Since the Solomon Islands established diplomatic relations with China in 2019, the Pacific country has become a strategic arena for Beijing’s influence.

By capitalising on the economic fragility of the local media sector, China has stepped up conditional funding, editorial partnerships and influence programmes to disseminate its narratives.

Reporters Without Borders (RSF) calls on the Solomon Islands’ government to make the viability and independence of the media sector a priority.

One day in January 2024, Lloyd Loji, publisher of the Island Sun, one of the country’s leading dailies, reportedly received a call from a Chinese diplomat.

According to the investigative outlet In-depth Solomons, the diplomat expressed the embassy’s “concern” about an op-ed published that same day on the election of the new president of Taiwan and its implications for relations between China and Western countries.

At the end of the call, the Chinese diplomat explicitly asked the newspaper to relay articles he had sent, reflecting Beijing’s official position on regional affairs.

The Chinese diplomat did not stop at interfering in the editorial line of the Island Sun.

In-depth Solomons reports that he also emailed the owners and editors of the country’s main media outlets, urging them to adopt the Chinese narrative on the Taiwanese elections and sharing two articles he asked them to publish.

The Solomon Star, the other major daily of the Solomon Islands, duly published the articles supplied by the Chinese embassy. Both the Solomon Star and Island Sun depend on Chinese funding as the country’s media landscape is facing structural economic difficulties.

Economic precarity as Beijing’s gateway
With fewer than 700,000 inhabitants and a limited advertising market — which is increasingly dominated by social media companies — news organisations in this nation face structural economic hardship.

These vulnerabilities deepened during the covid-19 pandemic and the collapse of traditional press revenues which mostly consist of advertising, making external funding essential to survival, whether from Australia, China or the United States.

Unlike support from other foreign partners, Chinese assistance often comes with editorial conditions.

After 15 years as a journalist in the Solomon Islands, Priestley Habru — now a PhD candidate at the University of Adelaide — told RSF about the demands made by the Chinese embassy to Island Sun after he left the outlet. According to his network, after the diplomatic mission donated computers, the newsroom was instructed to “stop publishing articles on Taiwan’s President.”

An investigation by the Organised Crime and Corruption Reporting Project (OCCRP), an international investigative journalism network, also revealed that in 2022 the Solomon Star sought SI$1.15 million (about US$140,000) from China to modernise its infrastructure, pledging in return to promote Beijing’s image as the islands’ “most generous and trustworthy” partner.

Following revelations about attempts by Chinese diplomats to directly interfere with the Island Sun and the country’s leading media outlets in early 2024, Beijing appears to have adopted a more discreet approach.

Ofani Eremae, president of the Media Association of Solomon Islands (MASI), explained to RSF that several local outlets have signed agreements with Chinese state media to use the state media’s content — which is fully controlled by the Chinese authorities — free of charge.

In early 2026, CCTV+, China’s state-owned international video news service, also offered MASI and In-depth Solomons use of its raw video footage and live broadcast signals free of charge, and invited them to sign cooperation agreements. Both In-depth Solomons and MASI have not yet responded to the proposal.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Fijian Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka’s announcement this week that the island nation will open a diplomatic mission in Jerusalem has been labelled “an act of aggression” by Palestine.

On Tuesday, the Fiji government revealed that Cabinet had decided to locate its consulate in Jerusalem, which remains at the centre of the Palestine-Israel decades-long conflict.

According to an overwhelming United Nations General Assembly Resolution ES‑10/19 on 21 December 2017 (128-9), Israel’s claim to Jerusalem as capital of Israel is “null and void”.

Previous UN Security Council resolutions demarcated Jerusalem as the capital of the future state of Palestine.

The Fijian government said in a statement: “Necessary risk assessments will be undertaken by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Ministry of Defence, in consultation with relevant agencies, prior to and during the establishment process.”

Fiji and Israel established diplomatic relations in 1970 and have partnerships in security and peacekeeping, agriculture, and climate change.

In a Facebook post on Wednesday, Rabuka said he “received a phone call from my friend Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, expressing his gratitude for Fiji’s decision to open a diplomatic mission in Jerusalem.”

“Even though very brief, we reaffirmed our commitment to strengthening Fiji-Israel ties,” he said.

I commend the Republic of Fiji’s government for its historic decision to open an embassy in Jerusalem, the eternal capital of the Jewish people. Thank you, Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka @slrabuka, friend of Israel. Thank you Fiji! 🇮🇱🇫🇯 pic.twitter.com/IxCkjPnhQ6

— Gideon Sa’ar | גדעון סער (@gidonsaar) February 18, 2025

“I also took the opportunity to express my deepest condolences for the tragic events of October 7, 2023, when Hamas attacked innocent lives in Israel.

Palestine’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs condemned Rabuka’s decision and is demanding the Fijian government “immediately reverse this provocative decision.”

‘Violating international law’
“With this decision, Fiji becomes the seventh country to violate international law and UN resolutions regarding the city’s legal and political status and the rights of the Palestinian people,” it said in a statement.

The seven countries include Papua New Guinea.

The Palestinian Ministry of Foreign Affairs strongly condemns the decision of PM @slrabuka to relocate Fiji’s embassy to occupied #Jerusalem.

This move blatantly violates international law and UN resolutions, and places #Fiji on the wrong side of history. https://t.co/5x1bCECNXO

— Palestine Australia, Aotearoa NZ and Pacific (@PalestineAusNZ) February 19, 2025

“This decision is an act of aggression against the Palestinian people and their rights.

“It places Fiji on the wrong side of history, harms the chances of achieving peace based on the two-state solution, and represents unacceptable support for the occupation and its crimes.”

The statement added that Fiji’s move “blatantly defies UN resolutions at a time when the occupying power is escalating its attacks against Palestinians across all of the Palestinian Territory, attempting to displace them from their homeland.”

The ministry said that it would continue to take political, diplomatic, and legal action against countries that opened or moved their embassies to Jerusalem.

“It will work to hold them accountable for their unjustified actions against the Palestinian people and their rights.”

In September 2024, Fiji was one of seven Pacific Island nations that voted against a United Nations resolution to end Israel’s occupation of Palestine.

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

COMMENTARY: By Ruth Cross Kwansing

We were polarised by the United States last week, but in the same way that a windscreen wiper distracts you from the rain, our Pacific news cycle and local coconut wireless became dominated by a whirlwind of speculation after New Zealand’s Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Affairs Minister Winston Peters announced a review of New Zealand’s aid to Kiribati.

This followed what was perceived as a snub by our President Taneti Maamau.

The New Zealand media, in its typical fashion, seized the opportunity to patronise Kiribati, and the familiar whispers about Chinese influence began to circulate.

Amidst this media manufactured drama, I found myself reflecting on “that” recent experience which offered stark contrast to the geopolitical noise.

We had the privilege of attending the ordination of a Catholic Priest in Onotoa, where the true spirit of Kiribati was exemplified in the splendour of simplicity. Despite limited resources, the island community, representing various faiths, came together to celebrate this sacred event with unparalleled joy, hilariousness and hospitality from silent hands that blessed you with love.

Hands that built thatched huts for us to sleep in, wove mats, cooked food, made pillows and hung bananas in maneabas to provide for guests from all over Kiribati and Nauru. Our President, himself a Protestant, had prioritised and actively participated, embodying by example, the unity and peace that Bishop Simon Mani so eloquently spoke of.

We laughed, we cried, and we felt the spirit of our loving God.

Spirit of harmony
That spirit of harmony and hope we carried from recent experiences felt shaken overnight by news of New Zealand’s potential aid withdrawal. Social media in Kiribati erupted with questions and concerns, fuelled by an article claiming that New Zealand was halting aid due to President Maamau “snubbing” of Deputy Prime Minister Peters.

Importantly: President Maamau would never in a millennium intentionally “snub” New Zealand or any foreign minister. The reality is far more nuanced.

At the end of 2024, President Maamau announced to his Cabinet Ministers that he would delegate international bilateral engagements to Vice-President Dr Teuea Toatu or other Ministers and Ambassadors appropriately. Thereby enabling him to focus intently on domestic matters, including the workplan for our national necessities outlined in the KV20 vision and 149 deliverables of his party manifesto.

While the Vice-President was prepared to receive the New Zealand delegation, it seems Minister Peters was insistent on meeting with the President himself, leading to the cancellation of his trip.

This insistence on bypassing established protocol is not only unusual but also, well let’s just say it with as much love as possible: It’s disrespectful to Kiribati’s sovereignty.

It is also worth noting that the Deputy Prime Minister of Australia recently visited Kiribati and engaged with the Vice-President and Cabinet Ministers without any such reluctance.

New Zealand’s subsequent announcement of an aid review, including a potential threat to the $2 million funded RSE scheme, has understandably caused serious anxiety in Kiribati.

Devastating impact
The potential loss of funding for critical sectors like health, education, fisheries, economic development and climate resilience would of course have a devastating impact on our people.

After committing $102 million between 2021-2024 these are major threats to public health where $20 million was invested in initiatives like rebuilding the Betio Hospital, training doctors, building clinics, NCD strategic planning and more, $10 million in education, $4 million in developing the fisheries sector, it’s an expansive and highly impactful list of critical support for capacity strengthening to our country.

While New Zealand has every right to review its aid programme to Kiribati or any developing country, it is crucial that these kinds of decisions are based on genuine development processes and not used as a tool for political pressure.

Linking Pacific aid to access to political leaders sets a questionable precedent and undermines the principles of partnership, mutual respect and “mana” that underpins the inextricably linked relationships between Pacific nations.

The reference to potential impacts on I-Kiribati workers in New Zealand under the RSE scheme is particularly concerning. These hardworking individuals contribute significantly to the New Zealand economy in a mutually beneficial arrangement.

We deserve to be treated with fairness and respect, not weaponised to cut at the heart of what drives our political motivations — providing for our people, who are providing for our children.

Despite this unfortunate situation, I believe that dialogue and understanding along with truth and love will prevail.

Greater humility needed
In the spirit of the “effectiveness, inclusiveness, resilience, and sustainability” that upholds New Zealand’s own development principles, we should all revisit this issue with greater humility and a commitment to resolving such misunderstandings.

As a New Zealand-born, Australian/Tuvaluan, I-Kiribati politician representing the largest constituency in Kiribati, I have zero pride or ego and will never be too proud to beg for the needs of the people I serve, who placed their faith in a government that would put them first.

We would love to host Deputy Prime Minister Winston Peters and a New Zealand government delegation in Kiribati, and we are indescribably grateful for the kinds of support provided since we gained independence in 1979. Our history stretches back even further than that, when New Zealand’s agricultural industry was nourished by phosphate from Banaba, and we continue to treasure the intertwined links between our nations.

Let us prioritise cooperation and mutual respect over ego and political posturing. Let’s drink fresh coconuts and eat raw fish together and talk about how we can change the world by changing ourselves first.

The “tea party” of Pacific partnership must continue to strengthen, and deepen, ESPECIALLY when challenged to overcome misunderstandings. It should always be one where Pacific voices are heard and respected lovingly, while we work towards a collective vision of health, peace and prosperity for all.

But if development diplomacy ever fails, we’ll remember that I-Kiribati people are some of the most determined and resilient on this planet. Our ancestors navigated to these “isolated isles of the Pacific” surrounded by 3.5 million km of ocean and found “Tungaru” which means “a place of JOY”.

We arrived in this world with nothing, and we’ll leave it with nothing, and we get to live our whole lives not feeling sorry for ourselves in this island paradise of ours, this place of joy, where we are wealthy in ways that money cannot buy.

We will survive

Ruth Maryanne Cross Kwansing was elected an independent member of Parliament in Kiribati in 2024. She later joined the Tobwaan Kiribati Party.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

As the new year gets underway, now is the time to look ahead to what will be significant in the Pacific islands region. Chances are this part of the world will continue to be a focus for the media and commentariat who will view what happens through their own lenses.

However, more now than ever, it is imperative to see the events of the Pacific in their context, with the nuance that allows for them to be more fully understood.

The Pacific will play a small part in the year in which more than half of the global population will go to the polls. We have already seen Dr Hilda Heine sworn in as the 10th President of Marshall Islands following elections late last year.

Next cab off the rank is Tuvalu, with voting to take place at the end of January. Of particular interest here is how, if at all, a change of government might affect the future of the Falepili Union with Australia that was signed in November 2023.

Perhaps most closely watched will be the elections in Solomon Islands, scheduled to take place in April. The Sogavare government is now in caretaker mode, but a date for the polls is yet to be announced.

These are the first general elections since the controversial “switch” in 2019 which saw diplomatic relations between Solomon Islands and Taiwan come to an end and China established as a leading development and security partner for Sogavare’s government.

It is hard to know how significant this switch will be for voters more than three years down the track. Sogavare can point to last year’s Pacific Games as a stellar achievement for his government and one in which the support of China was key.

Largely irrelevant outside Honiara
But this is unlikely to have much resonance for those Solomon Islanders who live outside Honiara and for whom the games were largely irrelevant.

Other Pacific island countries holding elections this year are Palau (November) and Kiribati (date to be confirmed).

In addition, Vanuatu is expected to hold its first-ever referendum on proposed constitutional changes intended to address chronic political instability.

The issue of security will continue to be vexed in 2024 in the Pacific islands region. As we have seen in recent years, narratives around climate change and those centred on “traditional” security concerns will become increasingly enmeshed.

The apparent acceptance of the significance of climate change as a security threat by partners such as the US is no doubt welcome. However, it is not enough to assuage concern among those who warn against the increased militarisation of the region.

Preliminary findings from the Rules of Engagement project led by Associate Professor Anna Powles and I show that “defence diplomacy” has become an important aspect of international engagement with Pacific island countries. We can expect this to continue throughout this year.

We need to understand better the extent to which these engagements add to feelings of security and safety in Pacific communities and how, if at all, they influence how Pacific people feel about the relationships between their countries and their international partners.

Internal security threats
As we have seen already this year, internal security threats will be front of mind in Papua New Guinea, and likely elsewhere in the region. Given the mix of cost-of-living pressures, political instability, and a febrile (social) media environment fuelled by rumour and counter-rumour, maintaining social cohesion will become increasingly challenging.

With globalisation in retreat and geopolitical competition on the rise, there is every reason to expect that the high tempo of international strategic engagement with Pacific policymakers, businesses, civil society leaders, and communities will continue throughout 2024.

While this provides numerous opportunities to secure resources for development and other initiatives, it can also create a serious burden in terms of transaction costs, particularly for small resource-constrained administrations.

Last year, the government of Solomon Islands announced that it would have a “block out” period during which senior officials are unavailable to meet with visiting delegations. This is an approach that could be beneficial for other countries to preserve valuable time for budget preparation or key policy work.

At the regional level, the Pacific Islands Forum (PIF) is still in the process of determining how best to manage the increased attention the organisation is receiving from countries that want to become dialogue partners. There are currently six applications awaiting consideration (Denmark, Ecuador, Israel, Portugal, Saudi Arabia and Ukraine).

Last year at the PIF Leaders Meeting it was made clear that the ongoing review of regional architecture includes a refreshed framework for engagement with dialogue partners — one that is led and driven by Pacific priorities.

In conclusion, 2024 holds both challenges and opportunities for the Pacific islands region. With elections, security concerns, and regionalism on the agenda, policymakers, businesses, civil society leaders, and communities must work together to tackle these issues.

Tess Newton Cain is the project lead for the Pacific Hub at the Griffith Asia Institute and is an associate of the Development Policy Centre. The author’s Pacific Predictions have been produced annually since 2012. Republished under a Creative Commons licence.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz