The deposed Prime Minister, Mahendra Chaudhry, says Speight’s motive had less to do with indigenous rights and a lot more to do with power, greed, and access to the millions likely to accrue from Fiji’s mahogany plantation.

On this day 25 years ago, the elected government was held hostage at the barrel of the gun, the Parliament complex started filling up with rebels supporting the takeover, Suva City and other areas in Fiji were looted and burnt, and innocent people were attacked just because of their race.

Chaudhry said indigenous emotions were “deliberately ignited to beat up support for the treasonous actions of the terrorists”.

He said the coup threw the nation into chaos from which it had not fully recovered even to this day.

Chaudhry said using George Speight as a frontman, the “real perpetrators” of the coup, assisted by a group of armed rebels from the Republic of Fiji Military Forces (RFMF), held Chaudhry and members of his government hostage for 56 days as they plundered, looted and terrorised the Indo-Fijian community in various parts of the country.

The Fiji Labour Party leader said that, as with current Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka, who led the first two coups in 1987, so with Speight in May 2000, that the given reason for the treason and the mayhem that followed was to “protect the rights and interests of the indigenous community”.

Chaudhry said today that it was widely acknowledged that the rights of the indigenous community was not endangered either in 1987 or in 2000.

He added that they were simply used to pursue personal and political agendas.

The FLP leader said those who benefitted were the elite in Fijian society, not ordinary people.

Chaudhry said this was obvious from current statistics which showed that currently the iTaukei surveyed made up 75 percent of those living in poverty.

He said poverty reports in the early 1990s showed practically a balance in the number of Fijians and Indo-Fijians living in poverty.

The former prime minister says it was obvious that the coups had done nothing to improve the quality of life of the ordinary indigenous iTaukei.

Instead, he said the coups had had a devastating impact on the entire socio-economic fabric of Fiji’s society, putting the nation decades behind in terms of development.

Chaudhry said the sorry state of Fiji today — “the suffering of our people and continued high rate of poverty, deteriorating health and education services, the failing infrastructure and weakened state of our economy” — were all indicators of how post-coup governments had failed to deliver on the expectations of the people.

He said: “It is time for us to rise above discredited notions of racism and fundamentalism and embrace progressive, liberal thinking.”

Chaudhry added that leaders needed to be judged on their vision and performance and not on their colour and creed.

Republished with permission from FijiVillage News.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

By Te Aniwaniwa Paterson of Te Ao Māori News

On 1 December 1961, West Papua’s national flag, known as the Morning Star, was raised for the first time as a declaration of West Papua’s independence from the Netherlands.

Sixty-three years later, West Papua is claimed by and occupied by Indonesia, which has banned the flag, which still carries aspirations for self-determination and liberation.

The flag continues to be raised globally on December 1 each year on what is still called “Papuan Independence Day”.

Region-wide protests
Protests have been building in West Papua since the new Indonesian President Prabowo Subianto announced the revival of the Transmigration Programme to West Papua.

This was declared a day after he came to power on October 21 and confirmed fears from West Papuans about Prabowo’s rise to power.

This is because Prabowo is a former general known for a trail of allegations of war crimes and human rights abuses in West Papua and East Timor to his name.

Transmigration’s role
The transmigration programme began before Indonesia gained independence from the Dutch colonial government, intended to reduce “overcrowding” in Java and to provide a workforce for plantations in Sumatra.

After independence ended and under Indonesian rule, the programme expanded and in 1969 transmigration to West Papua was started.

This was also the year of the controversial “Act of Free Choice” where a small group of Papuans were coerced by Indonesia into a unanimous vote against their independence.

In 2001 the state-backed transmigration programme ended but, by then, over three-quarters of a million Indonesians had been relocated to West Papua. Although the official transmigration stopped, migration of Indonesians continued via agriculture and development projects.

Indonesia has also said transmigration helps with cultural exchange to unite the West Papuans so they are one nation — “Indonesian”.

West Papuan human rights activist Rosa Moiwend said in the 1980s that Indonesians used the language of “humanising West Papuans” through erasing their indigenous identity.

“It’s a racist kind of thing because they think West Papuans were not fully human,” Moiwend said.

Pathway to environmental destruction
Papuans believe this was to dilute the Indigenous Melanesian population, and to secure the control of their natural resources, to conduct mining, oil and gas extraction and deforestation.

This is because in the past the transmigration programme was tied to agricultural settlements where, following the deforestation of conservation forests, Indonesian migrants worked on agricultural projects such as rice fields and palm oil plantations.

Octo Mote is the vice-president of the United Liberation Movement for West Papua (ULMWP). Earlier this year Te Ao Māori News interviewed Mote on the “ecocide and genocide” and the history of how Indonesia gained power over West Papua.

The ecology in West Papua was being damaged by mining, deforestation, and oil and gas extraction, he said. Mote said Indonesia wanted to “wipe them from the land and control their natural resources”.

He emphasised that defending West Papua meant defending the world, because New Guinea had the third-largest rainforest after the Amazon and Congo and was crucial for climate change mitigation as they sequester and store carbon.

Concerns grow over militarisation
Moiwend said the other concern right now was the National Strategic Project which developed projects to focus on Indonesian self-sufficiency in food and energy.

Merauke Integrated Food and Energy Estate (MIFEE) started in 2011, so isn’t a new project, but it has failed to deliver many times and was described by Global Atlas of Environmental Justice as a “textbook land grab”.

The mega-project includes the deforestation of a million hectares for rice fields and an additional 600,000 hectares for sugar cane plantations that will be used to make bioethanol.

The project is managed by the Ministry of Defense and the Ministry of Agriculture, and the private company, Jhonlin Group, owned by Haji Andi Syamsuddin Arsyad. Ironically, given the project has been promoted to address climate issues, Arsyad is a coal magnate, a primary industry responsible for man-made climate change.

Recently, the Indonesian government announced the deployment of five military battalions to the project site.

Conservation news website Mongabay reported that the villages in the project site had a population of 3000 people whereas a battalion consisted of usually 1000 soldiers, which meant there would be more soldiers than locals and the villagers said it felt as if their home would be turned into a “war zone”.

Merauke is where Moiwend’s village is and many of her cousins and family are protesting and, although there haven’t been any incidents yet, with increased militarisation she feared for the lives of her family as the Indonesian military had killed civilians in the past.

Destruction of spiritual ancestors
The destruction of the environment was also the killing of their dema (spiritual ancestors), she said.

The dema represented and protected different components of nature, with a dema for fish, the sago palm, and the coconut tree.

Traditionally when planting taro, kumara or yam, they chanted and sang for the dema of those plants to ensure an abundant harvest.

Moiwend said they connected to their identity through calling on the name of the dema that was their totem.

She said her totem was the coconut and when she needed healing she would find a coconut tree, drink coconut water, and call to the dema for help.

There were places where the dema lived that humans were not meant to enter but many sacred forests had been deforested.

She said the Indonesians had destroyed their food sources, their connection to their spirituality as well destroying their humanity.

“Anim Ha means the great human being,” she said, “to become a great human being you have to have a certain quality of life, and one quality of life is the connection to your dema, your spiritual realm.”

Te Aniwaniwa Paterson is a digital producer for Te Ao Māori News. Republished with permission.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

“One body, one people, one ocean, one Pacific” was Samoa’s powerful statement during the parade of nations at the official opening of the 13th Festival of Pacific Arts and Culture (FestPAC).

It was a sentiment echoed loudly and proudly by all other parading nations.

Rapa Nui’s delegation exclaimed, “we are all brothers and sisters, we are a family!”

This strong spirit of unity connected the Pacific delegates who had all travelled across vast oceans to attend the 10-day festival hosted in Honolulu, Hawai’i.

“Ho’oulu Lahui, Regenerating Oceania” is the underlying theme of the event.

Festival director Dr Aaron Sala said the phrase is an ancient Hawai’ian motto from the reigning Monarch of Hawai’i in the 1870s, instructing the community to rekindle their cultural practices and rebuild the nation.

He saw how the theme could be embraced by the entire Pacific region for the festival.

‘Power of that phrase’
“The power of that phrase speaks to every level of who we are.”

He saw the phrase come to life at the official opening ceremony over the weekend.

Almost 30 Pacific Island nations paraded at the Stan Sheriff Center, flags waving high, and hearts full of pride for their indigenous heritage.

Indigenous people of all ages filled the arena with song and dance, previewing what festival goers could expect over the next two weeks.

Dr Sala was impressed by the mix of elders and young ones in the delegations.

“The goal of the festival in its inception was to create connections between elders and youth and to ensure that youth are connected in their culture.

“The festival has affected generations of youth who are now speaking their native languages, who are carving again and weaving again.”

‘It’s so surreal’
Speaking as she watched the opening ceremony, the festival’s operations director Makanani Sala said: “it’s so surreal, looking around you see all these beautiful cultures from around the world, it’s so humbling to have them here and an honor for Hawai’i to be the hosts this year.”

The doors to the festival village at the Hawai’i Convention Centre opened the following day.

Inside, dozens of “fale” allocated to each nation were filled with the traditional arts and crafts of the Pacific.

It is a space for delegates and event attendees to explore and learn about the unique cultural practices preserved by each nation.

The main stage is filled with contemporary and traditional performances, fashion shows, oratory and visual showcases, and much more.

The FestPAC village space invites the community to journey through the entire Pacific, and participate in an exchange of traditional knowledge, thus doing their part in “Ho’oulu Lahui – Regenerating Oceania.”

The Festival of Pacific Arts and Culture runs until June 16.

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

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

A man on Saipan has burned the official CNMI flag in protest, saying that it does not truly represent Indigenous people of the Commonwealth of the Northern Marianas (CNMI).

A public video of the flag-burning was posted by Raymond Quitugua that has stirred various negative reactions within the CNMI community.

Under the CNMI’s constitution, flag-burning is prohibited and those found to have breached the law can face up to one year in jail or fined up to US$500 (NZ$835).

Quitugua said the true CNMI flag was the initial design presented back in the 1970s that featured a latte stone with a star in the front of it on a field of blue.

The current official flag of the US territory consists of a rectangular field of blue, a white star in the center, superimposed on a gray latte stone, surrounded by the traditional Carolinian mwáár.

But Quitugua claims the official flag does not accurately represent the Indigenous people of the CNMI, which he believes is the Chamorro community (not including the Carolinian community).

He added that he burned the flag as a form of protest and he intended to take the issue to court.

Disappointed, insulted
Renowned elder in the CNMI community, Lino Olopai, as well as one of the many champions of the CNMI’s flag, expressed disappointment and insulted by Quitugua’s actions and said that warranted jail time.

Olopai said the basis of the current CNMI flag was indeed the Chamorro flag, but a group of Carolinians that included himself fought to have a mwáár on the flag as a representation of the Carolinian community as they believed they, too, were indigenous people of the CNMI.

He added that Quitugua’s flag-burning is a form of discrimination against the Carolinian community, which like the Chamorros, are the two recognised Indigenous people of the CNMI.

“Stop the racism. We are all part of the Pacific islands,” Olopai said.

“We should maintain peaceful attitude and spirit with one another. Not just between the Chamorro and Carolinian communities, but with other communities across the Pacific,” he said.

In a letter to the editor of the Saipan Tribune, former lawmaker Luis John Castro also criticised Quitugua’s flag-burning, saying there were other more constructive forms of protest.

“If something such as the flag does not jive with your beliefs, OK you don’t have to agree,” he said, adding “but there are many ways to resolve differences other than desecrating a cultural symbol”.

“Conduct an online poll, call into [a radio station] and make it a topic of discussion. Hold a town hall meeting with other concerned citizens, ask a legislator to draft bills or initiative to address its look, or file a certified question with the courts to get an answer to your concerns.

“Why do something like burn the flag? To seek attention? To get likes and shares on Facebook? To incite civil unrest?” he wrote.

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

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

An Australian solidarity group for West Papua today warned of a fresh “heavy handed” Indonesia crackdown on Papuan villagers with more “arrests and torture”.

Joe Collins of the Australia West Papua Association (AWPA) gave the warning in the wake of the deployment of 30 elite rangers last week at the Ndeotadi 99 police post in Paniai district, Central Papua, following a deadly assault there by Papuan pro-independence resistance fighters.

Two Indonesian police officers were killed in the attack.

The AWPA warning also follows mounting outrage over a brutal video of an Indonesian Papuan man being tortured in a fuel drum that has gone viral.

Collins called on the federal government to “immediately condemn” the torture of West Papuans by the Australian-trained Indonesian security forces.

“If a security force sweep occurs in the region, we can expect the usual heavy-handed approach by the security forces,” Collins said in a statement.

“It’s not unusual for houses and food gardens to be destroyed during these operations, including the arrest and torture of Papuans.

“Local people usually flee their villages creating more IDP [internally displaced people]”.

60,000 plus IDPs
Human rights reports indicate there are more than 60,000 IDP in West Papua.

“The recent brutal torture of an indigenous Papuan man shows what can happen to West Papuans who fall foul of the Indonesian security forces,” Collins said.

“Anyone seeing this video which has gone viral must be shocked by the brutality of the military personal involved. 

The video clip was shot on 3 February 2024 during a security force raid in Puncak regency.

“The Australian government should immediately condemn the torture of West Papuans by the Indonesian security forces [which] Australia trains and holds exercises with.

“Do we have to remind the government of Article 7of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights? It states:

No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. In particular, no one shall be subjected without his free consent to medical or scientific experimentation.

“As more Papuans become aware of the horrific video, they may respond by holding rallies and protests leading to more crackdowns on peaceful demonstrators,” Collins said.

“Hopefully Jakarta will realise the video is being watched by civil society, the media and government officials around the world and will control its military in the territory.”

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

A recent webinar hosted by the Pacific Network on Globalisation (PANG) brought together minds from across the region to delve into the intricate issues of the digital economy and data value.

The webinar’s focus was clear — shed light on who was shaping the rules of the digital landscape and how these rules were taking form.

At the forefront of the discussion was the delicate matter of valuing and protecting indigenous knowledge.

PANG’s deputy coordinator, Adam Wolfenden, emphasised the need for open conversations spanning various sectors.

“It is a call to understand and safeguard the wisdom embedded in Pacific worldviews and indigenous knowledge systems as we venture into the digital world,” he said.

But amid the promise of the digital age, challenges persisted.

Wolfenden said the Pacific’s scattered islands faced the formidable obstacle of connectivity.

“Communities yearn to tap into online technologies, yet structural barriers stand tall. The connectivity challenges and structural barriers that are faced by the Pacific region are substantial and there is no easy, cheap fix,” he said.

He underscored the necessity of regional partnerships, even beyond the Pacific.

“As they sought to build advanced digital infrastructures, they realised that strength lay in unity. The journey towards progress means joining hands with fellow developing nations.

“It is a testament to the shared dream of progress that transcends geographical boundaries.”

The first step, Wolfenden believed, was awareness.

He said the Pacific region needed to be fully informed about ongoing negotiations, what rules were being carved, and how these might affect the region’s autonomy and data sovereignty.

“Often, these negotiations remain hidden from public view, shrouded in secrecy until agreements were reached. This has to change; transparency is vital,” Wolfenden said.

Beyond this, there was a call for broader discussions during the webinar. The digital economy was not just about buyers and sellers in a virtual marketplace.

It was about preserving culture, empowering communities, and ensuring that indigenous knowledge was never left vulnerable to the whims of the digital age.

Ema Ganivatu and Brittany Nawaqatabu are final year journalism students at The University of the South Pacific. They are also senior editors for Wansolwara, USP Journalism’s student training newspaper and online publications. Republished in a collaborative partnership with Asia Pacific Report.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

We woke to the news yesterday that the Australian government has negotiated with the designer of the Aboriginal flag Harold Thomas, and copyright for the flag will be transferred to the Commonwealth.

The government has now stated the flag is freely available for public use. Prime Minister Scott Morrison stated:

We’ve freed the Aboriginal flag for Australians.

While many Indigenous people are celebrating today and rejoicing in the idea the flag has been “freed,” I am not so sure.

I think we should all take a moment to pause and consider what this new “ownership” might represent.

The flag was first flown at Victoria Square on Kaurna Country, on National Aborigines Day in July in 1971.

A brief history of the flag
The flag was first flown at Victoria Square on Kaurna Country, on National Aborigines Day in July in 1971.

In 1972, it became the official flag for the Aboriginal Tent Embassy which was established on Ngunnawal Country.

In 1995, William Hayden, Governor-General of Australia proclaimed both the Aboriginal flag and the Torres Strait Islander flag (designed by the late Bernard Manok as) “Flags of Australia” under the Flags Act 1953.

But the truth is the Aboriginal flag has always been our flag. We didn’t need an act of Parliament to recognise its significance.

But it doesn’t belong to “all Australians”. It was meant to belong to just us. https://t.co/mzpIg6hV7o

— Scott (@ScottTrindall) January 24, 2022

A national flag?
National flags are seen as sacred objects by many: in many countries, to desecrate the flag carries penalties. As citizens, we are expected to revere the national flag and to be proud of what it represents.

But the Australian national flag represents white sovereignty and a belief in national unity.

The national flag symbolises both patriotism and nationalism. Nowhere was this more evident than when Morrison wore a mask sporting the design of the flag. The flag/mask drapes his face with the most prominent national symbol for all to see.

When wearing this mask, the prime minister literally embodies the symbolism of nation and all that stands for.

The national flag is flown at schools and all prominent government buildings. It is, for many Australians, a site of heightened emotion where the main response is a sense of belonging to what Benedict Anderson called an “imagined community”.

Of course, the Union Jack is another nation’s flag. It belongs to the United Kingdom. It represents our dispossession and is a constant reminder of our forced and continued colonisation.

The Union Jack does not represent us, our history or our future aspirations.

Not only did they steal the land, they now own the symbol of the movement built to get that land back.

Happy 50 years

— My Land (@BundjalungBud) January 24, 2022

A symbol of strength
The Aboriginal flag is a symbol of our strength as an ancient people who preceded the symbolic and real effects of national borders.

The Aboriginal flag does not belong to all Australians. It belongs, like the land, to us as a symbol of our sovereignty. Morrision’s statement about having “freed” the flag for all is offensive.

It is ours; he has no authority to “free” it. The Aboriginal flag cannot just be “freed”. It is an emblem of our emotion, our loves and losses. It holds our faith, our hope and our future.

I grew up in the 1970s and 80s. When I saw the Aboriginal flag, I felt a sense of pride and belonging. As a young person, I wasn‘t aware there were any copyright issues or that there were legalities that needed to be considered.

I always knew I belonged to what the flag stood for: our survival, our resilience as Indigenous people, and our steadfastness in the face of the on-going and omnipresent colonial struggles that continue to affect us today.

The flag was created in protest against the very people who now own it. This isn’t a win for Blackfullas.

— Anton Schirripa (@YourUncleAnton) January 24, 2022

Our sorrows and our unity
On Australia Day, we see the Australian national flag waving take place. There is both banality and symbolism to this ritual.

For some, the flag is waved without thought as to what it might mean to others: it is just part of the ritual of the national holiday. For many, it is emotionally charged and can generate fervour and national pride.

I am not sure many people stop to think about the flag’s design, its history or what it might mean to some non-white Australians.

But the design of the Aboriginal flag is intimately connected to our struggle for land rights.

The red represents the land, the yellow the life-giving sun and the black Aboriginal people.

The flag is a symbol of our unceded sovereignty of our lands. It represents a powerful symbol of resistance in our ongoing battle with the Crown in terms of the unlawful claiming of our lands as terra nullius.

How is it possible it can be so seamlessly hijacked in order to be incorporated — “freed” — into another set of meanings? Allowed onto the market for anyone to use? I see this act of “freeing” our flag as an act of arrogance at the very least.

One could also say it is a violent appropriation of what Aboriginal people deem to be a symbol of reverence.

As someone who is currently property of the colonial State, let me tell you that the flag now being owned by the gubbas does not make it free.

This is not a win.

This is not freedom.

— Disposable Human (@haveachattabs) January 24, 2022

Our flag contains our sorrows and our unity as a colonised people. It is not a “free-for-all” symbol. Nor is it a symbol that can be neatly injected into the national psyche as a means of expressing some kind of racial unity that overshadows the injustice and inequality Aboriginal people experience on a daily basis.

It is the fabric of our souls. When it flies, we can see ourselves in flight as we once were, free nations.

Dr Bronwyn Carlson is professor of Indigenous studies and director of the Centre for Global Indigenous Futures, Macquarie University. This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons licence. Read the original article.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz