For reasons which are unclear to me (unless they relate to the ubiquity of Krillard stories), the Ozblogosphere has, as far as I can tell, been completely silent fairly quiet on the Fiji coup. This might also be because the issues aren’t clear cut. The stated reasons for the coup are ones that some in Australia may have some sympathy with – the racial basis for Fiji’s electoral system and the plans to pardon the 2000 coup plotters. Fiji’s politics don’t easily fit into the left/right frames which divide Australian political blogs – the justification for a rigged electoral system is Indigenous rights, while those on the right might not want to know too much about the post-colonial nature of the Indian Fijian population and the strong links between their political representatives and organised labour.
Nevertheless, while Australia has made a habit of throwing its weight around the region, we, and the Australian government, shouldn’t be putting this event in the too hard basket. There was also little condemnation of the Thai coup in Australia despite the clearly corrupt nature of the government overthrown. But it’s essential that we insist that military intervention is not the way to bring about progressive political and social change. And Australia should take that principle seriously.
The Guardian went looking for regional blog comments and turned up frequent LP commenter Mick Bremner, who blogs from Austria. Mick raised the obvious point that Howard’s foreign policy in this instance is deeply inconsistent with his policy in Iraq. Howard has refused a request for military assistance from the elected government of Fiji. I doubt very much that this would be the direction for Australia to go in, but I do hope that something more serious is done than ritualistic oustings from the Commonwealth or the suspension of defence cooperation. If Australia is going to fancy itself as a power in the region, and one which claims to uphold democracy, it needs to stand resolutely opposed to military coups – no matter how imperfect the Fijian government or how badly it fits into the frames through which we usually view politics.
Correction: Since writing this post, my attention has been drawn in comments to posts on the coup by Andrew Bartlett, Cam and saint.
Update: More commentary on Howard’s response at Blogocracy. Further update: It seems I spoke far too soon. Thanks to Sarah in comments for pointing me to this link at The Australian Index.
the Ozblogosphere has, as far as I can tell, been completely silent on the Fiji coup
Not completely. Fijian Instability and Bandit Militaries.
Um I’ve not been vocal but not completely silent either. Good Fiji blog is Ms Vakaivosavosa although as she said, blogging is a bit slow at the moment.
Mark:
Good one.
Andrew Bartlett’s blog and its links are worth a look. He has been more in touch with the Fiji situation than has Downer.
Downer must go for his mishandling of the Fiji coup, a response which will cause Australia even more long-term harm than Australia’s entanglement with Bush and his cronies. His pompous outbursts will do nothing at all to help the Fijian people but they will help other regional powers who will not hesitate to take advantage of Australia’s latest blunder.
I think there’s little insight – or broad interest – in Australia into the Fijian situation. Many Australians have been there but don’t see much more than the view offered by travelling from Nadi to the resorts of western Viti Levu and the Yasawas.
There’s more awareness in NZ (a lot of the Fijian military training has been carried out in NZ) and the Australian government’s response to Bainimarama’s coup has been in lockstep with that of NZ. I don’t know what else either government could have done in responding. Helen Clark has been no less strident in her criticism than has Downer.
The Fiji military is 4,000 strong, far too large for any domestic requirement and highly professional given that successive Fiji governments have basically deployed them as revenue-earners on UN peace-keeping missions and the like. It’s basically become a law unto itself since the Rabuka coups and famously fractured during the Speight coup in 2000 when one unit backed Speight and attempted to murder Bainimarama. Bainimarama believes that the Qarase government has protected the coup plotters. His animus is deeply personal.
Fiji’s chiefly social governance has also broken down and fractured since the first coups when the Great Council of Chiefs divided in support of Sitiveni Rabuka. The military now offers a countervailing force to traditional leadership and democratic governance. Much of the entrepreneurial and professional talent in Fiji is indo-Fijian and they’ve left in their thousands since the first coups. There’s also the ongoing tension between indigenous rights and indo-Fijian rights which Bainimarama appears to be using for his own purposes.
Apologies for missing your, saint’s and Andrew’s posts, Cam. My feed reader must be a tad slow.
This issue has been building for some time, Mark, with SFA contribution from our erstwhile adventurist government.
Downer: Worst. Fecking. Diplomat. Ever.
I’ve updated the post with links and a correction.
Thanks, Fyodor.
I’m surprised that Rudd decided to bat away a question about the coup at his first press conference as leader. Perhaps he thinks it’s too hot to handle?
Pity.
Fiji is a place concocted by Graham Greene, V.S Naipaul and Tom Sharpe during an all-night drinking session.
Fiji is a shattered mirror that reflects back fractured parodies of colonial politics.
The ruling reality is that the Army is a fearsome expression of ethnic Fijian chauvinism. Military intervention in Fiji by Australia and New Zealand, or even an alliance of Australia and New Zealand would require an open-ended commitment of resources beyond the capability of these countries.
Moreover, an Australian and NZ military presence would likely precipitate an insurgency that’d look like a mini-Iraq.
Good God that was a wierd thread. Thanks for the memories, Fyodor.
…
Suspension of military cooperation isn’t a small stick, by the way, if, like I’m sure most of the Fijian military are, you’re someone who likes shootin’ guns and drivin’ trucks on someone else’s tab.
Getting the ADF to stop training Kopassus, for instance, and doing joint exercises with the TNI, would be a very big thing.
You can find more Australian blogs on fiji at http://theaustralianindex.com/?s=search&searchterms=fiji
There are a large number of deeply interlinked issues at play in the Fijian situation, all of which are ultimately up to Fiji to resolve. NZ and Australia have moved in lockstep on policy towards Fiji – this is absolutely not a case of Australia adopting a “rogue” response.
Bainimarama was determined that he and not the elected government (whatever its perceived deficiencies) should direct the course of events. I’m not sure what the NZ and Australian governments could or should have done differently but I’m open to discussion.
I basically agree, Geoff. As I said in the post, I’m not calling for military intervention by Australia or New Zealand, just highlighting the disconnect with Iraq policy.
It does beggar belief that Australia couldn’t have come up with some sort of effective diplomatic strategy since it’s been apparent for quite some time that this was going to happen, and since it’s become almost a regular occurrence – which is why I think we need to think creatively about what response to take. Obviously anticipation of the standard response didn’t act as a deterrent.
I’m also aware that the Commodore’s justification is almost certainly spurious, but I think that the political and constitutional set up in Fiji raises issues we shouldn’t be afraid to discuss. As you suggest, though, ultimately it’s the responsibility of the Fijian people to sort out. As Iraq is the responsibility of the Iraqis.
“It does beggar belief that Australia couldn’t have come up with some sort of effective diplomatic strategy since it’s been apparent for quite some time that this was going to happen, and since it’s become almost a regular occurrence – which is why I think we need to think creatively about what response to take. Obviously anticipation of the standard response didn’t act as a deterrent.”
Well, no. Both Canberra and Wellington clearly thought – wrongly – that Bainimarama was open to reason and persuasion.
The succession of coups has actually created great fracture lines through Fijian society and led to the rise of a military that no longer feels constrained by democratic convention. More importantly, it has the guns and it doesn’t have to be. For the military commander to openly abuse the great Council of Chiefs, as he did a couple of days ago, shows how deep the fracture lines are.
I think that the solution has to come from civil society in Fiji.
While we’re at it, what the hell are Australian troops and police doing in Tonga propping up an absolute monarchy?
From what little I do know, part of the problem with Australian or New Zealand intervention in Fiji is the sheer size and experience of the Fijian military. Australia and New Zealand simply can’t deploy enough troops (even absent commitments in Iraq) to the place to force the military to comply – sure, we could massacre them from the air, but that’s hardly likely to be a useful or ethical tactic…
I’m not sure that Howard is being inconsistent.
He repeatedly said that military intervention in Fiji “would not be in Australia’s interest” just as he repeatedly claimed that the invasion of Iraq was in Australia’s interest.
I think we all know what “in Australia’s interest” is code for in the latter case. The US alliance is worth the price of a foreign military conflict, but democracy in Fiji is not. (To be clear I agree with Mark that military intervention should not be Australia’s response anyway.)
Howard is only being inconsistent if you expect him to have a principled approach to foreign policy. But I don’t think he does, I think his is a Realpolitik approach.
Howard supporters, of course, always point to E Timor to counter that claim, but needless to say I disagree with their analysis.
“While we’re at it, what the hell are Australian troops and police doing in Tonga propping up an absolute monarchy?”
They’re not. The initial force (led by NZ) did contain Australian troops but they’ve since returned. I think the issue was less about “propping up absolute monarchy” and more about securing the safety of the population of Nuku’alofa after the CBD was destroyed in rioting.
Hey, don’t bag Downer. He might seem to be ignoring this particular uprising, but that’s just because he’s already preparing for the much worse upcoming Fiji coup of 2008.
Mr Lefty has something and, if I may be so vain, so does F Skippy.
Mr Lefty, Mr Downer might be preparing for the upcoming coup in Australia in 2008. Tories so hate losing power they are prepared to do almost anything, ask Gough.
Getting rid of P.M. Rudd AND a compliant G.G. could now easily be covered under the new Fijian ‘doctrine of necessity’ precedent. It’s a little ripper.
A link to the Bainimarama justification for the coup from last nights P.M. follows…
http://www.abc.net.au/pm/content/2006/s1804930.htm
I admit to being stung into posting by this thread, but if you can criticise government on any policy area you can criticise them on foreign policy, in terms of what’s in it for us.
Robert, I doubt whether the situation in Tonga can be compared to the storming of the Bastille, but even if it can the instability of France over the past two centuries sends a clear message on regional instability that we
arewould be foolish to ignore.I notice now that The Oz’s website is all over this issue now with lots of sympathetic commentary on Howard’s position. To be fair, I don’t think Howard has done the wrong thing but he shouldn’t talk himself up as some great neocon defender of democracy when he is quite clearly takes a pragmatic position on foreign affairs.
The thing that really gets me about all this is that it seems that Australia really isn’t that committed to the region and that Downer is much more interested in playing culture warrior games and re-framing historical debate than he is in working to solve the problems that face Pacific nations.
Mark:
I’m not surprised that Rudd was quiet on Fiji (did he have a big grin though?) – after all, while Downer keeps kicking home goals over Fiji, all Rudd has to do is remain silent and he can’t help but look downright brilliant.
I’m disappointed that there hasn’t been more analysis of the motivations of the various parties in the latest coup. The typically shallow response (and I won’t name names here, but you know who you are) is that this is just another military strongman sweeping aside a coup-prone banana republic for his own purposes. It’s not that simple.
First off, the government of PM Qarase has a patchy record when it comes to legitimacy. Wikipedia is pretty good on this, and this commentary from the (opposition) Fijian Labour Party also provides an interesting (if obviously biased) perspective. Importantly, Qarase is strongly associated with the chauvinist element in the dominant (indigenous) Fijian population. Even so, he did not achieve an outright majority of the vote in the recent (May, 2006) elections, which were largely contested on ethnicity, and he does not speak for the sizeable minority of Indo-Fijians in the country.
Second, the points of contention between Commodore Bainimarama and PM Qarase relate to legislation aimed at: (further) enhancing the rights of ethnic Fijians at the expense of Indo-Fijians and, importantly, providing a legal means to pardon individuals associated with the 2000 coup that overthrew the multi-racial government led by Mahenda Chaudhry. This coup does not seem to be about the military seizing power for its own ends – Bainimarama has been consistent and clear for some time in his opposition to the divisive agenda of the government.
Third, it should be noted that the last coup, in 2000, was resolved by Commodore Bainimarama, who declared martial law before defeating the rebels led by George Speight. He then oversaw the (brief) transition back to civilian, democratic government. Bainimarama has since been vocal in criticizing the government, but this is the first time since that he has used the military politically.
Fourth, Bainimarama is a more complex character than he has been portrayed in our media. Importantly, he is from the navy, which is the distinctly junior and un-macho arm of the military. Nevertheless, he has the support of the army-dominated military and has been consistent in opposing: 1) the pardon of those responsible for the 2000 coup; and 2) Fijian chauvinism, despite being ethnically Fijian himself. The latter point is very important – since the first coup, of Brigadier Rabuka in 1987, Indo-Fijians have seen their rights steadily reduced. The result has been an increase in ethnic tension, which PM Qarase has flamed by openly pandering to Fijian chauvinism.
Finally, this expat Fijian has a pretty good summary of the whole sordid history of Fijian politics in recent times. And here (also linked to by Saint, above) is a more cynical take on the military’s actions.
More discussion on Ken’s links thread at Troppo:
http://www.clubtroppo.com.au/2006/12/06/wednesdays-missing-link-2/#comments
Part of the reason Bainimarama moved when he did was because the one weapon Qarase had was tto call an election: all indications were that he would’ve won in a landslide. For all his talk about Australia in 1975 it was the reverse: it was the government, not the opposition, that was keen for a poll.
Fyodor’s quite right. The script is very different to the previous coups, and not some indigenist ethnic putsch. It doesnt make Boneymoronie’s actions anymore palatable, but there seems to be remarkably little interest in our media as to whats going on behind the scenes.
You know, just an idea: if we’re going to be a regional policeman/ roving neo-colonialist, how about we teach the ADF and AFP something, anything about Melanesia/ Polynesia? There’s no indication anyone on the ground understands the local cultures in the slightest.
Thanks Arnie Rimmer for the most concise summary of the background to the coup that i’ve read so far.
I wouldn’t necessarily see Bainimarama as being on the side of the angels, Fyodor. Rather, he’s utilising a particular take on the Qarase government – it’s indigenous chauvinism, it’s alleged (and no doubt, real, in part) corruption – to justify the unshakeable belief that his will should prevail.
He’s been greatly assisted in so doing by the major fissures that have opened in the traditional Fijian social/power governance structures since Speight’s coup in particular. In essence, the military has emerged as a constantly competing arm of government with it’s own tribal ethos – and I can assure you that the esprit de corps of Fiji’s very small navy is no less muscular than that of the army. In essence, he doesn’t need to rely on “Fijian chauvinism” when he’s got “military chauvinisim” which also incorporates the few Indo-Fijians in the RFMF.
His animosity for Qarase is deeply personal and clearly based in his belief that senior members of the government were complicit in the attempt by military mutineers to kill him in 2000. But it’s hard to believe that the entire public service leadership, the Great Council of Chiefs, the Churches, the judiciary are all somehow complicit in the vast corruption conspiracy that he keeps seeing.
The fact that he’s been reduced to appointing the RFMF’s honorary surgeon as the Prime Minister sees a good deal about the lack of support for him. But he’s got the guns.
Interestingly, the QoliQoli Bill, aimed at maintaining the foreshores in indigenous Fijian ownership, looks similar to the NZ Foreshores Bill that was aimed at giving Maori the same rights. It too was the source of much disputation.
I didn’t say he was on the side of the angels, Geoff. I suggested he wasn’t your typical Caudillo. As for his “take” on Qarase, it’s painfully obvious that his take _IS_ correct: Qarase is running a chauvinist government maintaining control by pandering to the dominant ethnic group, in a gerrymandered system, at the expense of the minority. IMO, the corruption allegations also have legs – the whole structure is rotten. I’m not saying a military coup was the solution, but Qarase was leading the country down the wrong path.
Well, bula, sailor! I’m tempted to defer to your background in the area, but my own experience (i.e. I’ve met members of both army and navy in Fiji) confirms the usual stereotype in Fiji’s case: modern navies are officered by technocrats, armies by warriors. Fiji’s army is ridiculously large for its needs, and is symbolic of the country’s machismo. Its navy is trivial by comparison, and more functional. As you know, organisational psychology has an important effect on the self-perception of the members of the respective armed forces. You’re also over-playing the presence of Indo-fijians in the military – it is largely the preserve of ethnic Fijians, who are over-represented.
You’re right that the RFMF is tribal, however: its actions in recent years demonstrate that it sees itself as self-appointed guardian of the good governance of the country. This is a huge problem, but one that won’t go away so long as the government of the day lacks legitimacy in the eyes of a substantial chunk of the population.
I think you’re making a subtle mistake here. Bainimarama placed Qarase in power after the previous coup – there was no personal animosity between them at that time. The animosity has arisen subsequently, as Qarase has relentlessly pursued an agenda of pardoning those responsible for the previous coup, and to further privilege ethnic Fijians over Indo-Fijians. In this, I believe Bainimarama is in the right: the criminals should not be pardoned, and Fijian chauvinism can only be negative for the future of the country given the ethnic divide.
You’re exaggerating, Geoff. For one thing, Bainimarama is not the only one accusing the government of corruption. Check out the opposition’s (Fiji Labour Party) statements over the past year to get a handle on the accusations that have been thrown around. Also, the public service IS corrupt, and has been for some time. This is not surprising given it’s a huge employer in the country – an unfortunate side-effect of Fiji’s economic stagnation. As for the Great Council of Chiefs, they are a backward, passive and undemocratic beneficiary of policies favouring ethnic Fijians – their complaisance in Qarase’s agenda shows just how morally bankrupt their position has become in modern Fiji. I don’t know where your comments about the church and judiciary come from.
Not at all. He’s chosen a technocrat (he’s not just an “honorary” surgeon, but a “respected medical practitioner”, apparently) who’s not of the military but oviously loyal to the military. Dr Senilagakali is also not intended to be the long-term PM, at least based on Bainimarama’s stated aims. You’re right about the guns, though.
Stop right there, Geoff.
New Zealand: indigenous, socio-economically disadvantaged minority asking for rights arguably theirs by law under the Treaty of Waitangi.
Fiji: dominant ethnic group granting themselves superior economic rights to ethnic minorities via a gerrymandered political system.
Leaving aside the worth of such ethnically-based legislation, there’s a big difference between the legal, constitutional and socio-political circumstances of the two countries.
Bainimarama’s grip on the military may not be as strong as previously believed, it appears there may have been a mutiny at the QEII Barracks in Suva. Presumably it failed.
[link]
Pretty impressed with your udnerstanding of Fiji inner-working Fyodor.
Meanwhile, elsewhere in the arc: its official – DSD knew all along about the murder of the Balibo five by TNI. Federal governments nakedly suppressed the info across two inquiries, the 1977 Hope Commission, and the 1999 Sherman report. http://www.news.com.au/story/0,10117,20894599-2,00.html
ABC is reporting that “another foreign corrospondent” was just a little jumpy, and the commotion was in fact a game of cricket.
abc: Reports of Gunfire a Game of Cricket
There has been a Fiji Exiles discussion board on Ezboard.com since the 2000 coup in Fiji. http://p087.ezboard.com/ffijiboardexilesfijiboardexiles
All the old regulars are back discussing the current coup. The regulars include people living in Fiji, such as the smart young Fiji lawyer/soldier /keyboard commando, ‘real jack’, and people with strong connections to Fiji living in Oz, NZ, Canada, US, etc.
Fiji watchers will find a lot of useful insights in this board.
I know it is pretty bizarre that I would be supporting a coup. Intellectually I can completely relate to what you and Rider are saying…it makes perfect sense as it did during the Speight coup.
Perhaps living here has given me a different sense of the state of affairs or the riddle wrapped in the mystery wrapped in the enigma.
One of the aspects of the riddle is that the people in this country have a lot of fear. My simple sentences on this have as many layers as an onion. The Indians fear the Fijians, the Fijians fear for lack of a better term of never getting ahead or having finanacial security. In the past and still now other races have put some terrible labels on them of being stupid, lazy, cannibals etc. That is no truer the case then any generalizations that people hurl around about any particular race. But it hurts and it stays inside. So I suppose one might say they fear being powerless. They also aren’t comfortable being in the limelight in any negative way. The investors fear being deported. White people tend to fear dark people, just have any dark person climb into a white elevator and see everyone clutching their purses and wallets. Then they come to a country that has a lot of dark people. Then, of course money, there is this joke of how do you become a millionaire in Fiji. Ans: Arrive as a billionaire.
Basically even though the Fijians have a notorious reputation as a warring people, the Indians and the Fijians are really quite peaceful at heart. They just want to live their life with some blanket of security.
However, there are times these fears manifest themselves and don’t bring out the best in any of these races creating greed, anger, and jealousy.
So for these people to progress along the normal lines of making change like a vote of no confidence or demonstrations in the streets, their fear is not going to let it happen at least not for now. So things tend to simmer and simmer and then an event like this occurs that leaves the rest of the world scratching their heads.
In Fiji the majority understands the event perfectly and it is acceptable. Don’t get me wrong, they don’t like coups, but they like them more then them going into the limelight and making their feelings known which could have huge reprisals on a personal basis for them and leaving them holding the bag if their perceptions were wrong. Depending on the race it would have the other races coming down on their race full force in an indiscriminate way.
I believe what gave the SDL party the vote even though there are rumors that I admit that I can not substantiate that the election was rigged. But lets say it wasn’t, many people voted for the SDL party thinking that if Fijians were in charge there would be no coups. Clearly the Indian thing didn’t work and remember everyone wants security and an existence without fear.
This party comes in under the guise of unity which was a great concept and confidence builder to get non-Fijian races to vote them in. Previously in the Qarase administration things seemed to be going okay…not great, but okay and everything was slowly percolating upwards. So who wouldn’t vote for Unity and stability.
THEN…the unity wasn’t so hot, MC and Qarase were at odds a lot of the time…again division. The Qoliqoli bill was creating division in every segment. The previous coup gang coming into positions of power YIKES!!! VAT being raised, this and much more in 6 months time.
So the fear kicks in, one of which is if things could spiral so much in 6 months who has the time to discuss, in the middle of discussions something else could be pushed through. IN FB case Qarase refused to discuss any of it with him. Now after everything has probably reached the point of no return, Qarase wants to talk.
Generally the people of Fiji were not for a coup, that is a fact. The reason not being that they wanted their elected officials to stay in power, they just didn’t want to have to suffer the economic repurcussions…fair enough.
But now that it has happened, I seriously doubt there is going to be a bloody uprising over it. If you listen carefully to what people are saying in the media interviews in Fiji speak is, they want democracy restored very few say they want Qarase back in position. Democracy and Qarase are not one and the same.
So I believe democracy will be restored in this country because that is what the people want. I think or at least I hope that FB is aware of that, everything he says seems to point in that direction. There will be no bloody uprising because the repurcussions of this event looking like a bloody coup in international eyes is something no one wants if just purely for economic reasons, not to mention pride. The majority is unified on those two concepts. When Howard said the coup in Fiji was Brutal, uhhhhh that did not go down well with the populace who are trying their best to carry on and keep up appearances and show as a people they can unite and not go tropo for the sake of this country and its future. Which is why with the exception of Qarase is telling them to mind their own business. I suppose the peaceful reaction to this coup is this country’s way of showing a vote of no confidence. Intellectually I know that is after the fact, but as I said earlier there was no way they could do it before the fact. I know someone will say it is about the guns…but if Fiji really had a problem with it, guns would not stop them from bringing out the cane knives and whatever else they are adept at.
I take it you wont be buying
Mr Bananarama’s Greatest Hits Album featuring the synchronistic:
‘I Can’t Help It’
‘I Want You Back ‘
‘Cruel Summer ‘
Many thanks for the link, Nana.
I blame the Native Land Trust Board m’self. And those godawful pastries they used to serve at Morris Hedstrom’s coffee shop underneath the arches overlooking Nubukalou Creek.
Speaking as a former schoolmate of George Speight, I’d say Geoff H. and Fyodor’s takes are pretty much on the tabua. Not to mention the North West – South East economic divide on Viti Levu, inflamed by various long festering tribal enmities and the whole Lauan dynasty thing that Mara tried to inject into a modern body politic. Ratu Sir Lala Sukuna would have given all of them a clip around the ear with a three-legged stool quick smart.
Aloha also makes an interesting point about the lack of violence (so far). Fiji’s first coup happened 17 years after independence and, during that one and every one that followed, very few people got killed or even beaten up a lot. Compare and contrast with most underdeveloped countries outside the Pacific, especially in Africa and Asia, once their 19th century colonial masters formally retire dbroke and well-meaning (the Brits), left in high dudgeon (the Frogs) or were booted out first by the other colonial powers (the Krauts).
Perhaps because Fiji was the only geopolitical entity ever to ask to join the British Empire and perhaps because the Brits had pretty much refined Lugardism to its peak in Fiji.
Or perhaps because just about all Kai Vitis, like the folks of most mid-Pacific nations, have always understood it’s just us on a bunch of flyspeck islands in a great and sometimes very dangerous ocean and we have to get along to go along.
It’s the Pacific vibe. Truseup man.
And travel packages to the Coral Coast are gonna be dirt cheap this Xmas. Bonus!
And speaking of Western hard power intervention in Fiji, I’m reminded of David Lange’s comment after the 1987 coup:
“Send troops to Fiji? Are you kidding? Have you seen how they play rugby?”
Taking on the RFMF on their home ground would be even more stupid than telling a Gurkha he’s too pussy to pull his khukuri.
About time you showed up, Bula Boy of the Intellectual Status Quo.
Been following with interest “the views of Australia on Fiji”.
I suggest for those of you in Melbourne to come to this Public Forum on Fiji in Melbourne CBD, 6:30pm, Fri 15thDec06. Details are posted below:
Join us for a discussion on the Fiji coup and the return to democracy.
6.30pm., Friday 15 December, 2006 in Melbourne
Trades Hall, Corner Lygon Street and Victoria Street, Carlton
“Democratic rights in Fiji – the Fiji coup and the return to democracy”
On 5 December 2006, the commander of the Republic of Fiji Military Forces (RFMF) Commodore Voreqe (Frank) Bainimarama led a military coup to overthrow the government of Prime Minister Laisenia Qarase. The RFMF has disarmed police, sacked senior public servants and seized control of key government institutions.
There is widespread public condemnation of coup from the Great Council of Chiefs, NGOs, churches, unions and overseas governments. But how is the current crisis affecting local communities in Fiji?
Join us for a discussion on the Fiji coup and the return to democracy.
Speakers include:
- Mosese Waqa
Victoria University Pacific Islands Network
Global Partnership for the Prevention of Armed Conflict (GPPAC) – Pacific
- Nic Maclellan, Oxfam International
Venue:
Meeting room 1, Ground floor, Trades Hall
Victorian Trades Hall Council,
Corner Lygon Street and Victoria Street, Carlton (Enter off Victoria Street)
MELBOURNE CITY
For further information, contact Mosese on 0411343800 or Nic on 0421840100
Please circulate this to your friends and networks