Insights
In the midst of neocolonialism What are the threats to Pacific solidarity ?
The state of Pacific island solidarity in the midst of a serious crisis pertaining to climate change and the strategic competition between the United States and China seems to be weak . At a time when solidarity may be most needed , it seems to be most lacking . There are the natural distinctions and geographic divisions between the north and south Pacific .
There are the “ traditional colonial ” divisions of Polynesia , Micronesia and Melanesia . There is the issue about how to deal with Pacific island territories and fully independent nations .
In between , there are varieties of “ freely associated states ” which require some definition .
In the midst of this concern over solidarity , some Pacific island states want to make sure that they emphasize their “ solid ” independent status . This means that Pacific island territories could be included in some forums , but not all . It also means that freely associated states are sometimes seen as “ technically ” independent , but not fully . This remains a subtext , but not an openly discussed sentiment .
For many of the nations south of the equator , the U . S . -affiliated freely associated states are playing on the American team . Territories are on the bench . They aren ’ t even in the game , but some are eager to play .
What are the threats to this Pacific island solidarity ? Almost all threats are explained as being external rather than
By Robert A Underwood
internal . In the midst of dealing with climate change , many Pacific leaders are pushing Australia to adopt more aggressive measures to reduce their contribution to the carbon footprint . They are pushing Australia to accept “ loss and damage ” responsibility for climate change to date . In these conversations , Australia attracts a fair amount of negative commentary .
Although they may not be the main source of climate change , they are the biggest nation and polluter seen from nearby Pacific islands .
Both in the north and the south Pacific , there is some division about how to deal with the China-U . S . strategic competition . Some want to take advantage of the competition to secure more assistance . It is a logical but explosive approach . Almost all provide a kind of “ pox on both your houses ” approach even though most favor the United States . But even in the midst of this discussion in which the U . S . may be favored , the Americans come in for severe criticism .
The most common one is that the U . S . -Pacific Partnership initiative is underfunded . It needs to be more robust and the U . S . also needs to accept “ loss and damage ” for climate change . This kind of reparations approach to climate change is growing and each nation must assess how it will do with it . Both Australia and the United States are attracting their fair and unfair share of criticism .
When Gov . Lou Leon Guerrero articulated a desire to join the Pacific Islands Forum , it wasn ’ t long before this was characterized as an “ American gambit ”— a neocolonial move . Apparently , we are all continuing victims of the colonizer .
The role of these large nations is framed in conversations about “ neocolonialism ” and the desire to “ decolonize ” and enter into a “ postcolonial ” era . Almost everyone concedes that neocolonialism exists in a variety of forms . It comes in direct influence through ministries of foreign affairs , influence peddling through assistance programs , and indirect influence through trade and economic relations .
This raises the question about the nature of the “ solid ” independence of the Pacific island nations . Is any nation today truly independent ? Are they all dependent upon external nations ? While it is true that the entire world is interdependent , there are still some nations that are more dependent than others . Where do the Pacific islands stand in this continuum ?
Where do territories stand in this continuum ? Is independence a kind of continuum rather than an absolute category ? The nature of international relations today is constantly being redefined in light of globalization and global challenges . Sometimes , there is some spill over between territories and independent nations . The boundaries seem fungible and there seems to be some room for regional solidarity . This is most evident in Pacific-wide organizations like the Pacific Community or the Secretariat of the Pacific Regional Environmental Program .
But just when you think the trend is moving in a more connected region , the equator becomes a dividing line . Last year ’ s Micronesian move to disengage from the Pacific Island Forum was clearly generated by an internal disagreement . But it wasn ’ t long before it was given a “ neocolonial ” explanation .
When Guahan Gov . Lou Leon Guerrero articulated a desire to join the PIF , it wasn ’ t long before this was characterized as an “ American gambit ”— a neocolonial move . Apparently , we are all continuing victims of the colonizer . I get that . But there are times when we must understand that we are victims of our own actions .
It is true that the nation-state continues to be the building block of international relationships . That hasn ’ t quite changed yet . But in the midst of international relationships , organizations , NGOs , the internet and WhatsApp , it seems like a different reality is emerging . In a world where only a handful of nations are “ solidly ” independent , there is hope for territories yet .
Dr . Robert Underwood is the former president of the University of Guam and former member of the U . S . House of Representatives . Send feedback to anacletus2010 @ gmail . com .
The opinions expressed here are solely the author ' s and do not reflect the editorial position of the Pacific Island Times .
6