Natapei was Prime Minister twice and Opposition leader several times during the course of his 32 year parliamentary career. He first entered parliament in 1983 as an MP for TAFEA outer islands. He later became an MP for the Port Vila constituency and has held his seat ever since.

He will be remembered as an honest and humble leader who did much for his constituency and the nation at large.

The Pacific Institute of Public Policy extends its deep condolences to his family and the nation and acknowledges that Vanuatu’s political life will be poorer without his presence.

Natapei was quietly spoken and forthright but rarely played the Big Man role so common in Melanesian politics.  He also achieved something rare – there was never a whiff of scandal or corruption associated with him and thus he will be remembered as a ‘clean skin’ and a man of quiet integrity who improved the body politic of Vanuatu’s parliamentary life.

He drew deeply from his Christian faith and championed the rights of others in the region. In particular he was a strong supporter of the West Papuans and spoke on their behalf in various international fora, including the United Nations. Only recently he expressed his belief that the West Papuans should be given full membership of the sub-regional Melanesian Spearhead Group (MSG).

Natapei was born in 1954 on Vanuatu’s only Polynesian outlier, Futuna, and together with former Prime Minister Moanna Carcasses is among the few Polynesians to have become MPs in this Melanesian country. 

He held a variety of parliamentary posts including Speaker of Parliament, Chairman of the Public Accounts Committee and Minister of Foreign Affairs. He was also President of the Vanua aku Party, the political party which brought independence to Vanuatu in 1980 under its founding father, Fr Walter Lini.

Tributes have flowed from the general public on the Yumi Tok Tok (YTS) page of facebook, a popular social media forum.

Arthur Knight posted: “RIP. Honorable Edward Natapei .. A great national leader and family man that struggled and toiled for Vanuatu’s development ….May God Bless your family and nation in this time of loss and sorrow ..Deepest Sympathy and Condolences.”

One of the administrators of YTS Julian Ligo has posted a moving tribute called “we see you” on their website:

“In all the trials and tribulation, in our path to finding a way to redemption, through our visions of a nation, you have lit the fire that needed to burn. You decided to mould a future through a child’s heart. You instilled a symbol of hope in a generation without patience. You became an icon on your last breath for making us believe we can lead and we see you.”

Recently deposed Prime Minister Joe Natuman praised Natapei saying: “He was a true leader of Vanuatu, a humble person, very genuine, kind and loving person who cared about people, particularly ordinary people. He was a true leader of Vanuatu, a humble person, very genuine, kind and loving person.”

“He will be remembered as a person who was really trying to make sure that people have a better life in Vanuatu”.

Its a sombre moment as the country begins celebrating its 35th independence.

A State funeral will be held on July 31^st.

Caption: Edward Nipake Natapei Tuta Fanua`araki (center) with Australian MP Stephen Smith (left) and former Secretary-General of the Pacific Islands Forum Secretariat (PIFS) Tuiloma Neroni Slade (right).

“The Pacific Ocean is a vital regulator of climate for the whole world and needs a voice.  We, the Polynesian Leaders Group, are the voice for the Pacific Ocean, and wish to carry our strategic vision to deal with the adverse effects of climate change by limiting global warming below 1.5 (degrees Celsius) and having access to tools and means to adapt to the adverse impacts caused by climate change.”

The latest gathering of the Polynesian Leaders Group (PLG) have met in French Polynesia and issued the Taputapuatea Declaration demanding action to keep global land temperature rise at no more than 1.5 degrees Celsius by the year 2100.

The group represents Samoa, Tonga, Tahiti and French Polynesia, Niue, the Cook Islands, Tokelau and Tuvalu.

Their leaders say that their collective EEZs amount to 10 million square kilometres and is one of the biggest carbon sinks in the world, like the largest forests. The full declaration can be downloaded from the Samoan government website.

Acknowledging their vulnerabilities, the declaration implores:

“We want the voice of the Polynesians to be heard at the COP21 in Paris with regards to the intensification of extreme weather events, the loss of territorial integrity, the displacements of populations, the deterioration of our natural and cultural heritage and the management of our common ocean.

We, the Polynesian Leaders Group, state that our islands and peoples are at the frontline of devastation from climate change.

We are victims of climate change. We must be heard. We call for justice and our right of survival.”

Their urgent appeal comes amid dire warnings from a new report by former NASA climate scientist James Hansen and 16 colleagues which claim that:

Glaciers in Greenland and Antarctica will melt 10 times faster than previous consensus estimates, resulting in sea level rise of at least 10 feet in as little as 50 years.

Despite Pacific islanders taking the lead on establishing renewable energy economies at home and demanding action on climate change internationally, they know little can be done to keep targets under 2 degrees if the big players – the US, China and India – don’t get serious. They are also disappointed that two of their most important Pacific partners, Australia and New Zealand, are currently ruled by conservative governments that are paying little more than lip service to climate change and appear to be hostage to the fossil fuel industry.

Australian Prime Minister Tony Abbott’s recent attempts to cut funding to renewable energy subsidies for solar and wind power, after scrapping the carbon tax on polluters, continue to outrage social and business commentators, even drawing criticism from fellow conservative politicians in the UK.

Aside from the Polynesian declaration, Micronesian leaders are also on the front foot, asking that any looming UN climate deal must be “shorter and clearer”.

“It should be something that people can understand, be able to work with and negotiate from,” said chief diplomat from the Marshall Islanda, Tony de Brum. As this article suggests: “the current version of the draft text is a bewildering 85-page list of options, incorporating the demands of the nearly 200 nations participating in the process.”

Tony de Brum is also named in this list as among the top officials currently working in climate change diplomacy.

France, as host for the 2015 summit in December this year, is mindful it does not want its Paris summit to be characterized by failure like the Copenhagen summit was in 2009, and has been spending diplomatic capital to bring various parties together behind the scenes.

France and the UN face a big challenge bringing the big emitters to some kind of binding agreement, but they will have the Pacific nations on side, as Pacific leaders fight to have their voices heard.

So Australia’s proposed decision to ban the importation of kava has outraged many across the Pacific, none more so than among the tens of thousands of islanders who live in Australia and enjoy a quiet shell from time to time. Kava is not just a product, it is part of kastom and culture; a beverage that acts as social glue, a way to commune with ancestral spirits and one that binds communities together. Important social and political decisions are made around a kava bowl. Imagine Australians being told they couldn’t drink beer anymore because some in their community can’t handle their grog.

The Abbott government thinks it is doing the right thing to protect its Aboriginal and Torres Strait island community from abusing kava. These are communities who already suffer from high rates of alcoholism and domestic violence and there is a persuasive argument to protect them from further ‘drugs’. But is an outright ban the only way? The decision to do so further underlines how little Australia regards its Pacific island community at home and its relations with neighboring island countries, for whom kava is part of their identity and a major export.

It will also hit businesses across the region, not just Australia. Cameron McLeod is an Australian entrepreneur who runs the Kava Emporium in Vanuatu. He says the ban will be devastating for his business and the farmers and communities he sources from.

‘Approximately 80 per cent of our customers are Australian tourists and a further 80 per cent of sales to these customers are kava. Obviously if the ban is put into place we will have to close our doors. However it is not just about The Kava Emporium (we employ 5 sales staff and 3 production staff), but the flow onto the islands that we source kava from in Tanna and Epi. The money used from our purchasing of kava goes back into the communities to pay for essential services such as school fees.’

Every year Australian aid money flows to a variety of workshops, consultants and reports all tasked with helping build export products for the islands, since their two-way trade is always vastly one-sided in Australia’s favour. And yet the one unique product from the Pacific with major export potential – kava – struggles to get beyond a Pacific island market. Before a scare campaign caused a temporary ban, kava was a USD$100 million business in the 1990s. The EU and US lifted their temporary ban on kava some time ago and no long term detrimental health effects have been proven. Quality control is important – those exporting Vanuatu kava only export the four ‘noble’ varieties, which have no side effects. In a world awash with serious drugs, the natural, non-alcoholic, non psychotropic, non-addictive kava is about as mild as you can get.

The problem in indigenous communities in Australia is that there was never any cultural history of using it, so it is an introduced drug as much as alcohol and tobacco. Also the quality of dried and powdered kava brought into those communities is nowhere near as good as fresh kava drunk in the islands.

Kirk Huffman helped found the Vanuatu Cultural Centre and currently works at the Australian Museum. He is a regular imbiber of kava and is dismayed at the sudden ban and its insensitivity to the wider Pacific community.

‘Rather than just a knee-jerk ban, why doesn’t the government create an exchange mechanism so Aboriginal communities understand how kava is used properly within island communities. You could bring down chiefs from Vanuatu and Fiji to go into the Aboriginal communities and talk to them about using it in kastomary ways, and not abuse it like it is just another drug.’

‘Alternatively, take Aboriginal elders up to the islands so they see how it is done responsibly in island communities. Maybe you only have kava available in ‘dry’ communities as an incentive for people to get off the grog and enjoy the peace that comes with kava. Let’s think constructively and find a way forward rather than just banning it. Let’s face it, alcohol abuse is far worse and this kava ban will damage Australia’s standing in the region’.

Huffman also points out that Australian companies are already producing kava pills to relieve stress and anxiety as a natural alternative to Prozac and other anti-depressives, so there is some inconsistency in policy. If Australia does value its relations with Pacific island communities it needs to see kava in a wider sense, understanding kava is not just a drink, but cultural too, and come up with a more nuanced approach. Why not engage the Pacific community to help solve this problem in Australia’s indigenous communities?

A petition has already started to challenge the ban while others are finding the lighter side of the ban.

In a speech during a summit of national leaders, Mr O’Neill said it was time to speak about the oppression of ‘our brothers and sisters in West Papua’.

‘Sometimes, we forget our own families, our own brothers, especially those in West Papua. I think as a country, the time has come to speak for our people about the oppression there. Pictures of brutality of our people appear daily on the social media and yet, we take no notice. We have the moral obligation to speak for those who are not allowed to talk. We must be the eyes for those who are blindfolded.’

‘Again, Papua New Guinea as a regional leader, we must take the lead in having mature discussions, with our friends and more so, in an engaging manner.’

PM O’Neill’s comments follow the application by the newly unified West Papuan movement, the United Liberation Movement of West Papua (ULMWP), which on Wednesday resubmitted its application for membership to the MSG. The afternoon ceremony at the MSG Secretariat in Port Vila made it clear that this was not to be a quiet handing over of prepared documents to the reception desk. The Secretariat laid on a red carpet welcome for the gathered West Papuan leaders with full kastom and encouraging words by Secretariat staff. Leaders on all sides were visibly moved by event, following emotional speeches by the ULMWP Secretary General Octo Mote and Benny Wenda who said “we have struggled for more than 50 years to get to this day”.

As part of the ceremony, ULMWP leader Octo Mote did not hand the application directly to MSG Director General Peter Forau, but to Vanuatu’s deputy Prime Minister Ham Lini, in recognition of Vanuatu’s strong support in their struggle. Mr Lini then formally handed the documents to Mr Forau on behalf of the ULMWP and Vanuatu government.

Melanesian kastom was on full display; gifts of woven mats and string bags were exchanged, pigs were killed and a feast prepared, traditional dancers and tam tam drums rang out and prayers were offered up for the West Papuan cause.

Now it is up to the leaders of PNG, Vanuatu, Fiji, Solomon Islands and the FLNKS of New Caledonia to decide on bringing the West Papuans into the Melanesian family. It has been a divisive issue for many years and Indonesia has done all it can to split regional solidarity by offering all kinds of inducements to national leaders. At varying times, PNG, Fiji and Solomon Islands have all succumbed to Indonesian ‘sugar’, while Vanuatu and the Kanaks of New Caledonia have remained solidly behind the Papuans.

West Papua’s membership will be decided at a meeting of regional leaders in the Solomon Islands to be held in June, however, whispers from the MSG Secretariat suggest that the issue may be decided even earlier with talk of an imminent meeting of leaders on this issue alone.

Few underestimate Indonesia’s ability to work behind the scenes to frustrate regional solidarity on this issue, and much will depend on PNG and Fiji’s leaders agreement. Indonesia dangles the carrot of ASEAN membership to PNG, while Fiji has found it useful to forge closer ties with Jakarta during its stoush with Australia and New Zealand. Yet even these two seem to be finding it harder to justify supporting Indonesia when it is doing so little to change its brutal policies in West Papua. The killings continue and newly elected President Jokowi has offered little more than rhetoric in his bid to woo the West Papuans after decades of neglect and oppression. Foreign media remain banned despite pledges from Jokowi to change this during his election campaign.

PNG’s strong statement on human rights in West Papua does not directly endorse the ULMWP application, but it does send a signal that Indonesia cannot continue with business as usual. Cynics might link Prime Minister O’Neill’s comments to the fact that his 30 month grace-period as PM is over now and he needs the support of as many MPs as he can get to avoid any looming motions of no-confidence. Many of PNG’s MPs are pro-West Papuan, including Port Moresby Governor Powes Parkop, so the West Papuan issue is beginning to have domestic ramifications in PNG. There may also be an element of PNG trying to claw back some regional leadership given Vanuatu’s bold leadership on this issue and Fiji’s growing diplomatic clout in the international arena, having recently hosted both the Indian and Chinese presidents. There has been some on-going competitiveness and even hostility between PNG and Fiji over the past year on a variety of issues.

Pressure is on Fiji’s Prime Minister Bainimarama now to show whether he values Melanesian solidarity and decolonisation above a pragmatic relationship with Indonesia, which has put him at odds within the region.

ULMWP Sec Gen Mote believes that “the Melanesian family of nations is not complete without West Papua”, something endorsed by Vanuatu’s deputy PM Lini on the day. During the handover ceremony, Mr Lini quoted his brother, Vanuatu’s founding father, Fr. Walter Lini, who said decades ago: ‘Vanuatu is not totally free until other colonized people in the region are politically freed.’

Whether the rest of Melanesia agrees is soon to be tested again.

In kastom ceremonies that included pig-killing and gifts of calico, kava and woven mats, West Papuan leaders embraced each other in reconciliation and unity while the Prime Minister of Vanuatu, church groups and chiefs looked on. The unification meeting was facilitated by the Pacific Council of Churches.

The new organisation unites the three main organisations and several smaller ones who have long struggled for independence. By coming together to present a united front, they hope to re-submit a fresh application for membership of the Melanesian Spearhead Group (MSG) as well as countering Indonesian claims that the West Papuan groups are divided. The divisions have tended to be more about personalities than any real policy differences since all the groups have been pushing for the same thing: independence from Indonesia. But the apparent differences had sown some confusion and gave cover to Fiji and others in the region to say the movement was not united and therefore undeserving of a seat at the MSG so far.

This narrative has been challenged by other leaders in the region such as the Vanuatu Prime Minister Joe Natuman who said that the very fact the West Papuans are a Melanesian people gives them the automatic right to be represented by the MSG.

Following the unification gathering, newly elected spokesperson for the ULMWP Benny Wenda said “We West Papuans are united in one group and one struggle now.” Wenda claimed this was the most important gathering of West Papuan leaders since the struggle began 52 years ago.

The key groups to have united include the Federal Republic of West Papua (NRFPB); National Coalition for Liberation (WPNCL) and National Parliament of West Papua (NPWP), which incorporates the KPNB (National Committee for West Papua). An external secretariat consisting of five elected members from the various groups will now co-ordinate the ULMWP. Octovianus Mote, a former journalist who has been based in the US for many years, has been elected General Secretary of the ULMWP. Benny Wenda is the spokesperson and the other three elected members are Rex Rumakiek, Leone Tangahma and Jacob Rumbiak.

General Secretary Mote said at the close of the unification meeting “I am honoured to be elected and very happy we are now all united. The ULMWP is now the only recognised co-ordinating body to lead the campaign for MSG membership and continue the campaign for independence from Indonesia.”

In a speech outside the Chief’s Nakamal (the hut which serves as a focal point for all the chiefs of Vanuatu), Mote spoke of the urgency of their situation. He quoted economist Dr Jim Elmslie whose demographic projections suggest that Papuans will comprise only 29% of the population by 2020, highlighting the massive transmigration program that continue to bring settlers in from around Indonesia. Indigenous Papuans are already a minority in their own land – and Mote warned that once West Papua is fully “asianised” then PNG will be next.

PNG is already under sustained pressure from Indonesia, witnessed by the last minute blocking of a charter flight organised for 70 delegates, many of whom had travelled for weeks through the jungle of West Papua to reach PNG, from leaving Jackson’s airport in Port Moresby. Peter O’Neill’s PNG government had originally organised and paid for the charter to get delegates to the Vanuatu meeting but appears to have succumbed to Indonesian anger. In the end 5 of the 70 delegates marooned in Port Moresby found commercial flights and got to Port Vila in time for the final day’s signing ceremony, which became known as the Saralana Declaration.

While Indonesia dangles the carrot of “assistance” and supporting Fiji and PNG’s bid for ASEAN membership, other Melanesian nations  are not so easily bought. No-one could accuse Vanuatu or its successive Prime Ministers of bowing to Indonesian pressure – the issue has bi-partisan support there and has become a domestic political issue. Vanuatu’s current Prime Minister Joe Natuman gave full state support for the West Papuan gathering saying he didn’t care if Indonesia cut diplomatic relations with Vanuatu.

On December 1^st, the day West Papuans traditionally celebrate their independence day, Vanuatu’s leaders joined a large rally of supporters who marched through the capital Port Vila, led by the VMF (Vanuatu Mobile Force) marching band in uniform. Prime Minister Natuman was present at a flag raising ceremony which hoisted both the Vanuatu flag and West Papuan “Morning Star” independence flag. Indonesia promptly sent a “warning” to Vanuatu with unspecified threats.

West Papuan delegates were moved by Vanuatu’s support and spoke emotionally about ongoing atrocities and repression in their homeland. Even as they united, reports of more killings surfaced this week.

General Secretary Mote told me the next step is for the new movement to re-submit their MSG application for membership between February and March next year, with MSG leaders expected to make a decision when they meet in the Solomon Islands in June 2015.

No doubt some internal tensions will remain, given the tribal diversity of West Papua and its traditionally de-centralised leadership, but the newly unified movement under the ULMWP represents the best chance yet for the Papuans to continue building momentum for their struggle.

The latter follows the notion that “you cannot have development without peace”  – peace in all its manifestations – and reflects new approaches towards “human security” being built into the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), soon to replace the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) in 2015.

The workshop brought together around 70 delegates from all over the Pacific, including defence, police, NGOs and government officials. Chatham House rules prevents me from directly quoting the participants, however some key themes emerged which are worth highlighting.

There was a broad consensus that the basic framework of regional security architecture was in place, that mechanisms such as the Biketawa Declaration were there to trigger regional responses to national problems if needed. Growing co-ordination by officials at the national, sub-regional (such as the MSG) and regional level (such as the PIF) suggest that the necessary linkages are there to deal with humanitarian and natural disasters as well as possible peacekeeping interventions in the event of conflict. However, while the regional mechanisms may be in place, problems remain at the national and local level to better manage cycles of payback violence, tribal war, resource exploitation and personal security issues such as stemming domestic violence.

A decade after the regional Peace Monitoring Group (PMG) oversaw Bougainville’s transition from war to peace, plus the RAMSI operation in the neighbouring Solomon Islands, lessons have been learnt about how to manage such interventions. RAMSI has its critics, particularly since it was not structured to actually deal with the “root causes” of the ethnic tension in the Solomons, however it did stabilize a situation that was spinning out of control and provided needed space to rebuild respect for governing institutions.

The peace process on Bougainville might be seen as the gold standard so far: a case of regional partners, led by Australia and New Zealand, providing unarmed troops to oversee a rapid demilitarization, using kastom reconciliation processes to maintain peace. It is the second point which has been key to its success. Rather than “imposing” peace like in many UN interventions, the unarmed PMG on Bougainville rightly saw that only through local ownership would the mission succeed, by creating the space necessary to allow chiefs and kastom leaders to use kastom reconciliation processes to flourish. This included many ceremonies that saw opposing militants symbolically break bows and arrows, chew beetlenut together and spit into holes which were then covered up; another symbolic gesture of burying their differences.

Traditional reconciliation processes often take years, even decades. Today, more than 15 years after the war ended, kastom reconciliation ceremonies in various communities are still taking place, underlining the need for national governments to maintain on-going peace-building measures. Many countries in our region have not invested enough in the idea of maintaining peace and internal cohesion – preventative measures -leading to perhaps too much crisis management when tensions do flare.

Approaches to regional peacekeeping and national peace-building are important if the Pacific is to better manage its periodic disasters – natural and man made. Both the MSG and others in the region are examining the possibility of creating a permanent regional peace keeping / disaster response force that can mobilized quickly. While the MSG force would be drawn only from the Melanesian nations, Australia and the PIF are also looking to establish a regional training center in the Pacific to allow for a wider variety of Pacific police and soldiers to be trained up to global standards and be able to participate in global UN peacekeeping operations.

Conventional threats and flashpoints were identified at the workshop – such as tension in the South China Sea and the ongoing conflict in West Papua, but many speakers were keen to highlight non-conventional threats to the Pacific, ranging from climate change impacts to the epidemic of obesity and non-communicable diseases (NCDs), to community policing and domestic violence concerns.

What was interesting to note is the growing acceptance in the security sector of civil society engagement and a more holistic approach to national security. Until recently, policy-making in the security area was the preserve of the uniformed services and government ministers. Now the MSG has an advisor to support national “wellbeing” indicators, the PIF has a conflict prevention advisor and a “human security framework” developed by civil society is being integrated into national security policy in places like Fiji.

This is not about doing warm and fuzzy, this is about ensuring governments at all levels are better equipped to deal with grassroots security concerns – particularly around resource exploitation, ethnic tension and domestic violence – as much as managing grand chess moves in regional geopolitics by the major powers.

It seems fitting that after embedding with Pacific island troops in various armies, I end up queuing for the Dubai connection with a gaggle of Australian and Fijian military contractors, all in civilian clothes. Their body language gives them away, and I soon learn that they are all ex-Special Forces guys, now doing private security contracts to provide “close body protection” jobs – ie bodyguards – for Afghan leaders. Their 2 month gigs, on rotation, are high risk but also highly paid – hence the attraction. But it comes at a cost.

I see frayed nerves in all their eyes and a hunger to be up in international airspace, safe and away. When the pilot threatens to turn the aircraft back to the terminal because some Afghan passengers keep getting up to adjust their overhead baggage when the plane is readying for takeoff, one of the Aussie contractors jumps up from his seat and yells “sit down!” with such force that the message seems to get through. At this point, all the contractors can think about is getting up and away from here, downing their first beer in two months, and moving into a new headspace. Kabul’s dry, mudbrick sprawl disappears below as we ascend to the clouds and you can feel the anxiety of weeks and months begin to fall away. Characteristically, the Aussies order themselves drink after drink from the flight stewardess while their Fijian colleague retreats quietly into a book.

“Bloody good soldiers those Fijians” says the Aussie next to me, nodding in his mate’s direction. After a few drinks he opens up more, talking about his risky job and how he misses the beach at home. I remark how tough it must be on his wife and family when he goes away – and comes back.

“Yes it is hard on everyone. The problem is you can never really talk to your missus about what goes on when you are deployed to places like this. I have tried before and she tries to understand, but the gulf of understanding is just too big and I realized there is just no point in talking about what we go through with anyone who hasn’t been there, done that. I know that it creates distance between us and it hurts, but I just can’t find anyway around it so we don’t talk about it much. You just have to carry the experience with you and learn to live with yourself and not shut yourself off from those closest to you.”

Wars don’t end when a soldier comes home. It is often the start of a whole new psychological battle for soldiers to cope with their experience, to find peace within themselves long after their deployment has finished. Too often this internal struggle impacts on those around them, among friends and loved ones trying to reach through the fog of PTSD (post traumatic stress disorder) to connect with their returned friend who isn’t quite “there” when they come back.

Many soldiers are resilient and will get on with their personal and professional lives, feeling strengthened by their military experience. But a growing number of returned vets are not coping, particularly those who have returned from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. There are shocking statistics coming from the US on veteran suicide, with reports suggesting 22 vets every day are taking their own lives in the US, but this figure has been put into better context in followup reports.

Underlining the tragedy is that more vets have killed themselves in recent years than the 4000-plus killed in combat in Iraq. Australia has also seen a spike in PTSD cases flowing from its involvement, mirroring the US. There have been sad cases like the ADF captain who mysteriously went up a mountain in the US and froze to death, deliberately, as if in a trance. These wars since 2001 appear to have caused more PTSD cases than before and psychiatrists are trying to work out why.

Some speak of the “accumulative effect” that several deployments create. Others speak to the impact of being involved in “wars of choice” like Iraq and Afghanistan compared to the experience of vets who fought “wars of necessity” like in WW2.

Given such statistics on vet suicide, there is little doubt modern armies like the US, UK and Australia are putting much more resources into helping vets cope. They are trying to alleviate the stigma attached to mental health issues and recognize PTSD as an ongoing duty of care, not something to be hidden away and ignored. To that end there have been some interesting new methods, ranging from treating depressed soldiers with drugs like MDMA (ecstasy) in the US, to giving army dogs to depressed Aussie vets to look after once home.

How do the Guam Battalion troops cope and Pacific island soldiers more generally?

Before leaving Kabul, I interviewed the Battalion Commander, Colonel Michael Tougher and asked him about this.

It is something I am concerned about and constantly monitoring. The army has got better at dealing with this and we have deployed a unit psychiatrist to keep an eye on the soldiers and see what they go through in the field. Anecdotally our island troops seem to cope better than mainland (US) troops. There seems to be an island thing, part of their culture, that makes islanders very open and they feel they are all part of a family and those close-knit bonds will remain when they go home. That probably helps them process what they have gone through.

I half joke that the island way  – having a few drinks over a bbq and talking it through with your mates – might actually be better than having islanders sit alone on a shrink’s couch in a faraway city, especially when the psychiatrist has no experience of war and keeps asking “profiling” questions to fit their diagnostic box.

Yes I think you are right. As long as our guys have their strong sense of community around them and a chance to process their emotions, even over a few drinks, they will be ok. Islanders also pride themselves on their warrior tradition so there is a long history of them engaging in war and then going back to their island life and singing and laughing with family and friends. We will obviously be keeping an eye on our guys when they return so they can readjust to life back home again.

It turns out that there have been a few incidents in-country and a couple of guys sent home with “issues” but on the whole, Guam Battalion is unlikely to see the same terrible suicide statistics as others. 6 months after their deployment finished, however, there are still a number of Guam Battalion soldiers still receiving treatment in Hawaii for PTSD and other issues. There has also been concerns raised about the functioning of Veteran’s Affairs in the US, while in Australia, some have questioned funding priorities when hundreds of millions of dollars are to be spent this year on WW1 commemorations when many Aussie vets of recent wars like Afghanistan are struggling with health and employment issues. Private organisations like Soldier On are doing important work to fill the gap and raise awareness.

Many Pacific island nations already struggle with providing public health care. How are they able to cope with an influx of damaged vets and contractors? This is a public policy issue for governments in Micronesia, Hawaii and Fiji to look deeper into as the true cost of involvement in recent wars touches Pacific communities well beyond the battlefield.

Meanwhile significant developments on West Papua’s application to join the Melanesian Spearhead Group (MSG) have also played out in the special MSG leader’s summit held recently in PNG. Although initial analysis suggested a set back for West Papuan membership based on the call for WPNCL (West Papua National Coalition for Liberation) to withdraw its application, the official MSG communiqué asks that a new application be submitted which represents all the West Papuan groups. The full Communique is here while the relevant section made in “Decisions”, is where the leaders noted in section 8:

(ii) Agreed to invite all groups to form an inclusive and united umbrella group in consultation with Indonesia to work on submitting a fresh application.

Although some West Papuan supporters are concerned about implications in the words “in consultation with Indonesia”, those close to the deliberations say Indonesia, as only an Observer member, cannot veto or make decisions on these next steps, even as it tries to influence it.

Last week in Port Vila meetings took place between WPNCL leaders Andy Ayamiseba and John Ondawami, together with a senior representative of the Federal Republic of West Papua grouping, Marcus Haluk. Haluk has been appointed Chairman of the Working Group for Reconciliation, which will oversee the establishment of a unified umbrella group incorporating the 3 main pro-independence groups; WPNCL, Federal Republic of West Papua, and the National Committee for West Papua (KNPB).

Haluk and the WPNCL leaders say they are committed to working together to establish a unified structure and that this process had been underway even before the latest MSG request. This issue of unity between competing groups has been a stumbling block for West Papua over many years but the opportunity for an MSG seat is driving momentum towards unity now. All the groups say they are now working towards this outcome. When asked if there were any ideological differences between them or whether it was all about competing personalities, Haluk said:

“There are no ideological or political differences between us. We are all working towards the same goal – independence. You can say that the rivalry that has existed between us is only to see who can be first and who can be most effective in getting there”.

The only condition to being part of the new umbrella group is to be pro-independence. Pro-autonomy Papuans like Franz Albert Joku and Nik Messet will not be invited to join.

“They don’t represent any Papuan groups, only themselves” said Haluk. “As for me, I come from the Dani tribe, the largest tribe in West Papua which has half a million people and they all support independence.  Not just our tribe, but 99% of all Papuans support independence.”

Despite being only an Observer Member of the MSG, Indonesia has mobilized much diplomatic and financial capital recently to woo the Melanesian states in an attempt to keep West Papua off the agenda and deny them an MSG seat. Fiji in particular has acted as Indonesia’s proxy, pushing Jakarta’s diplomatic line and attempting to maneuver MSG decisions in Indonesia’s favour, such as the controversial Foreign Ministers visit to West Papua on a “fact-finding mission” earlier this year that lasted only a few hours and prevented delegates from meeting anyone on the ground who was not pro-Indonesian. Vanuatu on principle refused to be part of the trip.

Marcus Haluk, Secretary of the Federal Republic of West Papua

“This is Melanesian diplomacy” laughs Andy Ayamiseba. “Indonesia can try to bribe Melanesian countries but in the end “blood is thicker than water”. Just because PNG, Solomons and Fiji have taken Indonesian money does not mean they will support Indonesia’s agenda”.

How should we read the fact that Fiji was not present to sign the latest communiqué?

“When they realized that the MSG, in its wisdom, would withdraw WPNCL’s application but at the same time ask for a new application once there is a new united umbrella group, I think Fiji realized it was outmaneuvered and didn’t want to lose face by being there” says Ayamiseba.

Indeed it is hard to see how Melanesia can benefit meaningfully from Indonesia at a time when its military still enjoys complete impunity in its violent subjugation of West Papua and other Melanesians in Indonesia. For all the talk of Indonesian democracy, the fact is democracy does not exist anywhere east of Bali. Keeping the entire province of West Papua off limits to foreign media and NGOs and controlled by a military fiefdom does not suggest any democratic values. Indonesia’s police and military forces have long been regarded among the most brutal and corrupt in the world, hardly offering a “model” for Melanesia’s uniformed services to follow; its former dictator Suharto is officially the wealthiest dictator in modern history, having looted US$70 billion over his 30 year tenure. His former son-in-law Prabowo, if elected, will likely protect and entrench the oligarchy there and threatens to wind back any democratic progress made since the fall of Suharto.

Even as President SBY handed a cheque for $20 million to the PIDF during his visit to Fiji for climate change projects, reports emerged claiming the world’s worst illegal logging is no longer by Brazil in the Amazon, but in Indonesia. Much of this illegal logging is overseen by local military commanders.  There is clearly a policy disconnect when providing climate change funds to the Pacific at the same time you are allowing massive deforestation at home when forests are the best natural carbon sinks available.

While it is understandable that over the decades PNG, as a neighbor, has sought to minimize friction with its giant neighbour Indonesia perhaps out of fear, Fiji’s position is more puzzling. Many in the region support Fiji’s attempts to sort out its own domestic politics and be allowed to do so, but Fiji’s naked self-interest in pushing Indonesian policy (even as it kills fellow Melanesians) regionally, not just domestically, seems unworthy of a nation like Fiji aspiring to regional leadership.

In late August, Vanuatu will host an international gathering of all the major West Papuan groups in an effort to help them unify and resubmit a fresh application for MSG membership.

Indonesia is expected to know the outcome of its election by July 22.

2 May 2014

This morning the Pacific Institute of Public Policy (PiPP) held the second of its Eminent Speakers Series at the Holiday Inn in Port Vila.

Vanuatu’s newly appointed ambassador to the United Nations, H.E. Odo Tevi, was the guest speaker and he focused his speech on the transitioning of Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) to Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in 2015.

Ambassador Tevi highlighted the need for a stronger Pacific voice at the UN in helping to formulate the key elements of the SDGs, as well as calling on countries like Vanuatu to focus on strengthening their national institutions.

“We now have the opportunity to shape our collective future, and in doing so we must take ownership of our development challenges and opportunities and where there are factors impeding our development that are beyond our control we must articulate our expectations of the global community.”

He noted the post-2015 development agenda will not be business as usual and the biggest challenge is for nations like Vanuatu to “take ownership” of the new goals.

“There is a clear call for a transformative development agenda. One that puts the primary focus back on national ownership. Our national development frameworks must reflect our national priorities and circumstances. They should be aligned with, but not be subordinate to, global goals” Ambassador Tevi said.

As usual there were some lively questions from the audience that included the need to address gender balance, support the “80% of people who live in the rural areas” and factor in the emerging understanding of alternative indicators of poverty and affluence.

PiPP’s Eminent Speakers Series showcase some of the key thinkers in our region and these breakfast talks help policy makers and influencers at the national and regional level.

Ambassador Tevi’s full speech can be downloaded here and a video presentation will be on our website next week.

For more information please contact Kiery Manassah on:

kmanassah@pacificpolicy.org

PiPP exists to stimulate and support policy debate around the Pacific.