Australia’s John Howard has also revealed his hypocrisy.
In trying to tackle child-abuse crisis plaguing many indigenous communities, Australian Prime Minister Howard last week has moved to take over the Northern Territories Aboriginal lands and effectively strip thousands of indigenous people of their fundamental human rights.
John Howard has justified his breach of constitution with a simple rhetoric: “"What matters more, the Constitutional niceties, or the care and protection of young children?"
How conveniently he forgets: "What matters more, the Constitutional niceties, or saving Fiji from total corruption, financial and moral bankruptcy and heading towards social upheaval?"
Michael Green, the expelled High Commissioner from Fiji might have been doing what his Government asked but did his Government have the right to ask Green to go to subordinate officers and encourage them to overthrow Bainimarama? Was that legal, ethical, moral or under any convention?
They got it wrong in Solomons. They got it wrong in Tonga. They believe the 20 to 30 year old green NGO staff who have little real life experience, have no idea of what makes a country tick, have no understanding of economics and have no long-term vision. Yet they are the ones who write up any kind of reports to maintain their pay, flow of funds and New Zealand and Australia take such jaundiced reports as the gospel truth. Fiji is going to be the same: bullied into submission while corruption/economic destruction takes it on the road to Zimbabwe's hyper inflation! Now, wouldn't that be in interest of Australia and New Zealand?
It is essential for Australia and New Zealand to understand how democracy works in third world poor countries and how the leaders there can exploit it for their personal and political gains while showing all the niceties of a democratic government. The SDL Governments showed this deceit in the past.
Therefore should New Zealand and Australia wish to know more about the Pacific, they need to employ some Pacific and Fiji migrants in their Foreign Affairs to understand the Pacific, not second hand from teenage NGO staff or shoddily fed from their High Commission’s cocktail- circuit- blazing and night –club partying staff. Furthermore, it is in interest of New Zealand and Australia to make Fiji into a vibrant and thriving democracy like them. To do this they should stop kicking Fiji in the teeth and give it a helping hand.
Like her big brother neighbour and John Howard, Helen Clark also needs to ask: What matters more, the Constitutional niceties, or promoting and strengthening democracy in Fiji and removing the underlying reasons for the coup culture? The ball now is in New Zealand’s court to show its political and regional maturity in strengthening a fledging democracy in Fiji.
E-mail: thakurji@xtra.co.nz
(About the author: Thakur Ranjit Singh is an Auckland-based third generation Indo Fijian community worker, a commentator on Fiji affairs, a human rights activist and an advocate of good governance.)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
Dear Thakur Ranjit Singh, Thanks for your article. We welcome your well researched and balanced articles. Please do not hesitate to send them in. We look forward to more. Thanks again and Vinaka.
Mr Fiji
Post a Comment