New Caledonia, climate finance, U.S territories and lack of banking services – key issues when leaders meet this month.
Commentary by Tess Newton Cain
For a glimpse of what’s going through the minds of Pacific leaders ahead of their annual get-together, Suva has been the place to be for the past two weeks. Ahead of the 53rd Pacific Islands Forum leaders meeting in Nuku’alofa, Tonga, at the end of August, the headquarters in Fiji have been abuzz with preparatory meetings.
Unrest in New Caledonia, membership applications by U.S territories, dwindling banking services and a homegrown climate finance fund, were among topics dominating meetings of ministers with senior policymakers from the region.
Neither the Forum Foreign Ministers’ Meeting nor the Forum Economic Ministers’ Meeting get the media coverage they deserve, given their agenda setting influence, especially when it comes to what is discussed and decided at the leaders’ meeting.
However, both gatherings have seen their profiles lift in recent years. This reflects a growing recognition of the importance of Pacific regionalism in understanding and engaging with this part of the world. The use of “Blue Pacific” is now ubiquitous in official statements emanating from Washington, Tokyo, and elsewhere. It is from the work of the PIF that this concept arose.
New Caledonia was top of mind for the foreign ministers, given recent developments, including an attempt to radically reform voting rules which in turn sparked violence and disorder. Since erupting in early May, GDP has contracted by a staggering 25 percent and sporadic unrest continues.
Speaking to the media post-meeting, the Forum Chair and Prime Minister of Cook Islands Mark Brown announced that France’s President Macron had given the go-ahead for a PIF mission to visit New Caledonia before the leaders’ meeting. The prime ministers of Cook Islands, Fiji and Solomon Islands hope to be in the French territory next week, before heading to Tonga to report back to the leaders. If it happens, Fiji’s Sitiveni Rabuka would face a tight turnaround from a 10-day visit to China starting this week.
New Caledonia has now been added as a standing item to the PIF leaders’ agenda. However, elsewhere on that agenda, human rights in West Papua is also a standing item. It is better described as a ‘standing still’ item given there has been no movement on the Forum’s 2019 request for a visit by the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights to Indonesia’s Papuan provinces. According to Brown, West Papua was not discussed during FFMM.
The foreign ministers agreed, in principle, to support the applications of American Samoa and Guam to become associate members of the PIF. Whilst this is not a done deal, as the final decision rests with leaders, they will likely be confirmed in Tonga. However, any movement to make them full members is a much bigger ask. The 2016 inclusion of New Caledonia and French Polynesia as full members, despite them being French territories, was controversial. As Brown told the media, the Forum’s attempts to provide support to New Caledonia have been further complicated because of its dual status as a member of the PIF and a French territory.
Concerns about the exit of banking services from the region are not new, given how important they are for keeping the Pacific connected to global trade and finance flows, including through remittances. Recent overtures from the leaders of Nauru and Vanuatu to the Bank of China to set up shop in their countries have prompted significant reactions from the U.S. and its allies. Australia and New Zealand have undertaken to support countries who are at risk of losing correspondent banking relationships, with an Australian pledge in July of AUD$6.3 million (US$4.15 million).
The long road to establishing the Pacific Resilience Facility reached another milestone. Ministers agreed to recommend to leaders that the PRF be headquartered in Tonga. While the choice may seem left field, it is part of a long-established practice of ‘sharing’ regional institutions among the PIF membership. This is about engendering or maintaining political commitment to the regionalism project rather than the efficiencies that would derive from having them all based in Suva.
It’s still unclear when this ‘homegrown’ climate finance mechanism will become operational, given the yawning gap in capitalisation that remains. Of the stipulated initial US$500 million in funds by 2026, about US$328 million has yet to be pledged. The Forum secretariat has advised that the UN Secretary-General – who will be attending PIF – has agreed to host a pledging conference in New York soon. All eyes will be on the likes of France, the United Kingdom and wealthy Middle Eastern countries to come on board as a demonstration of their commitment to addressing the Pacific’s number one priority, the climate crisis.
The ministerial meetings have highlighted key regional issues, setting the stage for the upcoming Pacific Islands Forum leaders’ meeting in Tonga. However, the ongoing onslaught of geopolitical transactionalism is continuing to skew national thinking towards bilateral rather than regional activity. This creates a very real risk that the leaders’ meeting will be an exercise in deferral rather than decisiveness. There are significant tension points, including around deep sea mining, as was evident last year in Cook Islands.
Meanwhile, there are concerns arising about transparency when it comes to regional processes at important meetings such as these. On the one hand, there was a welcome return to the practice of sharing a draft outcomes statement with the regional media after the foreign ministers’ meeting, after being noticeably absent last year. The opportunities for journalists to ask questions about what took place during the discussions are still pitifully few and highly constrained, time wise. Providing more and better opportunities for media and analysts to engage with all aspects of Pacific regionalism needs to be at the heart of bringing Pacific communities along on what is a crucial and challenging journey for the region.
Tess Newton Cain has worked as an independent consultant and researcher in the Pacific islands region for more than 25 years. She is a former Lecturer in Law at the University of the South Pacific and an adjunct associate professor at Griffith University, Australia.
