PNG’s 12 turbulent months – what really happened

This is an extract from the Fernbergh Lecture given today by IAN KEMISH, Australia’s high commissioner to Papua New Guinea, at Government House in Brisbane

TO UNDERSTAND PAPUA NEW GUINEA – the maturity or otherwise of its institutions, the commitment of its people to democracy – it is important to appreciate what really happened in the 12 turbulent months leading to Peter O’Neill’s finally undisputed emergence, on 3 August this year, at the head of this new and energetic government.

It is a story of painful generational succession - one which tested the country’s constitution and political institutions more than any other moment in its post-independence history. It was a crisis that lasted exactly a year and a day.

If you will permit me a digression, the day it all began  –2 August last year - was a unusual day for me.

It was the day I became the first Australian High Commissioner in more than 20 years to visit the site of the enormous Panguna mine on the island of Bougainville.

You will know that Panguna was once the largest copper mine in the world – until a dispute focused on landowner and environmental concerns morphed into a bitter struggle by secessionists to break Bougainville away from PNG.

This became, in the 1990s, the worst conflict the Pacific had seen since the dark days of World War II. The mine lies dormant for the moment, and its future is intertwined with the future of the island. All this is another story, but it is worth mentioning in passing as an abiding strategic issue of importance to Australia.

In any case, if you had been there on the morning of the 2 August last year you would have seen me walking – with dignity I hope - under the raised boom-gate that is still used by former members of the Bougainville Revolutionary Army to control access to the Panguna district.

You would have seen me towing, by its foreleg, a very large pig – the ceremonial price for Australia’s re entry into the area. I understand from reports I heard later in the day that it was delicious, but cannot confirm this.

It was an eventful day. Late that afternoon, on the long drive back to Buka town, our vehicle became stuck at mid-point when fording a rising river.

My young colleagues – a group of impressive young women – and I managed to extract ourselves from the vehicle and escape the raging stream with the assistance of hundreds of locals who magically appeared on the scene (as they always seem to when an expatriate encounters trouble).

It was as I climbed to the top of a grassy river bank, barefoot, muddy and soaked from the neck down, that I received a text advising that Peter O’Neill had just been elected on the floor of Parliament.

And it was in that state that I made my congratulatory phone call to him. Such is the romance of diplomacy.

For PNG, the 12 months that followed were marked by two separate but related crises.

The first, which peaked in the December/January period a year ago, was essentially a dispute between O’Neill and the man he had overthrown – Sir Michael Somare – over who was rightful Prime Minister.

The court backed Somare, and Parliament strongly backed O’Neill. In circumstances that would have challenged any constitution, the Public Service, the PNGDF and the Police Force largely accepted the principle that a Prime Minister must have the backing of Parliament.

We appeared, for a while there, to have two of everything in Papua New Guinea: Governors General, Prime Ministers, military and police commanders. But O’Neill was the effective prime minister throughout.

There were several moments in this first crisis when attempts were made to get the security forces involved. This is an important point.

On each of these occasions the leaders of the Royal Papua New Guinea Constabulary and the PNGDF showed remarkable maturity. They refrained from becoming involved despite the significant pressures placed on them.

And they exercised very good judgment in the disciplinary approach taken in dealing with the small disaffected elements within their midst that were tempted to support one side or another.

The populace certainly did not behave as if there was a crisis. Papua New Guineans understood clearly the political dispute, but it was quite striking how people remained calm, and how everyday life and business continued as normal in Port Moresby, and across the country.

I certainly wasn’t short of advice at this time – from the Australian media and commentators - about how Australia should conduct itself.

The Australian government was active behind the scenes: encouraging restraint and persuading the parties, through confidential dialogue, to keep what is a political dispute in the political arena.

At a local level we undertook some successful, creative diplomacy with the police and defence forces to keep the temperature down. But in the end it was Papua New Guineans who kept a lid on things.

Through this first crisis we – and more importantly, the PNG people, took the view that the only hope of restoring real political stability lay at the ballot box, in the national elections scheduled for June-July this year.

This is why we were all so concerned when a second crisis emerged in February-March this year, as powerful negative forces within the PNG Parliament began to suggest that the constitutionally mandated election should be deferred, perhaps indefinitely.

For a moment there appeared to be a real risk that PNG would walk away from its proud democratic record, which has seen it hold elections every five years since Independence.

But the people spoke in no uncertain terms, staging peaceful protests in support of their right to vote. The local media cleared its throat, and letters to the editor sent a consistent message. Slowly Parliament came to accept that its mandate would in fact expire, and elections would be held.

It was in this context that Australia moved to provide unprecedented support to PNG to help ensure the success of the elections….

But once again, the best part of the story is what Papua New Guineans achieved themselves. To conduct an election in PNG – a country with more than 800 distinct languages and with some of the world’s toughest topography – is no mean feat.

It takes place over a fortnight, involves more than 3,000 candidates and 9,800 polling places, and requires almost 5,000 small polling teams to travel – by helicopter, boat and foot – to some of the remotest places on Earth to deliver the poll.

As Senator Carr said last week in Port Moresby, if Papua New Guinea can deliver an election in such circumstances, then no other country has an excuse not to trust the people, and not to stage a democratic election.

Was it a free and fair election? Well, it was a relatively safe election, and I have no doubt that the overall result reflected the will of the people. In many coastal and urban areas the polls would have been familiar in their conduct to anyone with a western perspective.

In some parts of the Highlands this was not the case, and the motto “Vote early, vote often” had particular application. But let me give you two brief anecdotes that will put this last comment into perspective.

In one region, a corrupt local candidate arranged to procure the ballot papers intended for a remote community, and to have the papers filled out by his own supporters.

The community in question walked en masse for two and a half days out of their mountain fastness to the local provincial centre, demanding – and ultimately obtaining – their democratic right.

And in a case witnessed by High Commission monitors, a community of seven clans found itself in a situation where insufficient ballot papers had been provided.

Consultations were held, and it was agreed that the papers available should simply be divided evenly into seven – irrespective of the size of the respective clans.

All agreed that this was in the best spirit of consensus making, and would best reflect the collective will. We Westerners should hesitate before we criticise.

But what now? What lies before this new Government in PNG?....

The new leadership grew up in an independent Papua New Guinea. This makes them more confident in dealing with Australia. It naturally makes them more inclined to be selective in their international dealings, taking each external relationship on its merits. We need to understand and accept this.

So when we take a step back and imagine the future shape of Australia’s nearest neighbour, we should be imagining a country led by people more inclined to be assertive and selective in their dealings with Australia, with a population approaching contemporary Australia.

Over time it will likely play a different kind of role in regional affairs. It will remain confronted by very significant development challenges, and yet have access to unprecedented new wealth.

Comments

[Colin Huggins]

Phil - I have paid my dues on High Commissioner Ian Kemish, and indeed he has a very impressive CV.
__________

Mr. Kemish was most recently Australian Ambassador to the Federal Republic of Germany, a position he held from April 2006. Prior to this, Mr. Kemish was First Assistant Secretary, International Division in the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet.

Mr. Kemish's overseas service includes Vienna and Brunei. He has also worked on secondment with the New Zealand Ministry of External Relations.

Mr. Kemish was made a Member of the Order of Australia (AM) in 2003 in recognition of managing the Australian Government's response in the aftermath of the 12 October 2002 Bali bombings.

Mr. Kemish holds a Bachelor of Arts (Hons) in International Relations and South East Asian History from the University of Queensland. Mr. Kemish completed his primary school education in Papua New Guinea. He speaks Indonesian, German and Tok Pisin. Mr. Kemish is married and has two daughters.
__________

As now all can see, if they hadn't before, most impressive.

As for the cocktail function he hosted, that was commendable, but they have a budget for such things.

Now recall that in previous posts that the Australian High Commission in Port Moresby has been referred to by some as "Fort Shithouse" [Fort Shitscared - ed] or some other weird name.

I strongly disagree with you, Phil, that we are a slobbering puppy to the USA. I think Kim Beazley as the present Ambassador to the USA would take great exception to this description of his job and I think Ian Kemish would agree.

I think I would prefer the US alliance to remain, warts and all, than to pander to the PRC.
__________

Enough irrelevant chatter about Australian political polarities - KJ

[Phil Fitzpatrick]

We've had a bit to do with Ian Kemish because of his very generous support for the Crocodile Prize.

While we failed to get any support from the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, Ian came to the party by contributing from his own discretionary funds and hosting the awards, including laying on a venue and providing tucker and drinks.

He's a good bloke, softly spoken and highly respected in PNG. Both his Australian and Papua New Guinean staff are top notch.

If he had control of Australian policy towards PNG things would be a lot different.

It should also be noted that his speech is couched in simple terms but nevertheless gets to the crux of the matter.

Contrast that to the hideous document from AusAID, recently posted by Paul Oates, in relation to the 89 advisors .

Unfortunately the Australian media won't report what he said.

But does that really matter?

The inferiority complex that Australia displays by sitting at the feet of the USA like a slobbering puppy dog is not a good look. In fact its downright degrading and makes one ashamed.

PNG doesn't need Australia to pat it on the head. If the media in Oz ignores PNG that's their own loss.

[Colin Huggins]

Thank you Peter. My "mea culpa". I should have "wikipediaed" the High Commissioner first. Ninety-nine percent of the time I do. This time, I didn't. My apologies.

[Peter Bell]

Regarding the attributes of a High Commissioner as described by Colin Huggins.

Colin will be undoubtably pleased to find out that the current Australian High Commissioner, Ian Kemish, came to and lived in PNG when he was very young.

He came with his father who worked for Elcom in the 1960s and 1970s.

Ian is a fluent tok pisin speaker which would have been useful in his Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade career which commenced almost 25 years ago.

[William (Bill) Dunlop]

Vale Pious Kerepia, the first Papua New Guinean Police Commissioner at PNG Independence and a north Bougainvillean by birth.

I had the privilege of being his Executive Officer for
a period in 1980, when he was then the Secretary of Transport, Works And Supply.

Pious was an absolute scholar and a complete gentleman.

Bougainvilleans, you may have a hard road to hoe. I just pray for you all that Premier Peter O'Neill Is your mentor. Help him make it happen.

[Colin Huggins]

Tim - I would be more than surprised if this makes any news at all in the Australian media.

There was a good report on FM Senator Carr by one of the
so-called experts on what Carr has so far done in one or two of today's papers, but what the Australian High Commissioner and his dumping in a river will not warrant any mention.

If they do get hold of it, they will wonder what he was doing with a group of "impressive young women". Now that might take some explaining?

After all, the main news here is that "backfiring" shock-jock call and what happened to a London nurse.
Talk about mea culpas, coming left, right and centre. I might add that what was supposedly an innocent stupid stunt by the media has backfired with terrible repercussions. Silly smart arsed twits, now branded for life.

This update by the Australian High Commissioner, Ian Kemish on PNG is not at all informative, even makes that mystery Falcon 900 jet flight and the antics in a high rollers Sydney Casino look first rate by a
would be PNG PM! What was his name?

If Australia is to be successful with our ex-responsibility as the colonial power and now major benefactor, then the High Commissioner to PNG, should be someone who has lived in PNG and I am sure there must be one who is presently employed in the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade in Canberra worked and lived there.

Or take the plunge and send the ex- Ambassadors to Italy and the Holy See, Amanda Vanstone or Tim Fischer, ex-military also, a Vietnam veteran. Now that would throw cats among the pigeon loft.

Both seemed to have come out with flying colours and both appointed by a Labor government.

[Jeff Febi]

Now how do we get such great story to the Australian populace...its an art that has not been mastered yet.

[Tim Ashton]

Oh dear. what will our Australian mainstream media make of this?

Will we see the headline "Citizens of PNG enforce democratic rights" or something similarly positive?

Dont hold your breath.