Australia's Pacific diplomacy needs recalibrating

BY DEREK BRIEN
THE AUSTRALIAN

DISMISSING the current diplomatic standoff between Australia and Vanuatu as a case of "the mouse that roared" is a bad idea.

Neither does it help to view Pacific island countries solely as beneficiaries of Australia's $1 billion aid program. Their strategic significance is only growing.

As the axis of power moves eastward, emerging Asian powers including China, Indonesia and India are demonstrating increasing strategic interest in Australia's backyard.

Within days of expelling the Australian Federal Police, Vanuatu's Prime Minister Sato Kilman welcomed a delegation from Indonesia and offers to provide police and paramilitary training. Within 24 hours of that meeting, a Hercules aircraft loaded with equipment had arrived from Jakarta.

To resolve the current impasse and retain its strong footprint in the region, Australia would do well to recalibrate its relationships in the Pacific.

Australia's Melanesian neighbours Papua New Guinea, Solomon Islands and Vanuatu have more than 1,000 living languages, a cultural make-up more diverse than anywhere else in the world.

Rules of engagement vary greatly from island to island. Islanders know that the way one person says something is not necessarily the way the other person hears it. Its not just what you say, its how you say it. Actions often speak louder than words, and both are always carefully examined. Getting language and approach right is no mean feat.

So it must be a source of great frustration that well-meaning Australian politicians, diplomats and aid workers find themselves labelled "big brother" or "bully".

Equally importantly, it frustrates Pacific leaders and policymakers not to be afforded the same degree of respect bestowed on their international colleagues. No matter how small the country, the prime minister is still the prime minister.

The Pacific is a region in the process of redefining its own identity. Most countries are led by the same ageing generation that won independence. As the biggest donor, Australia has played a significant role in charting the region's development path over the last 30 years.

Yet the discourse on foreign aid remains haunted by guilt, greed, and good intentions. Donors are accused of interference, neo-colonialism and aid conditionality. In some cases, such accusations have been warranted.

In other, the best of intents have been thwarted, often due to the failure to communicate a good idea. But unilaterally imposed solutions rarely gain traction, and for good reason.

Most of us don't like to be told what to do, and we certainly don't like to see our faults paraded in front of others. In a region where pre-independence memories remain fresh, such sentiments are particularly powerful. Stop focusing on corrupt governments, and start thinking about the people who need support fixing things.

In the Pacific, development is a process, not a product. Development partnerships may be forged between countries and institutions, but the interaction and engagement occurs between people. Person-to-person relationships come first and they extend far beyond government offices.

One of the greatest collateral effects of the Pacific seasonal workers scheme is that Pacific islanders not only gain access to temporary job opportunities in Australia, they return home enriched with new friends and exposed to new ideas.

Personal relationships can have far-reaching consequences. The battle for supremacy between China and the US is now playing out on the Pacific stage. As both powers boost their presence across the region, Australia's position is coming under closer scrutiny. Australia may have the deepest pockets now, but new donors are gaining traction.

Pacific leaders who have quietly bemoaned the imbalance in the relationship with Australia are embracing these new opportunities. Chequebook diplomacy it may be, but it comes with lashings of respect.

Kilman was politically compromised and embarrassed when his delegation was diverted and an adviser arrested at Sydney airport. An angry reaction was inevitable, and its fallout threatens to shake the foundation of the relationship between the two countries.

Both sides claim the high moral ground, making a face-saving resolution all the more important. Saving face is integral to the Pacific way and many across the region are watching in anticipation.

A new era of understanding is possible. A little effort and a lot of empathy could reset the relationship from the prevailing lop-sided, aid-centric approach towards mutually beneficial closer integration. Staying on the same track is in no one's interest.

Derek Brien is the executive director of the Pacific Institute of Public Policy, an independent regional think tank based in Vanuatu

Comments

[Colin Huggins]

Very interesting comments on this report by all correspondents.
However, just read page 5 - the Nation Section of the Australian of today 23/05/12. You can't miss it with a first photo of a doubled up President B.H. Obama in a giggling fit with PM Julia Gillard and then photo number 2 of President and PM with arms locked around each other moving off.
Move to below: Would be Deputy PM and Foreign Minister, Julie Bishop, and her latest views on closer relations in our Pacific area - "More Jakarta - less Geneva". No mention of Port Moresby. Then "would be" PM Tony Abbott's flying agenda for late this year and I quote: "Last night a spokesman for Mr. Abbott confirmed he planned to visit Indonesia ( Jakarta), the US ( Washington), China ( Beijing) and India ( New Delhi)in the second half of the year". Nay a mention of any Pacific Island country. I guess if he leaves Canberra in daylight hours, he will be able to look out the window of the plane and see PNG as he wings his way to Beijing.
I really don't think PNG is on the political agenda here from either party. A case of give them the big handout and we have done our duty with AusAid. Most filters back here anyhow.

[Mrs Barbara Short]

Michael, Australia today is made up of people from every part of the world. In times past people from a European background would have dominated. But today the people in power, politically and in the business world, come from many other backgrounds.

I live in an area now inhabited by Chinese, from everywhere, Koreans, Lebanese, Indians,(probably some from Fiji), and many others who speak broken English and have darker skins than mine and seem to come from all corners of the globe.

I would say that most do not have a clue about PNG. As Paul says, they probably fly over PNG as they travel backwards and forwards to their former homelands, but are not interested in PNG.

Sadly, some Pacific Island families have had sons who have given their families and their Island groups bad names in Sydney. The news will report an attack was carried out by people of Islander appearance and it is likely that many people actually fear coming into contact with these Islanders.

I have a soft spot for Vanuatu as I'm from the Presbyterian Church and we have been very involved with the New Hebrides history. But today we have missionaries working all around the globe, even in places like Portugal.

As Paul and Keith and all the others that contribute to PNG Attitude know, we have an uphill battle to try to get Australia to help our brothers and sisters in the Pacific nations, especially PNG, in a suitable way.

I'm joining with the Boroko United Church and their prayers. They are praying for the upcoming general elections and the current political situation including the handing down of the decision early last night.

[Paul Oates]

Mate! From the day we set foot back in Australia we were virtually 'persona non grata'. No one apparently wanted to know anything about what we had learnt or what use we could be to both our nations.

As far as Australia was concerned, we were expected to just fade away into the mists of history. In fact, you might say it was a 'mist' opportunity?

[Michael Dom]

A pity the powers that be choose to ignore the old guard ex-PNG, Paul.

[Paul Oates]

Ah Michael, your point is indeed indicative of the actual problem.

The average 'Occer' has no idea about what part of the world they live in. In part, this situation has been exacerbated by successive governments and foreign ministers who have failed to look out the window when they fly off to the US, Europe and Asia.

When recently confronted with a practical suggestion about our Australian school curriculum including the teaching our neighbour's language of choice (Melanesian) and facts about geography and culture, senior public servants merely suggested a personal approach to the local school to see if they would be interested?

Rest assured and not to be deterred, the 'PNG Attitude' fraternity el al will as the name suggests, continue to work away at changing the situation.

[Michael Dom]

After centuries of existing in Oceania when will Australia learn to live in it?
If Australia searches for an identity greater than its historical past, as a product of European history, then its time to embrace the Pacific and our ways.
One would think that after being directly involved with one of the most culturally diverse nations in the Pacific you would have learned something by now.

[tom]

I believe that re-calibrate will not do much for the Australian diplomacy.
Just changing the Foreign Minister and keeping the people briefing the Minister intact is really tinkering on the edges and will bound to produce the same results. Using the analogy of diesel engine that has clogged filters, worn piston rings, with exhaust valves in need of grinding, worn bearings that have to be replaced.

That is the perception of Australian diplomacy in the Pacific- put simply it needs an overhaul not a re-calibration.