SPECIAL REPORT: By Scott Waide, RNZ Pacific PNG correspondent

The nauseating stench of dried blood hung in the air as we arrived in Karida village, a few kilometers outside of Tari in Papua New Guinea’s Hela province.

Through the landcruiser window, I could see two men carrying a corpse wrapped in blue cloth and a tarpaulin. They were walking towards the hastily dug graveyard.

This was July 2019.

A longstanding tribal fight by various factions in the Tagali area of the Hela province had triggered this attack. Several armed men came at dawn. The residents, mostly women and children, bore the brunt of the brutality.

The then Provincial Administrator, William Bando, advised us against travelling alone when we arrived in Tari. He requested a section of the PNG Defence Force to take us to Karida where the killings had happened less than 24 hours before.

Two men carrying the corpse, hesitated as we arrived with the soldiers. One of the soldiers ordered the men to disarm. The others who carried weapons fled into the nearby bush.

On the side of the road, the bodies of 15 women and one man lay tightly wrapped in cloth. The older men and women came out to meet the soldiers.

The village chief, Hokoko Minape, distraught by the unimaginable loss, wept beside the vehicle as he tried to explain what had happened.

“This, I have never seen in my life. This is new,” he said in Tok Pisin.

Complexity of tribal conflicts and media attention
For an outsider, the roots of tribal conflicts in Papua New Guinea are difficult to understand. There are myriad factors at play, including the province, district, tribe, clan and customs.

But what’s visible is the violence.

The conflicts are usually reported on when large numbers of people are killed. The intense media focus lasts for days . . . maybe a month . . . and then, news priorities shift in the daily grind of local and international coverage.

Some conflicts rage for years and sporadic payback killings continue. It is subtle as it doesn’t attract national attention. It is insidious and cancerous — slowly destroying families and communities. In many instances, police record the one off murders as the result of alcohol related brawls or some other cause.

The tensions simmer just below boiling point. But it affects the education of children and dictates where people congregate and who they associate with.

Although, the villagers at Karida were not directly involved in the fighting, they were accused of providing refuge to people who fled from neighboring villagers. The attackers came looking for the refugees and found women and children instead.

The Deputy Commissioner for Police responsible for specialist operations, Donald Yamasombi, who has personally investigated instances of arms smuggling, said the traditional trade of drugs for guns along the eastern and southern borders of Papua New Guinea is largely a thing of the past.

“People are paying cash for guns. They are bringing in the weapons and then legitimising them through licensing,” Yamasombi said. “The businessmen who fund them actually run legitimate businesses.”

The involvement of political players is a subject many will state only behind closed doors.

In the highlands, the hire men are a recent addition to the complex socio-political ecosystem of tribal and national politics. Political power and money have come to determine how hire men are used during elections. They are tools of intimidation and coercion. The occupation is a lucrative means of money making during what is supposed to be a “free and fair” electoral process.

“Money drives people to fight,” Yamasombi said. “Without the source of money, there would be no incentive. There is incentive to fight.”

Rules of war
At the end of elections, the hire men usually end up back in the communities and continue the cycle of violence.

In February, Papua New Guineans on social media watched in horror as the death toll from a tribal clash in Enga province rose from a few dozen to 70 in a space of a few hours as police retrieved bodies from nearby bushes.

The majority of the men killed were members of a tribe who had been ambushed as they staged an attack.

Traditional Engan society is highly structured. The Enga cultural center in the center of Wabag town, the Take Anda, documents the rules of war that dictated the conduct of warriors.

Traditionally, mass killings or killings in general were avoided. The economic cost of reparations were too high, the ongoing conflicts were always hard to manage and were, obviously, detrimental to both parties in the long run.

Engans, who I spoke to on the condition of anonymity, said high powered guns had changed the traditional dynamics.

Chiefs and elders who once commanded power and status were now replaced by younger men with money and the means to buy and own weapons. This has had a direct influence on provincial and national politics as well as traditional governance structures.

The unusual level of violence and the use of guns left many Papua New Guineans confused. Milne Bay province, widely known as a peaceful tourism hub, suffered a massive PR hit with embassies issuing travel warnings to their citizens.

In Pindiu, Morobe province, the widespread use of homemade weapons resulted in the deaths of a local peace officer and women and children in a long running conflict in 2015.

The Morobe Provincial Government sent mediators to Pindiu to facilitate peace negotiations. Provincial and national government are usually hesitant to intervene directly in tribal conflicts by arresting the perpetrators of violence.

This is largely due to the government’s inability to maintain security presence in tribal fighting areas for long periods.

Angoram killings
Two weeks ago, 26 women and children were killed in yet another attack in Angoram, East Sepik.

Five people have been arrested over the killings. But locals who did not wish to be named said the ring leaders of the gang of 30 are still at large.

Angoram is a classic example of a district that is difficult to police.

The villages are spread out over the vast wetlands of the Sepik River. While additional police from Wewak have been deployed, there is no real guarantee that the men and women who witnessed the violence will be protected if they choose to testify in court.

Will new legislations and policy help?
The Enga massacre dominated the February sitting of Parliament. Recent changes were made to gun laws and stricter penalties prescribed. But while legislators have responded, enforcement remains weak.

The killers of the 16 people at Karida remain at large. Many of those responsible for the massacre in Enga have not been arrested even with widely circulated video footage available on social media.

In April, the EU, UN and the PNG government hosted a seminar aimed at formulating a national gun control policy.

The seminar revisited recommendations made by former PNG Defence Force Commander, retired Major-General Jerry Singirok.

One of the recommendations was for the licensing powers of the Police Commissioner as Registrar of Firearms to be taken away and for a mechanism to buy back firearms in the community.

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

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

It has been an interesting couple of weeks for Solomon Islands, with stories of policing, weapons, replica weapons and a security agreement with China dominating the local and regional media.

Let’s start with the issue of arming the police. After the tensions, for a long time Solomon police did not carry arms but this is an exception in our history.

Indeed, the precursor of the Royal Solomon Islands Police Force (RSIPF) created during the early colonial era was known as the “BSIP Armed Constabulary”.

For as long as I can remember, our police have had access to some form of arms stored in the armoury. Their use traditionally was ceremonial, mostly during parades.

In fact, many of us who used to watch their parades loved to hear the sound made when the police and marine units lifted the guns as they responded to the orders of the parade commander.

The only time the weapons were used in my lifetime was during the Bougainville crisis and during the ethnic tensions.

The Bougainville crisis necessitated the importation by the Solomon Islands government of high-powered guns because of incursions by armed Papua New Guinean soldiers across the border and their use against Solomon Islands citizens at the PNG-Solomon Islands border.

Weapons bought via US broker
I recall that importation as at that time I was a legal adviser in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. The weapons were purchased from the US via a broker in Singapore.

Some questions were asked but, given the circumstances, their importation was justifiable.

A diplomatic request was made for their temporary storage in Australia before they were shipped to Honiara. These were government-procured arms and the procurement procedures for their acquisition duly complied with government procurement processes.

I have been advocating for some time the rearmament of the RSIPF and I am also supportive of the RSIPF to be trained by whoever can provide it. Many police officers have been trained in the US, Taiwan, Australia, UK, Singapore, New Zealand and Fiji.

Thus, I have no particular issues with them being trained by Chinese advisers as was the case recently.

However, I do have issues if the RSIPF is going to equip itself with high-powered guns, whether real ones (as supplied by Australia) or fake ones (as supplied by China). These concerns are exacerbated by the current level of secrecy and confusion around the security arrangements.

Firstly, it is questionable whether it is necessary for the RSIPF to be armed with high-powered weapons. Perhaps there are still a number of guns that were taken from the armoury that are still in the hands of former MEF (Malaitan Eagle Force) militants.

Moreover, this information might be known by a key member of the current political coalition who is a former MEF commander. Perhaps the police just want to be prepared.

Memories of the ethnic tensions
However, we also should not forget what happened 22 years ago during the ethnic tensions, when the armoury was compromised by police giving weapons to militants and militants raiding the armoury for weapons — weapons which were then used by Solomon Islanders to intimidate and kill their fellow citizens.

Members of the public are also genuinely concerned about the manner in which the Chinese fake guns were imported into the country — via a logging vessel which is, to say the least, an unusual means of transporting official government goods.

The shifting narratives from the Police Commissioner about this incident have raised more questions than they have answered.

There are also broader questions. Is security created through arming the police? Or should we instead focus on an approach to security whereby the community is recognised as a partner in building and maintaining peace, and build on the long history Solomon Islanders have of brokering conflict among themselves?

While, as I said, there is nothing intrinsically wrong with arming the police, the focus needs to be on using community policing, chiefs, and youth leaders to broker conflicts. It is unfortunate when the ordinary citizens of the country are viewed not as partners in development, but as threat to the hegemony and hold on power by some people.

Last year’s riots and covid-19 have revealed many underlying governance weaknesses. As I have argued earlier, they are symptomatic of a society that has become increasingly less pluralistic, and of political and economic institutions that have become less inclusive.

Then there is the leaked security agreement with China, which has exacerbated existing unease among the public about China. The increasing engagement with China is explained by the Prime Minister as an attempt by the government to diversify its engagement on security.

Chinese naval base unlikely
It is unlikely that China will build a naval base in Solomon Islands. The agreement does not specify that it will and, although it could be construed that way, the reality is that it is not going to happen.

Australia is already building a patrol base in Lofung, in the Shortland Islands which borders Papua New Guinea, and has announced that they will build another one in the eastern Solomon Islands. I would venture to suggest that the capacity of these investments should cater for a naval base if the need ever arises in the future.

What is unprecedented about this security arrangement is that it allows China, with the consent of the Solomon Islands government, to send armed personnel to protect its citizens and assets.

It also prohibits any publicity around these arrangements. It is ironic that a prime minister who invariably extols the virtues of national sovereignty should agree to cede a fundamental sovereign function — the protection of lives and property — to a foreign force.

It is not clear if this is inadvertent, but it would seem that its ramifications have not been thought through.

The security arrangement has also raised concerns in the region. The President of the Federated States of Micronesia has written to Prime Minister Sogavare requesting that he reconsider it.

There is perhaps nothing intrinsically wrong with Solomon Islands signing a security agreement with China. There should, however, be coherence with similar arrangements with other countries, which focus on the capacity of the Solomon Islands Police Force to deal with internal security uprisings, and preferably all assistance should be within a regional framework supported by the Pacific Islands Forum.

Cannot choose neighbours
While a country may choose its friends, it cannot choose its neighbours.

In Solomon Islands today, there is no opportunity for policy debate by the public except on Facebook. The public and constituents do not have the same ease of access to our ministers and prime minister as embassy officials, and mining and logging CEOs.

Such is the current degree of polarisation that any criticism or comment is viewed by the current political coalition as “anti-government”. There does not seem to be any scope for dissenting views, or even constructive ideas from outside the inner circle, to be accommodated.

Unless a more pluralistic society is promoted where people’s views are welcomed, and there are more inclusive political and economic institutions, the government will be forced to depend on regional troops to support it.

At some stage, regional partners must hold Solomon Islands politicians to account for the economic and political situation they have created and the resulting violence such as the rioting last year.

The current focus on arms, without attention to rights and responsibilities, cannot and should not be sustained.

Dr Transform Aqorau is CEO of iTuna Intel and founding director, Pacific Catalyst, and a legal adviser to the Marshall Islands. He is the former CEO of the Parties to the Nauru Agreement Office. This article was first published by Devpolicy Blog from the Development Policy Centre at The Australian National University and is republished under a Creative Commons licence.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz