Four researchers and authors from the Asia-Pacific region have provided diverse perspectives on the media in a new global book on intercultural communication.

The Sage Handbook of Intercultural Communication published this week offers a global, interdisciplinary, and contextual approach to understanding the complexities of intercultural communication in our diverse and interconnected world.

It features University of Queensland academic Dr Mairead MacKinnon; founding director of the Pacific Media Centre professor David Robie; University of Ottawa’s Dr Marie M’Balla-Ndi Oelgemoeller; and University of the South Pacific journalism coordinator associate professor Shailendra Singh.

Featuring contributions from 56 leading and emerging scholars across multiple disciplines, including communication studies, psychology, applied linguistics, sociology, education, and business, the handbook covers research spanning geographical locations across Europe, Africa, Oceania, North America, South America, and the Asia Pacific.

It focuses on specific contexts such as the workplace, education, family, media, crisis, and intergroup interactions. Each chapter takes a contextual approach to examine theories and applications, providing insights into the dynamic interplay between culture, communication, and society.

One of the co-editors, University of Queensland’s associate professor Levi Obijiofor, says the book provides an overview of scholarship, outlining significant theories and research paradigms, and highlighting major debates and areas for further research in intercultural communication.

“Each chapter stands on its own and could be used as a teaching or research resource. Overall, the book fills a gap in the field by exploring new ideas, critical perspectives, and innovative methods,” he says.

Refugees to sustaining journalism
Dr MacKinnon writes about media’s impact on refugee perspectives of belonging in Australia; Dr Robie on how intercultural communication influences Pacific media models; Dr M’Balla-Ndi Oelgemoeller examines accounting for race in journalism education; and Dr Singh unpacks sustaining journalism in “uncertain times” in Pacific island states.

Dr Singh says that in research terms the book is important for contributing to global understandings about the nature of Pacific media.

“The Pacific papers address a major gap in international scholarship on Pacific media. In terms of professional practice, the papers address structural problems in the regional media sector, thereby providing a clearer idea of long term solutions, as opposed to big measures and knee-jerk reactions, such as harsher legislation.”

Dr Robie, who is also editor of Asia Pacific Report and pioneered some new ways of examining Pacific media and intercultural inclusiveness in the Asia-Pacific region, says it is an important and comprehensive collection of essays and ought to be in every communication school library.

He refers to his “talanoa journalism” model, saying it “outlines a more culturally appropriate benchmark than monocultural media templates.

“Hopefully, this cross-cultural model would encourage more Pacific-based approaches in revisiting the role of the media to fit local contexts.”

Comprehensive exploration
The handbook brings together established theories, methodologies, and practices and provides a comprehensive exploration of intercultural communication in response to the challenges and opportunities presented by the global society.

From managing cultural diversity in the workplace to creating culturally inclusive learning environments in educational settings, from navigating intercultural relationships within families to understanding the role of media in shaping cultural perceptions, this handbook delves into diverse topics with depth and breadth.

It addresses contemporary issues such as hate speech, environmental communication, and communication strategies in times of crisis.

It also offers theoretical insights and practical recommendations for researchers, practitioners, policymakers, educators, and students.

The handbook is structured into seven parts, beginning with the theoretical and methodological development of the field before delving into specific contexts of intercultural communication.

Each part provides a rich exploration of key themes, supported by cutting-edge research and innovative approaches.

With its state-of-the-art content and forward-looking perspectives, this Sage Handbook of Intercultural Communication serves as an indispensable resource for understanding and navigating the complexities of intercultural communication in our increasingly interconnected world.

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

Macron said tensions in the Indo-Pacific zone were a matter for concern because France was an integral part of the Indo-Pacific — both in the Indian and the Pacific oceans.

He recalled the French version of the Indo-Pacific had been masterminded in 2018 and had since been developed in partnership with such key allies as India, Australia, Japan and the United Arab Emirates.

“But we have also consolidated it and, may I say entrenched it, in our own (overseas) territories,” he said, citing New Caledonia as an example of French army presence to defend France’s sovereignty and “the capacity for our air force to deploy (from mainland France) to Oceania within 48 hours”.

He also praised the recent South Pacific Defence Ministers’ Meeting held in Nouméa last month when “France was the inviting power”.

He said Paris was able to strike “strategic partnerships” with neighbouring armed forces.

“The year 2024 will see us maintain without fail the protection of our overseas territories,” he told the troops.

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

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

The 22nd Melanesian Spearhead Group (MSG) Leaders’ Summit was declared open at the National Convention Centre in Port Vila yesterday with host Prime Minister Ishmael Kalsakau hailing opportunities to “galvanise our efforts as a United Melanesia”.

Prime Minister Kalsakau welcomed all the delegations and said how happy and privileged the people of Vanuatu were to have the MSG leaders visit Port Vila after the recent successful Melanesian Arts and Cultural Festival.

“It gives me enormous pleasure, to welcome you all to Port Vila on the occasion of the official opening of the 22nd MSG Leaders’ Summit,” he said.

“Fifteen years since Vanuatu last hosted in 2008, this gathering of all leaders of our distinctive and noble organization is for history to behold.

“Let me at the outset take this opportunity on behalf of the government and people of Vanuatu to convey our sincere appreciation for your commitment and respect.

“This is not only for honouring the call to attend the Leaders’ Summit and related meetings here in Port Vila but more importantly for your leadership and wisdom to collectively harness opportunities to revitalise and galvanise our efforts as a United Melanesia.”

Prime Minister Kalsakau said a united Melanesia was not just for the developmental goals, dreams, and aspirations of the Melanesian area, which stretches from West Papua in the Southwest Pacific to Fiji to the East.

Duty of care
He said Melanesian countries had a duty of care and obligation to the remainder of Oceania, particularly the Pacific Small Island Developing States, as custodians of 90 percent of the landmass, population, and natural resources.

“As Prime Minister, chair, and host, I take this opportunity once again on behalf of the Vanuatu government and people, to reiterate Vanuatu’s privilege to take on the mantle and challenge of leadership of the MSG, and in furthering our sub-regional organisation’s common agendas and aspirations, for the betterment of the group and our peoples,” Kalsakau said.

“Many political observers derided our subregional efforts in cooperation, as divisive and destructive to regional cooperation.

“Also in the yesteryear, foreign sceptics with zero understanding of Melanesia and its nucleus referred to us as the ‘Arc of Instability’. They drove this agenda for us to fail as nation states.

“Today I stand proud, to say that we have proven these critics wrong on more than one account. We have proven to be resilient collectively building on the fundamentals that bound us together as One People, that inheritance bestowed on us by our Creator, God Almighty.”

Kalsakau said the MSG today remained more vibrant and viable than ever, as the countries forged ahead in their collective pursuit of common social, political, economic, and security interests, underscoring the resoluteness, tenacity, and resilience of Melanesia.

“MSG, Being Relevant and Influential” as the theme of the 22nd MSG Leaders’ Summit, is therefore a fitting and timely reminder,” he said.

‘Conquered the colonial past’
“For the independent states we have conquered that colonial past and now as a collective have transformed the ‘Arc’ into one of Responsibility and Prosperity. This indispensable Arc of Melanesia is moving forward,” said the Prime Minister.

“And we are reminded that among our peoples are those who continue to be deprived of taking up their rightful place among the global union of nations. The MSG platform, therefore, provides unique opportunities in solidifying expressions of hope for all of Melanesia.”

MSG was the largest grouping in the Pacific Islands Forum family, Prime Minister Kalsakau said. MSG must continue to assert a leadership role, and in spearheading initiatives, as the name denoted.

He said that MSG was the only subregional grouping that had a permanent secretariat, and perhaps had the only active and functioning free trade agreement in Oceania.

“This is a marked feat, as we commemorate 35 years of MSG’s existence as our august organisation, an achievement we all should be proud of,” Kalsakau said.

“Our subregionalism is no longer frowned upon but is regarded as the building block for stronger regional cooperation in the wider regional architecture, as we provide added cooperation impetus for the Blue Pacific Continent, of which we are an integral part.”

The MSG subregionalism had therefore been vindicated and would continue to grow in prominence and relevance going forward.

Fundamental principles
“As chair, I would like to assert that as a group, we must not lose sight of fundamental principles espoused by the MSG,” Kalsakau said. This included:

• encouraging sub-regional diplomacy and friendly relations,
• maintaining peace and harmony,
• encouraging free and open trade, boosting economic and technical cooperation, and
• promoting our unique Melanesian traditions and cultures.

However, during his tenure as chair, Prime Minister Kalsakau wants the secretariat to assist the members in bringing to closure many of the outstanding issues leaders had agreed to.

Under the tutelage of the high-performing Director-General, he expected the committed secretariat to implement the main recommendations of the Implementation Strategy for the 2038 Prosperity for All Plan.

“The third-revised MSG Free Trade Agreement 2017 must be brought into operation quickly so we can all benefit from its provisions on trade in services and investments,” he said.

“On that note, I wish to assure you all of my government’s commitment to signing and ratifying the MFTA by November of this year. The Skills Movement Scheme must be promoted widely so our people can fully take advantage of it.”

The Prime Minister announced that, through representatives, the governments of Australia and China were also participating in the Leaders’ Summit as special guests.

He commended the secretariat for its facilitation and revitalisation of the first edition of the MSG PM’s Cup last year.

Doddy Morris is a Vanuatu Daily Post reporter. Republished with permission.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Deputy Prime Minister Professor Biman Prasad has called on the Fiji Football Association to address the problem of the decline of the Fiji’s men’s global football ranking.

He made the request to the national governing body while welcoming FIFA president Gianni Infantino to Fiji at the weekend.

Infantino was in the country as part of his visit to Oceania member countries.

The Fiji men’s football team, known as the “Bula Boys”, is ranked 168 — seventh out of the 11 teams in the Oceania Football Confederation.

Fiji is ranked below New Zealand (103), Solomon Islands (133), Papua New Guinea (159), New Caledonia (161), Tahiti (162) and Vanuatu (165).

Professor Prasad said that while FIFA’s financial support had been invaluable, it was vital to reflect and determine why Fiji’s performance was not on par with its glorious past.

‘All-time low’
“We all are wondering why our men’s football ranking has plummeted to an all-time low despite an abundance of talent and football in our country,” he said.

“We were ranked in the 1990s before the turn of the century. We used to defeat every nation in our region. We chalked up two wins over Australia in 1977 and 1988. We either beat or were on par with New Zealand.

“And that was in an era when football wasn’t even semi-professional. We are now professional according to our standings of player fees and transfers. But we aren’t improving despite what we are told are three football academies, primarily funded by FIFA.”

Professor Prasad raised questions about the effectiveness of the football academies established with FIFA’s funding and asked whether the talent was being nurtured adequately, and if the infrastructure and guidance provided were enough to support the aspirations of young players.

The Deputy Prime Minister also brought up concerns about the governance within Fiji FA, and stressed the importance of transparent and accountable leadership.

He said decisions should always be made in the best interest of football and the athletes.

‘It is the reality’
“What I said isn’t about recrimination. It is the reality where football descended to in the last 16 years. But it will change. And change for the better. Our conscience must be clear when dealing with governance issues.”

Responding to Professor Prasad’s criticism on Fiji’s poor ranking, Fiji FA president Rajesh Patel said they were not worried about the rankings as it was something that had declined when the side played more international matches.

He said in Fiji’s bid to compete at the 2026 FIFA World Cup, they had been playing quality opposition during FIFA international windows.

Patel said the under-20s participation at the under-20 World Cup in Argentina was proof of progress in the development of the sport in Fiji.

Rodney Duthie is a Fiji Times journalist. Republished with permission.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

In his recently published article “Sea of many flags”, the head of the ANU National Security College Rory Medcalf makes the case for why Pacific Island states should regard the deep regional involvement of a Western coalition of powers, “quietly” led by Australia, as an effective and attractive “Pacific way to dilute China’s influence”.

Although presented as a new proposal, the increased regional engagement of this Western coalition is already well advanced, in the form of proposed new military bases and joint-use facilities, new security treaties, increased aid programmes, new embassies, as well as a new regional institution, Partners in the Blue Pacific (PBP).

Medcalf’s main task is not to persuade Canberra of the merits of this approach, but rather to demonstrate to a sceptical Pacific audience that this Western coalition’s Indo-Pacific strategy is compatible with the Blue Pacific strategy of the Pacific Islands Forum (PIF).

Medcalf argues that an Indo-Pacific strategy of containing China supports the broad concept of human security embraced by Pacific Island leaders in their 2018 Boe Declaration, which includes the key demand for climate change action.

He also argues that the strategy would support the Blue Pacific emphasis on Pacific Island sovereignty by countering Chinese attempts to dominate the region. Thus he moves beyond the argument (made for example by Sandra Tarte) that there are some meeting points between these two world views and posits their complete compatibility.

His purpose is to counter the position of Pacific insiders, like former Secretary-General of PIF Dame Meg Taylor, and Professor Tarcisius Kabutaulaka, who argue that these security narratives are antithetical.

Medcalf proposes a model of security governance dominated by a Western coalition of interests operating through institutions like the Quad, AUKUS and PBP, where Pacific Islander influence is marginal or non-existent. Australia is seen as the “hub” for Western alliance management of the Pacific, acting as a “guide and informal coordinator”, ensuring that investments are organised efficiently and “in line with what Pacific communities want”.

PBP aid projects deployed
PBP aid projects would be deployed in support of the objectives outlined in the Boe Declaration as well as PIF’s 2050 Strategy for the Blue Pacific Continent.

The problem here is that, at best, this security model operates on behalf of Pacific interests, but not under the control of Pacific governments or regional institutions created for that purpose.

The argument for compatibility between the Indo-Pacific and Blue Pacific strategies does not consider key aspects of the Pacific vision for the future, such as urgent climate action, where there are clear discrepancies, especially regarding limiting emissions. Asking Island leaders to curtail China’s regional role requires them to compromise their long-standing foreign policy ethos of “friends to all and enemies to none”.

Nor is it clear that Medcalf’s approach would support Island sovereignty, when the major threats seem to come from Western actors, including increased military activity in Micronesia, the undermining of regional institutions by external initiatives such as PBP, continuing colonial rule in French Polynesia and New Caledonia, and ongoing American control (and deepening militarisation) of Guam.

[Pacific Media Watch adds that this includes continuing colonial rule by Indonesia in the expanded five provinces that make up the West Papua region].

Australian military plans to allow US stationing and storage of nuclear weapons in north Australia appear to violate the terms of the South Pacific Nuclear Free Zone Treaty, and Japan’s proposal to release into the ocean nuclear waste from the Fukushima power plant meltdown is causing considerable consternation in the region.

Medcalf’s argument that adoption of the Indo-Pacific mental map could bring together Indian Ocean and Pacific Ocean islands to discuss common challenges misses the 30-year history of such collaboration within the Alliance of Small Island States.

Unhelpful characterisation of China
Another problem with this analysis is its frankly unhelpful characterisation of China’s Pacific engagement. According to Medcalf, China “has a rightful place in the Pacific, just not a right to dominate”.

However, he provides no evidence that China does in fact seek regional hegemony, and cites no examples where its behaviour in the Pacific Islands might be regarded as “bullying” or “coercive”.

The 10 island countries that recognise Beijing have signed up to participate in the much-maligned Belt and Road Initiative without any apparent coercion.

Nor does Medcalf provide Pacific examples of the debt-for-equity argument often levelled at China’s lending practices in the Global South. When Tonga had difficulty servicing Chinese loans, Beijing agreed to extend their terms. Even the claim that China seeks to establish a military base in the region, a central plank in Western narratives, remains unsubstantiated.

Recent studies by the RAND Corporation (funded by the US military) provide some useful perspective by ranking Fiji and Papua New Guinea of “medium desirability” but “low feasibility” for Chinese military initiatives. Other Pacific locations, including Solomon Islands and Kiribati, are not seen as feasible.

To describe Beijing’s engagement as “neocolonial” is to invite comparisons with the activities of the Western coalition, key members of which retain actual colonies in the region. Nor is Australia in a strong position to accuse others of manipulative behaviour.

For example, Canberra’s efforts to protect its coal industry by working to weaken PIF statements about climate change mitigation are well documented, date back to the beginning of the COP negotiations, and continue today.

Self-determination issue at heart
Ultimately Medcalf’s central argument falls because it does not consider the issue of self-determination which is at the heart of the Blue Pacific strategy. Although Medcalf calls for “a premium on self-awareness, inclusion, and genuine diplomacy”, his proposal effectively devalues Pacific agency and marginalises Pacific decision makers.

“Sea of many flags” claims to promote strategic equilibrium in the Pacific, yet it really aims to create the conditions for continuing Western hegemony. It claims to counter geopolitical competition and militarisation while shoring up and expanding Western military domination.

It claims to act in the interests of Pacific peoples, yet seems designed to moderate opposition to recent anti-China initiatives established under the auspices of the Indo-Pacific strategy and without meaningful consultation.

By allowing some role for China, albeit a limited one, Medcalf is advocating a softer form of strategic denial than that imposed by Western powers during the Cold War. But his warnings to island states about the dangers of economic engagement with Beijing seem hollow indeed, given Australia’s massive trade dependence on China.

In advocating “a Pacific kind of leadership”, the author (perhaps inadvertently) evokes the principles guiding Pacific leaders in the early days of independence. But it is worth remembering that the essence of the Pacific Way advanced by Ratu Mara and others was Pacific control and regional self-determination.

In contrast, what Rory Medcalf is advocating would subsume all of this under the control of the Western alliance, led quietly (or not so quietly) by Australia.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Edson Arantes do Nascimento passed away at the age of 82 after a brave battle with colon cancer in Brazil on 20 December 2022. Known as “O Rei”, “The Black Pearl”, and “Pelé”, he was an ambassador, businessperson, community worker to the world, cultural force, leader, soccer player, and politician.

In this article, I write about why I admired Pelé as a child.

Writing as an adult and activist, I also pay tribute to Pelé and articulate why “O Rei” remains an important teacher of decoloniality and decolonisation in contemporary Oceania.

Pelé in my childhood in the 1970s
I caught brief glimpses of Pelé’s soccer genius in sports highlights on Aotearoa television news as a child in the 1970s.

I did not grasp the tactical, technical, or strategic intricacies of professional soccer when watching Pelé play for the New York Cosmos as a child. But I did see Pelé’s genius with a soccer ball on television. I remember seeing him play with creativity, joy, and imagination.

Pelé brought joy into my difficult childhood.

Like other Pacific Islanders of his generation, my father was a born-again rugby supporter who did not rate football as a sport. But even he would marvel at O Rei’s exploits on Aotearoa television when Pelé appeared.

Pacific people recognised Pelé’s genius — just as they recognised the extraordinary gifts of Muhammad Ali in the boxing ring.

Years before the formation of the English Premier League, I grew to love watching the great British players representing the mighty first division English clubs. Aotearoa television would play a weekly English first division match, and we always received televised, free- to-air coverage of FA Cup Finals in the 1970s and 1980s.

I came to love Division One English club football in the 1970s and 1980s.

An Al Jazeera tribute to Pelé.

Historically, Aotearoa has always had a strong affinity with British football. Despite loving the English game, I saw that Pelé played soccer in a radically unique way.

In later years, I would understand that Pelé played an Afro-Brazilian style of football known as “jogo bonito”, or, the beautiful game — characterised by creativity and improvisation by individual players; off the ball movement; one touch passing; samba like team rhythm and tempo, and superlative dribbling, passing, and attacking movements on the ground and in the air by the entire team.

I watched documentaries about Pelé as a child and a teen when they appeared on Aotearoa television. But I was too young to see the televised, in-colour spectacle of “jogo bonito” performed by Alberto, Gerson, Jairzinho, Pele, or Rivellino at Mexico City when Brazil beat Italy 4-1 to win the 1970 World Cup. I would only watch these mighty players in the 1970 World Cup after Sky TV played classic matches.

Pelé, Brazil, and ‘jogo bonito’ in 1982
But I did witness the “jogo bonito” performed by the 1982 Brazilian side that featured Eder, Falcao, Junior, Socrates, and Zico. Although this side did not win the 1982 World Cup, they remain the greatest sporting team I have ever witnessed — they performed art and played soccer simultaneously.

Aotearoa’s mighty All Whites played this Brazilian side in the group stages of the 1982 tournament. The team also got to meet Pelé in person when O Rei visited the Aotearoa team changing room before the match.

I was too young to understand that the 1982 side played a style of Afro-Brazilian soccer that continued the legacy of the beautiful game begun by Didi, Garrincha, Pelé, and Jairzinho long years before. Pelé was one of the innovators of this style of play in Brazil.

Engaging with Pelé as an adult
As an adult, I developed a fuller understanding of Pelé, his life, and his historical context.

1. Pelé was born only 53 years after the abolition of slavery in Brazil in 1888 into an Afro-Brazilian family who often struggled to put food on the table. (Pelé writes about his childhood and the hardships he endured in his 2007 autobiography.)
2. The Black Pearl’s Afro-Brazilian people occupied the lowest socio-economic positions in Brazilian society.
3. Even today, Afro-Brazilians face discrimination in employment, the justice system, and day-to-day life in Brazil. The Brazilian police still target Afro-Brazilian male youth for violence even today.
4. Opposing team’s fans made monkey noises — whether Pelé played in Brazil or around the world with his club, Santos. Despite his popularity, Pelé was a target of racism.
5. Pelé’s Brazilian government prevented him from playing soccer in Europe by making him a “national treasure”. In consequence, Pelé could not sell his labour to European clubs. Critics have stated that this would never have happened to a white Brazilian.
6. Brazilians accused Pelé of getting too close to figures in the Brazilian dictatorship of 1964-1985 — such as General Medici.
7. Pelé’s former national teammate, Paulo Cesar Lima, said in the 2021 documentary Pelé that he loved Edson, but Lima also said he felt Pelé functioned as a “submissive Black man” during the height of the dictatorship repressions in 1969. Lima felt a statement by Pelé against the dictatorship in the late 1960s would have “gone a long way”.
8. Brazilian journalist Juca Kfouri stated that Pelé did not have a guarantee that the Brazilian regime would not torture him if he did speak out.
9. In Africa, ordinary people treated Pelé as a son when O Rei playing there in the late 1960s. Pelé remains a figure of Trans-Atlantic Black unity in Africa, the US, and in other parts of the Black Diaspora.
10. Apartheid security forces prevented Pelé from leaving an airport when he visited South Africa in the 1960s. Pelé swore he would never return until South Africa was free from Apartheid. He did return in the 1990s — to spend time with Nelson Mandela.
11. Pelé was a Goodwill Ambassador for the Rio De Janeiro Earth Summit in 1992.
12. He was a Minister for Sport in Brazil.
13. He was an ambassador for the UN, UNICEF, and UNESCO during his lifetime — always seeking to forge relationships with children.
14. He endured business failures.
15. He refused to recognise a daughter born out of wedlock.
16. Pelé was a significant cultural force in Brazil — for good and for bad.
17. He was a football genius. Football journalists such as Tim Vickery have spoken of Pelé’s soccer skills — Edson’s ability with both feet; acceleration; skills in the air; passing talents; unselfishness; football intelligence, and his psychological strength.

Pelé’s passing in the media
Since his untimely passing, television news networks such as Al Jazeera, BBC, CNN, MSNBC, and Television New Zealand have all honoured Pelé’s cultural, historical, political, and sporting legacy.

Similarly, print media in Aotearoa, Australia, Brazil, Britain, France, and South Africa have represented Pelé as a “cultural icon”, “hero”, “innovator”, “giant of sport”, an “artist”, a “genius”, and a “fine, humble, and warm human being”.

Print media sources in France and the US have also expressed criticism of Pelé for not doing more against the Brazilian dictatorship.

Sources in Brazil have criticised Pelé for not taking more of a public stand against racism in Brazil and the world.

Pelé’s aesthetics
Brazilian star Neymar wrote a moving tribute for O Rei after the great man died. In one part of his tribute, Neymar stated that Pelé transformed soccer into art. I agree with Neymar’s insight.

If one watches Pelé on film today, one sees a kinetic aesthetics of balance, gesture, grace, intelligence, power, speed, rhythm, and style — whether Pelé was in the air, in space, or in a crowd of players. One observes Pelé performing an aesthetics of creativity, joy, and improvisation. I have no doubt Pelé’s parents, coaches, friends, and teammates in Brazil all nurtured his aesthetics.

Simultaneously, I am in no doubt that Pelé’s aesthetic genius was a gift given him by his ancestors and by his historical experience of being Afro-Brazilian.

I am not Afro-Brazilian and do not pretend to understand the language of decoloniality and decolonisation Pelé performed in living motion on a soccer field. But I am convinced Pelé performed an aesthetics of Afro-Brazilian being, decolonisation, decoloniality, living, and expressing in his every movement on the soccer field.

Pelé performed the history of his ancestors on the soccer stage.

Pelé’s lessons for Oceania
In conclusion, Pelé taught me five things as a Pacific person in Aotearoa.

1. struggle to embrace joy and freedom in your life,
2. always extend solidarity to those engaged in the Black struggle,
3. remember the struggle for justice in Aotearoa, the Moana, Palestine, or West Papua are one with the struggle Black people face around the world,
4. always look for the talents and potential in your own Moana peoples, and
5. never be ashamed of your Oceanian ancestors, your genealogy, or your history.

Despite his handful of personal failings, Pelé remains one of my great teachers in decolonial Oceania.

The author, Tony Fala, acknowledges the lives of Brazilian football greats Garrincha, Pelé, and Socrates as the inspiration for this article. He also pays tribute to Pacific peoples across Oceania who believe in soccer as a sport that embraces emancipation, participation, struggle, and unity.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

A new Aotearoa New Zealand book focusing on activists and their causes against militarism and for social struggles and climate justice across the Asia-Pacific is being launched in Wellington today.

Peace Action: Struggles for a decolonised and demilitarised Oceania and East Asia, edited by Wellington-based activist Valerie Morse, is the first book published by Left of the Equator Press.

“This book highlights the role of militarism as an ongoing colonial force,” says Morse.

“It is a collection of stories about activists, their organising and their causes, and the interconnections between social struggles separated by the vast expanse of Te Moana-Nui-A-Kiwa.”

It includes chapters on the Doctrine of Discovery (Tina Ngata), on protecting Ihumātao (Pania Newton, Qiane Matata-Sipu mā), on anti-militarist organising in South Korea, on campaigning against US military training in Hawai’i and Japan, on French colonialism in Mā’ohi Nui and Kanaky, about Korean peace movements in Aotearoa and Australia, about Indonesia’s occupation of West Papua, on feminist resistance to war in so-called Australia, on NZ’s history of Chinese-Māori solidarity, and on peace gardening at Parihaka.

“The increasing military build up across the Pacific has come into sharp focus this year,” said Morse.

“Having any influence over issues of war and international affairs can feel impossible, but grassroots movements for decolonisation and peace are the heart of countering this spiralling militarism and addressing the region’s most pressing issues, including climate justice.”

She says she was inspired to do the book from learning about the kinds of organising across the Pacific rim.

“I wanted to share that learning in order to inspire and inform others.”

The book launch was an “awesome way to celebrate solidarity and connection with each other” and to build a collective knowledge for change.

It is being hosted at Trades Hall on Vivian Street in Wellington at 5.30pm today.

Trade Unions based at the hall were deeply involved in the Nuclear-Free and Independent Pacific (NFIP) movement.

More information: leftequator@gmail.com

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

The arrest, detention, and deportation of University of the South Pacific vice-chancellor Pal Ahluwalia and his wife are significant issues for Fiji and the “Sea of Islands”.

As a son of the Pacific committed to Oceania, I am dismayed by recent events at USP. I write in support of all the peoples of Fiji. Moreover, I uphold the mana of the many artistic and intellectual ancestors USP has provided for the education of younger generations of Pacific people across Oceania.

I acknowledge USP’s educational leadership for all peoples in Oceania with humility and respect. I extend solidarity to all USP staff and students from Fiji and around the Moana.

I do not arrogate the right to tell USP staff or students how they might resolve their issues. We Pasifika in Aotearoa are not qualified to lecture our brothers and sisters at USP about conflict resolution. USP has the collective culture, history, people, and protocols to resolve some of the issues about the expulsion of their vice-chancellor, Professor Pal Ahluwalia.

But I wish to provide some humble suggestions to empower those seeking to resolve the issues that USP in Fiji confronts today.

Speaking as a Pasifika activist, I acknowledge that the only resolutions will be holistic ones involving all parties. But I think the Fiji government can perform an important role in resolving all issues. In broader terms, I feel the Fiji government could perform an important leadership role in allowing USP to heal and move forward in a spirit of Moana unity.

Ramifications for Fiji, region
The Fiji government’s expulsion of Professor Pal Ahluwalia and his wife from Fiji has had tremendous ramifications for Fiji and the region.

Academic organisations, activists, legal organisations, NGOs, journalists, Fiji members of Parliament, regional politicians, and USP alumni, staff, and students have all clarified relevant issues about the Fiji government’s unilateral decision to expel Ahluwalia and his wife.

In summary, some of these issues are:

1. The rule of law and the right of due process;
2. Protection of human rights;
3. The protection of the right to dissent;
4. Academic freedom;
5. Unilateral government intervention into the affairs of USP;
6. Protection of USP staff from unfair dismissal,
7. Safety and the wellbeing of USP staff, students at USP in Fiji, including safe from arrest or detention;
8. Claims of corruption at USP;
9. Allegations against Pal Ahluwalia;
10. Claims of punitive action against Ahluwalia by the Fiji government and Fiji members of the USP Council;
11. Issues of staff remuneration;
12. The health of relationships between Fiji and other member states who co-own USP;
13. Distinctions between state and civil society, i.e. the distinctions between the Fiji government and the regional university campus in Fiji; and
14. Calls for a relocation of the office of USP’s vice-chancellor from Fiji to other member nations, such as Samoa or Vanuatu.

Helpful resolutions
The Fiji government could help resolve these matters by engaging in a number of actions, discussions and processes. It could:

• Invite Professor Pal Ahluwalia and his wife back into the country so the issues could be resolved in Fiji.
• Clarify precisely what part of the law Ahluwalia his wife are alleged to have breached.
• Recommit to protecting the human rights of all in Fiji. More specifically, the government could ensure that all USP employees’ human rights are guaranteed so academic freedom can be exercised responsibly.
• Acknowledge that Pal Ahluwalia and his wife’s human rights have been breached. Moreover, the government could act to ensure this does not happen again to any other USP employee.
• Take precautions not to directly intervene in the affairs of USP again by expelling employees of the university. Moreover, Fiji government representatives on the USP Council could work to ensure this is never carried out again at the university.
• Release the funding the Fiji government owes USP without strings attached.
• Work closely with USP’s member nations to work out collective resolutions to enhancing the regional nature and character of the institution. This could be achieved through the creation of innovative policies that ease current immigration restrictions on the recruitment and retention of staff particularly from the region, and, further, by helping to facilitate an easing of inter-country movement of USP staff and students among member countries.
• Uphold the sanctity of USP as a learning space and strongly discourage police and military units from entering any USP grounds in Fiji and elsewhere.
• Respect the autonomy of USP’s staff and student organisations.
• Ensure the University Council-commissioned 2019 BDO Report, which independently investigated all allegations of corruption, is officially released to all stakeholders including staff and students. The only way to investigate criticisms of Ahluwalia is for independent people to assess the truth of these allegations. Similarly, only independent voices can consider the truth of claims made on Ahluwalia’s behalf. The government agrees to accept the outcomes of such investigations. The search for truth and fact are being politicised because of the Fiji government’s interference in university matters. Truth can only prevail if it is not weaponised for political purposes.
• Ensure all concerns regarding staff remuneration are scrutinised fully and fairly by investigators acting independently of both the Fiji government and USP. The government could respect the independence of investigator’s findings. Moreover, the issue of remuneration for those staff who have served the region selflessly over long years could be examined with sensitivity and respect by investigators.
• Allow USP staff and students privacy to work through issues raised by Professor Ahluwalia’s deportation. The government could step back and encourage USP’s people on all sides of this issue to engage in toktok or talanoa in order to heal and move forward in unity. This might encourage people not to settle scores with one another via government and/or university politics.
• Articulate and clarify the lines of autonomy existing between the spheres of the Fijian state – and USP as part of Moana civil society. Then healthy lines of intersection between state and civil society might be established. If such lines are not clearly established, the Fiji government could be accused of trying to absorb USP in Fiji into an apparatus of the state.
• Seek assistance from Pacific neighbours to help sort out issues. Pacific unity is perhaps best demonstrated when we support one another. Working with Pacific Island friends ensures USP’s vision of re-shaping the future in Oceania continues. Moreover, working in partnership with other Pacific Island peoples ensures USP’s mission of empowering Moana peoples in the region continues for the foreseeable future.

Tony Fala is an activist, volunteer community worker and researcher living in Auckland, Aotearoa. He has Tokelau ancestry. According to genealogies held by family elders, Fala also has ancestors from Aotearoa, Samoa, Tonga, and other island groups in Oceania. He works as a volunteer for the Community Services Connect Trust rescuing food and distributing this to families in need. Fala is currently producing a small Pan-Pacific research project, and is also helping organise an Auckland anti-racist conference.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

COMMENTARY: By Yamin Kogoya in Auckland

More than 50 years of “torture” has been inflicted on the Papuan people by the Indonesian government. With the complicity of Western governments, great fear has been put in the hearts and minds of people across the Pacific.

These terrors have become cancerous tumours in the body of the peaceful Pacific island community.

Indonesia’s Pacific 2019 Exposition in Auckland last week was another calculated deception attempted by Jakarta’s elites to try to “cure” this cancer.

READ MORE: Indonesia’s ‘Pacific elevation’ – step up or power play?

But Indonesians have failed to recognise that this malignance cannot be removed by mere trade talk with the people of the Pacific Islands. This cannot be cured merely by bringing a few Pacific diplomats to attend a weekend event, such as the one organised in Auckland.

The Indonesian government might be successful in making friends with a few Pacific leaders through their diplomatic networks, but they will not win the hearts and minds of scores of communities across Oceania.

The head of the telecommunication and information accessibility body BAKTI, Anang Achmad Latif, said during the Expo:

“We are currently focusing on developing telecommunications in Papua, West Papua, Maluku, and East Nusa Tenggara, where the people of each province have similarities with those in the Pacific countries.”

Two crucial issues
Two crucial issues emerged out of this statement – firstly, a broken human spirit cannot be fixed simply by developing and connecting high speed broadband communication.

Secondly, after 57 years, Indonesia has failed to understand the deepest desires of the Papuans.

Indonesia has broken the human spirit of Pacific Islander communities by invading the already independent country of West Papua in 1963. Since then, Jakarta has established a new colonial system in West Papua, to influence the Papuans with all kinds of Indonesian-based development projects but it has failed.

The Indonesian government in Jakarta has been trying to forcefully compel the people of Eastern Indonesia, such as Maluku, to be part of West Papua and make West Papua part of Eastern Indonesia.

All of this is simply Jakarta’s desperate effort to try to bury West Papua’s right to be part of the Pacific family, as well as the global human family.

Jakarta has been devious in its approach since the 1960s, when – with the help of Western governments – it removed the Papuan rights to determine their own future during the phoney 1969 UN-sponsored Act of Free Choice, which Papuans refer to as the “Act of NO Choice”.

For 57 years, both Jakarta’s domestic and foreign policies regarding West Papua, have been a cover up immense untruths and propaganda. The illegal incorporation of an already Independent West Papua by manipulating the UN’s process from the 1950s, leading up to the so-called Act of Free Choice, was the greatest lie Indonesia has been endeavouring to cover up.

Decades old lie
This decades old lie has turned into an incurable cancer within the bodies of both Indonesia and the Pacific. This cannot be simply cured by high speed broadband communication development, or by trade and business deals among the leaders.

The Dutch East Indies ruled over Indonesia for more than 300 years, but the colonial Dutch failed to turn Indonesia into a manufactured European state with their tricks and lies. The Dutch did not establish the colonial system based on the principle of equality for all humans, but rather based it on a European doctrine of controlling, subjugating and civilising others.

In a similar manner to the Dutch, Indonesians have a comparable developmental aim and a wish to “civilise” the Papuans as they see fit.

Jakarta has assumed that Papuans want development, but this assumption is wrong and Indonesian leaders have failed to recognise it.

What Papuans need is not high-speed broadband development as advocated by the Ministry of Communications and Informatics in Auckland. What Papuans need is the awakening of high-speed human spirit that connects us all together and to recognise that the genocide of Papuan humans is the annihilation of all humans.

I have my doubts that Indonesian engagement with the original people of Oceania (Melanesian, Polynesian, Micronesian and Australian Aborigines) will effectively change their fundamental worldview.

Indonesian leaders in Jakarta cannot go to Pacific island countries and say, “we are one family and we have one culture”, while simultaneously “torturing” the Papuans.

Real Papuan issues
It is also unfortunate to note that there was no accommodation made at Indonesia’s Pacific Exposition 2019 in Auckland to disclose the real issues Papuan people face. What Indonesians did display in terms of the Papuan image at this expo was misconstrued.

When New Zealand’s Foreign Affairs Minister Winston Peters was asked about his view on the lack of West Papuan representation at the Expo, he admitted that he was “unable to answer why the Indonesians did not bring an independent West Papuan”.

The central issue here is not about Indonesia’s broadband speed communication development projects for West Papua or Maluku. It is not about trade and business partnership deals with the Pacific countries.

The core issue that gives nightmares to Indonesian military generals in Jakarta and drive their foreign policies towards Pacific island countries, as well as other countries around the world, is all about West Papua independence.

Peters probably knew deep in his heart that West Papua’s Independence was the reason Indonesia’s Pacific Exposition 2019 was organised.

Finding answers to the minister’s question will help cure the cancer Indonesia has created in the minds, hearts and bodies of communities across the Pacific.

The integrity of Indonesia’s public images promoted in the international arena, with the slogan, “Wonderful Indonesia” can never really be fully appreciated and respected by the world’s communities if they continue to terrorise the Pacific Melanesian population of West Papuans.

• Yamin Kogoya is a West Papuan academic who has a Master of Applied Anthropology and Participatory Development from the Australian National University who contributes to Asia Pacific Report. From the Lani tribe in the Papuan Highlands, he is currently living in the Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia, and he attended the Auckland Expo.
• Other Yamin Kogoya articles

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz