The recent announcement by Fiji’s Minister of Defence and Veterans Affairs that Fiji will consider contributing troops to a proposed international stabilisation force in Gaza imposes a responsibility on all of us to ask the hard questions before the decision is finalised by Cabinet.

At the outset, let’s all be clear on one thing — Gaza is not a routine peacekeeping environment. It is a highly contested battlespace where the legitimacy, consent, and enforceability of any international force remain uncertain.

Before Fiji government commits its soldiers to Gaza, the public deserves clear answers to a number of questions about the risks such a deployment would pose to those on the ground.

1: Is there genuine consent?
The most fundamental issue is the explicit rejection of the stabilisation force concept by Hamas, the dominant armed actor in Gaza.

Peacekeeping doctrine rests on consent, impartiality, and limited use of force. When one principal party openly rejects a mission, the cornerstone of consent collapses.

Without consent, Fijian soldiers in Gaza will not be seen as neutral interposers. They risk being perceived as a hostile occupying force, regardless of intent.

For troops on the ground, this dramatically elevates the risk.

Patrols, checkpoints, convoys, and static positions become potential targets — not because Fijian and other soldiers in the stabilisation force have failed, but because their presence itself is rejected.

Fiji’s peacekeepers have historically operated where communities accepted their role.

Gaza would represent a fundamentally different operational reality.

2: How clear and limited is the mandate?
Public reporting suggests the proposed force would support public order, protect humanitarian operations, assist in rebuilding Palestinian policing, and potentially contribute to the demilitarisation of armed groups.

Each of these tasks carries different — and escalating — levels of risk.

Protecting aid corridors is one thing. Being perceived as assisting disarmament or security restructuring against the wishes of the dominant armed faction in Gaza, is quite another.

Without a narrow, realistic mandate and clear rules of engagement, Fijian soldiers in Gaza risk mission creep — sliding from stabilisation into enforcement.

History shows that unclear mandates expose peacekeepers to rising hostility while leaving them politically constrained in how they respond.

The Fiji public deserves to know exactly what its soldiers would be authorised — and expected — to do if confronted by armed resistance.

3: Are troops being deployed into an urban conflict?
Gaza is one of the most complex operating environments in the world: dense urban terrain, extensive tunnel networks, armed groups embedded within civilian populations, and a society traumatised by prolonged conflict.

If Hamas and other factions do not accept the force, Fijian soldiers will find themselves operating in conditions closer to low-intensity urban warfare.

In such environments, visibility offers no protection. Uniforms do not deter improvised explosive devices, snipers, or politically motivated attacks.

The Fiji public are entitled to know whether its sons and daughters are being sent to stabilise a peace — or to operate amid an unresolved conflict where peace does not yet exist.

4: What does Fiji’s own experience tell us?
Fiji’s long service with UNIFIL in Lebanon offers an important point of comparison.

Fijian troops operated there with a clear UN mandate, within defined areas of responsibility, and — crucially — with working relationships with local communities that largely accepted their presence. Even then, the environment was never risk-free.

Gaza would be more volatile.

Unlike southern Lebanon, Gaza involves an armed group that openly rejects the very concept of an international force.

That distinction matters profoundly for force protection and operational viability.

5: What is the duty of care?
Ultimately, the central issue is the Fiji government’s duty of care to its soldiers and their families.

Courage is not the same as recklessness.

Pride in service must be matched by a rigorous assessment of the risks; whether the mission is lawful, achievable, adequately resourced and grounded in a good dose of political reality.

Before any deployment, the government owes the public clear answers:

• Is there genuine consent from all major parties on the ground?
• Is the mandate limited, realistic, and enforceable?
• Are the rules of engagement robust enough if consent collapses?
• And is Fiji being asked to stabilise a peace — or to substitute for one that does not yet exist?

Asking these questions is not an act of disloyalty. It is the standard that has protected Fijian soldiers and their reputation in past deployments.

Our peacekeeping legacy was built on disciplined judgment, not on repeating the narrative of The Charge of the Light Brigade — where unquestioned courage and noble intentions led to a fatal advance born of strategic ambiguity, and soldiers paid the price for a lack of clarity.

Fiji’s peacekeeping reputation was earned through disciplined judgment and respect for human life, not by placing soldiers in harm’s way where there is no peace to keep.

Jim Sanday was a commissioned military officer in the pre-coup Royal Fiji Military Forces (RFMF) and commanded Fijian peacekeeping battalions in Lebanon and Sinai. In 2025, he led the National Security and Defence Review (NSDR) and co-authored the National Security Strategy that was approved by Cabinet in June 2025. This article was first pubished by the Fiji Sun and is republished by Asia Pacific Report with the author’s permission.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

The late Archbishop Desmond Tutu, a Nobel laureate and tireless campaigner against South African apartheid, once observed: “If you are neutral in situations of injustice, you have chosen the side of the oppressor.”

For decades, the BBC’s editorial policy in reporting on Israel and Palestine has consistently chosen the side of the oppressor — and all too often, not even by adopting the impartiality the corporation claims as the bedrock of its journalism.

Instead, the British state broadcaster regularly chooses language and terminology whose effect is to deceive its audience. And it compounds such journalistic malpractice by omitting vital pieces of context when that extra information would present Israel in a bad light.

BBC bias — which entails knee-jerk echoing of the British establishment’s support for Israel as a highly militarised ally projecting Western interests into the oil-rich Middle East – was starkly on show once again this week as the broadcaster reported on the violence at Al-Aqsa Mosque.

Social media was full of videos showing heavily armed Israeli police storming the mosque complex during the holy Muslim fasting month of Ramadan.

Police could be seen pushing peaceful Muslim worshippers, including elderly men, off their prayer mats and forcing them to leave the site. In other scenes, police were filmed beating worshippers inside a darkened Al-Aqsa, while women could be heard screaming in protest.

What is wrong with the British state broadcaster’s approach — and much of the rest of the Western media’s — is distilled in one short BBC headline: “Clashes erupt at contested holy site.”

Into a sentence of just six words, the BBC manages to cram three bogusly “neutral” words, whose function is not to illuminate or even to report, but to trick the audience, as Tutu warned, into siding with the oppressor.

Furious backlash
Though video of the beatings was later included on the BBC’s website and the headline changed after a furious online backlash, none of the sense of unprovoked, brutal Israeli state violence, or its malevolent rationale, was captured by the BBC’s reporting.

To call al-Aqsa a ‘contested holy site’, as the BBC does, is simply to repeat a propaganda talking point from Israel, the oppressor state, and dress it up as neutral reporting

The “clashes” at al-Aqsa, in the BBC’s telling, presume a violent encounter between two groups: Palestinians, described by Israel and echoed by the BBC as “agitators”, on one side; and Israeli forces of law and order on the other.

That is the context, according to the BBC, for why unarmed Palestinians at worship need to be beaten. And that message is reinforced by the broadcaster’s description of the seizure of hundreds of Palestinians at worship as “arrests” — as though an unwelcome, occupying, belligerent security force present on another people’s land is neutrally and equitably upholding the law.

“Erupt” continues the theme. It suggests the “clashes” are a natural force, like an earthquake or volcano, over which Israeli police presumably have little, if any, control. They must simply deal with the eruption to bring it to an end.

And the reference to the “contested” holy site of Al-Aqsa provides a spurious context legitimising Israeli state violence: police need to be at Al-Aqsa because their job is to restore calm by keeping the two sides “contesting” the site from harming each other or damaging the holy site itself.

The BBC buttresses this idea by uncritically citing an Israeli police statement accusing Palestinians of being at Al-Aqsa to “disrupt public order and desecrate the mosque”.

Palestinians are thus accused of desecrating their own holy site simply by worshipping there — rather than the desecration committed by Israeli police in storming al-Aqsa and violently disrupting worship.

The History of Al-Aqsa Mosque.  Video: Middle East Eye

Israeli provocateurs
The BBC’s framing should be obviously preposterous to any rookie journalist in Jerusalem. It assumes that Israeli police are arbiters or mediators at Al-Aqsa, dispassionately enforcing law and order at a Muslim place of worship, rather than the truth: that for decades, the job of Israeli police has been to act as provocateurs, dispatched by a self-declared Jewish state, to undermine the long-established status quo of Muslim control over Al-Aqsa.

Events were repeated for a second night this week when police again raided Al-Aqsa, firing rubber bullets and tear gas as thousands of Palestinians were at prayer. US statements calling for “calm” and “de-escalation” adopted the same bogus evenhandedness as the BBC.

The mosque site is not “contested”, except in the imagination of Jewish religious extremists, some of them in the Israeli government, and the most craven kind of journalists.

True, there are believed to be the remains of two long-destroyed Jewish temples somewhere underneath the raised mount where al-Aqsa is built. According to Jewish religious tradition, the Western Wall — credited with being a retaining wall for one of the disappeared temples – is a place of worship for Jews.

But under that same Jewish rabbinical tradition, the plaza where Al-Aqsa is sited is strictly off-limits to Jews. The idea of Al-Aqsa complex as being “contested” is purely an invention of the Israeli state — now backed by a few extremist settler rabbis — that exploits this supposed “dispute” as the pretext to assert Jewish sovereignty over a critically important piece of occupied Palestinian territory.

Israel’s goal — not Judaism’s — is to strip Palestinians of their most cherished national symbol, the foundation of their religious and emotional attachment to the land of their ancestors, and transfer that symbol to a state claiming to exclusively represent the Jewish people.

To call Al-Aqsa a “contested holy site”, as the BBC does, is simply to repeat a propaganda talking point from Israel, the oppressor state, and dress it up as neutral reporting.

‘Equal rights’ at Al-Aqsa
The reality is that there would have been no “clashes”, no “eruption” and no “contest” had Israeli police not chosen to storm Al-Aqsa while Palestinians were worshipping there during the holiest time of the year.

This is not a ‘clash’. It is not a ‘conflict’. Those supposedly ‘neutral’ terms conceal what is really happening: apartheid and ethnic cleansing

There would have been no “clashes” were Israeli police not aggressively enforcing a permanent occupation of Palestinian land in Jerusalem, which has encroached ever more firmly on Muslim access to, and control over, the mosque complex.

There would have been no “clashes” were Israeli police not taking orders from the latest – and most extreme – of a series of police ministers, Itamar Ben Gvir, who does not even bother to hide his view that Al-Aqsa must be under absolute Jewish sovereignty.

There would have been no “clashes” had Israeli police not been actively assisting Jewish religious settlers and bigots to create facts on the ground over many years — facts to bolster an evolving Israeli political agenda that seeks “equal rights” at Al-Aqsa for Jewish extremists, modelled on a similar takeover by settlers of the historic Ibrahimi Mosque in Hebron.

And there would have been no “clashes” if Palestinians were not fully aware that, over many years, a tiny, fringe Jewish settler movement plotting to blow up Al-Aqsa Mosque to build a Third Temple in its place has steadily grown, flourishing under the sponsorship of Israeli politicians and ever more sympathetic Israeli media coverage.

Cover story for violence
Along with the Israeli army, the paramilitary Israeli police are the main vehicle for the violent subjugation of Palestinians, as the Israeli state and its settler emissaries dispossess Palestinians, driving them into ever smaller enclaves.

This is not a “clash”. It is not a “conflict”. Those supposedly “neutral” terms conceal what is really happening: apartheid and ethnic cleansing.

Just as there is a consistent, discernible pattern to Israel’s crimes against Palestinians, there is a parallel, discernible pattern in the Western media’s misleading reporting on Israel and Palestine.

Palestinians in the occupied West Bank are being systematically dispossessed by Israel of their homes and farmlands so they can be herded into overcrowded, resource-starved cities.

Palestinians in Gaza have been dispossessed of their access to the outside world, and even to other Palestinians, by an Israeli siege that encages them in an overcrowded, resourced-starved coastal enclave.

And in the Old City of Jerusalem, Palestinians are being progressively dispossessed by Israel of access to, and control over, their central religious resource: Al-Aqsa Mosque. Their strongest source of religious and emotional attachment to Jerusalem is being actively stolen from them.

To describe as “clashes” any of these violent state processes — carefully calibrated by Israel so they can be rationalised to outsiders as a “security response” — is to commit the very journalistic sin Tutu warned of. In fact, it is not just to side with the oppressor, but to intensify the oppression; to help provide the cover story for it.

That point was made this week by Francesca Albanese, the UN expert on Israel’s occupation. She noted in a tweet about the BBC’s reporting of the Al-Aqsa violence: “Misleading media coverage contributes to enabling Israel’s unchecked occupation & must also be condemned/accounted for.”

Bad journalism
There can be reasons for bad journalism. Reporters are human and make mistakes, and they can use language unthinkingly, especially when they are under pressure or events are unexpected.

It is an editorial choice that keeps the BBC skewing its reporting in the same direction: making Israel look like a judicious actor pursuing lawful, rational goals

But that is not the problem faced by those covering Israel and Palestine. Events can be fast-moving, but they are rarely new or unpredictable. The reporter’s task should be to explain and clarify the changing forms of the same, endlessly repeating central story: of Israel’s ongoing dispossession and oppression of Palestinians, and of Palestinian resistance.

The challenge is to make sense of Israel’s variations on a theme, whether it is dispossessing Palestinians through illegal settlement-building and expansion; army-backed settler attacks; building walls and cages for Palestinians; arbitrary arrests and night raids; the murder of Palestinians, including children and prominent figures; house demolitions; resource theft; humiliation; fostering a sense of hopelessness; or desecrating holy sites.

No one, least of all BBC reporters, should have been taken by surprise by this week’s events at Al-Aqsa.

The Muslim holy fasting month of Ramadan, when Al-Aqsa is at the heart of Islamic observance for Palestinians, coincided this year with the Jewish Passover holiday, as it did last year.

Passover is when Jewish religious extremists hope to storm Al-Aqsa Mosque complex to make animal sacrifices, recreating some imagined golden age in Judaism. Those extremists tried again this year, as they do every year — except this year, they had a police minister in Ben Gvir, leader of the fascist Jewish Power party, who is privately sympathetic to their cause.

Violent settler and army attacks on Palestinian farmers in the occupied West Bank, especially during the autumn olive harvest, are a staple of news reporting from the region, as is the intermittent bombing of Gaza or snipers shooting Palestinians protesting their mass incarceration by Israel.

It is an endless series of repetitions that the BBC has had decades to make sense of and find better ways to report.

It is not journalistic error or failure that is the problem. It is an editorial choice that keeps the British state broadcaster skewing its reporting in the same direction: making Israel look like a judicious actor pursuing lawful, rational goals, while Palestinian resistance is presented as tantrum-like behaviour, driven by uncontrollable, unintelligible urges that reflect hostility towards Jews rather than towards an oppressor Israeli state.

Tail of a mouse
Archbishop Tutu expanded on his point about siding with the oppressor. He added: “If an elephant has its foot on the tail of a mouse, and you say that you are neutral, the mouse will not appreciate your neutrality.”

This week, a conversation between Ben Gvir, the far-right, virulently anti-Arab police minister, and his police chief, Kobi Shabtai, was leaked to Israel’s Channel 12 News. Shabtai reportedly told Ben Gvir about his theory of the “Arab mind”, noting: “They murder each other. It’s in their nature. That’s the mentality of the Arabs.”

This conclusion — convenient for a police force that has abjectly failed to solve crimes within Palestinian communities — implies that the Arab mind is so deranged, so bloodthirsty, that brutal repression of the kind seen at Al-Aqsa is all police can do to keep a bare minimum of control.

Ben Gvir, meanwhile, believes a new “national guard” — a private militia he was recently promised by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu — can help him to crush Palestinian resistance. Settler street thugs, his political allies, will finally be able to put on uniforms and have official licence for their anti-Arab violence.

This is the real context — the one that cannot be acknowledged by the BBC or other Western outlets — for the police storming of Al-Aqsa complex this week. It is the same context underpinning settlement expansion, night raids, checkpoints, the siege of Gaza, the murder of Palestinian journalists, and much, much more.

Jewish supremacism undergirds every Israeli state action towards Palestinians, tacitly approved by Western states and their media in the service of advancing Western colonialism in the oil-rich Middle East.

The BBC’s coverage this week, as in previous months and years, was not neutral, or even accurate. It was, as Tutu warned, a confidence trick — one meant to lull audiences into accepting Israeli violence as always justified, and Palestinian resistance as always abhorrent.

Jonathan Cook is the author of three books on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and a winner of the Martha Gellhorn Special Prize for Journalism. His website and blog can be found at www.jonathan-cook.net. This article was first published at Middle East Eye and is republished with the permission of the author.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

British gender activist Posie Parker has left New Zealand, calling it the “worst place for women she has ever visited”.

Kellie-Jay Keen-Minshull, also known as Posie Parker, shared a photo on social media showing her being escorted by police through Auckland Airport.

She left her rally at Albert Park in Auckland yesterday without speaking, after being overwhelmed by thousands of heckling counter-protesters and pelted with tomato juice.

Controversial Harry Potter author JK Rowling took to Twitter to brand the protest scenes in Auckland yesterday “repellent”.

During a series of Tweets, she said a mob “had assaulted women standing up for their rights”.

Parker posted to Twitter and said she was leaving ‘the worst place for women she has ever visited’.

The activist also claimed she was a victim of a campaign to assassinate her character, boosted by a “corrupt media populated by vile dishonest cult members”.

No Wellington rally
Her departure means her planned rally for Wellington today will not go ahead.

A local group supporting her visit Speak Up For Women NZ had already announced the scheduled rally today in Wellington had been cancelled due to security concerns.

Auckland Pride rejected the idea that the activist had abandoned her Wellington plans due to threats of violence.

There is a narrative quickly taking hold amongst anti-trans groups and individuals that Parker abandoned her event because of violence from our community.

— Auckland Pride 🏳️‍⚧️ (@AucklandPride) March 25, 2023

The group Tweeted: “There is a narrative quickly taking hold amongst anti-trans groups and individuals that Parker abandoned her event because of violence from our community.

“We reject this narrative. We are of the firm belief that the demonstration of unity, celebration, and acceptance alongside joyous music, chanting, and noise of 5,000 supporters was too loud to overcome and the reason for her departure – and not the actions of any one individual.”

NZ First leader Winston Peters said violence and cancel culture did not represent “the majority of New Zealanders who want an open and free Western democracy that values freedom of speech”.

Irony of ‘disgrace’
He tweeted: “Whether you agree with her views or not, the irony of the disgraceful situation that occurred at the Posie Parker event, is that violence, hatred, and intimidation is coming from the very group who claim to be the ones standing up for inclusivity and freedoms.”

While Parker’s planned rally in Wellington today is off, groups opposing her views still plan to turn out, with the city’s annual CubaDupa festival also taking place today.

Police say they will be out in central Wellington to monitor and respond to any problems.

Parker arrived at the Albert Park event yesterday morning to speak with supporters at a rally.

Her presence and comments infuriated rights advocates, and the reception she received in Auckland yesterday left Parker visibly shaken.

Neo-Nazis in Australia
The controversial British activist’s Melbourne rally days before was attended by neo-Nazis, a fact widely reported in New Zealand before she was allowed into the country by Immigration NZ and Immigration Minister Michael Wood.

Parker was critical of what she said was a lack of police presence at the Auckland event, with her security team struggling to separate her from hostile crowds of protesters.

After being escorted to a police car through the crowd, Parker requested to be driven to the police station, because she feared for her safety.

Media had reported she was seen checking in for an international flight out of Auckland last night.

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

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

A few shops and buildings in Papua New Guinea’s Western Highlands provincial capital Mt Hagen have been destroyed and looted in a riot that caused four deaths and left 20 people injured and hospitalised.

The violence was triggered by a fight between between Mt Hagen Secondary and Hagen Park Secondary schoolboys last Friday.

Provincial police commander Chief Superintendent Joe Puri said tension was high throughout the weekend but there were no further fights.

Tension continued yesterday forcing Mt Hagen police to set up a roadblock from the Komkui Building roundabout to the old tribes’ theatre roundabout to ensure normal business continued.

The roadblock was also to allow the relatives of the four victims to come forward to show their sorrow.

The fight last Friday occurred in the middle of the city and opportunists took advantage and destroyed Hagen Plaza, which houses a food restaurant, a Digicel shop, Trophy Haus and Fone Haus.

Bystanders said the opportunists ran in numbers into the plaza and grabbed whatever that was inside, including mobile devices, footwear, work wear and other valuable items.

‘Disappointed’ with the public
Chief Superintendent Puri said he was disappointed with the public for taking part in the fight where buildings were damaged and shops looted.

“The public is supposed to contain the fight when it first started among the boys rather than ignoring and joining in, as it went out of proportion and eventually led to deaths and injuries,” he said.

“We have taken the investigation very seriously since day one and have already engaged outside investigation teams so the situation is not compromised in any way, and after that, we will be able to identify who was involved.”

Chief Superintendent Puri also urged the public to maintain peace and look after properties and businesses in the province.

Service providers in the province have complained that students must not be involved in fights as opportunists often damage and loot their shops.

Other businesses that were targeted included Boroko Motors and Wamps Fuel Station.

Rita Peki is a PNG Post-Courier reporter. Republished with permission.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Police have made 60 arrests today as part of a pre-planned operation to remove anti-covid public health protesters from New Zealand’s Parliament grounds.

Police have been descending on Parliament from early this morning on day 23 of the occupation and have also begun towing larger vehicles, including campervans and trucks.

They say they have gained significant ground this morning across the occupation.

Police have asked the public and commuters to avoid the area near Parliament and say they will continue to help those who want to leave the grounds to do so safely.

Hill Street is closed, and many surrounding streets to the protest have been blocked.

Protesters have reacted by throwing cones at police.

Police staff in and around the protest area have sighted protesters in possession of various weapons. These include homemade plywood shields and pitchforks.

One man told RNZ he wanted to move his car because it was all he owned.

There were reports of forklifts on the move, and police were also taking down more tents.

Around 60 people have now been arrested in relation to this morning’s operation at Parliament grounds.

Police continue to tow vehicles that are parked illegally. We have commenced towing larger vehicles, which includes trucks, vans and campervans.

— New Zealand Police (@nzpolice) March 1, 2022

One of the RNZ reporters on the scene said they were being abused by protesters and told to leave.

The Kīngitanga is calling for a peaceful resolution to the occupation at Parliament and other sites across the country.

In a statement, a spokesperson said the Kīngitanga had not given its support to any occupation and claims to the contrary were untrue.

They said Kiingi Tuheitia had been a strong advocate for the covid public health response, while acknowledging the impact on people and their families.

The Kīngitanga said its priority was to get through omicron and start preparing for a life after covid.

The Kīngitanga said it was calling for a peaceful resolution to the occupation at Parliament and other protest sites across the country.

#WATCH Hundreds of police, many in riot gear, are moving in on protesters occupying Parliament and the surrounding streets.

Here is what our reporters saw throughout the morning.https://t.co/GcuivdbAuR

— Morning Report (@NZMorningReport) March 1, 2022

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

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Demonstrators gathered in Port Moresby yesterday for a march to Parliament in protest over the covid-19 vaccines, which they claimed wrongly to be mandatory, a day after Papua New Guinean police warned such gatherings were illegal.

The protest was a result of a post circulating on social media about a “peaceful protest march” planned for the day against mandatory vaccination.

Despite assurances from Controller of the Pandemic Response and Police Commissioner David Manning that the notice circulated was false and misleading because vaccination was not mandatory and still remained a personal choice, the protesters gathered for the rally.

The anti-vaccine crowd disobeyed advice from the police to disperse. Instead, they took to the Gordon bus stop, gained momentum from others who joined them and attempted to march through a residential street towards the Wardstrip Primary School and on to Parliament.

However, police thwarted their their attempts by blocked the route and spoke to the crowd who disregarded social distancing and masks.

The NCD/Central Assistant Commissioner of Police (ACP), Anthony Wagambie Jnr, addressed the crowd. He said their concerns had already been heard.

It was not clear who the organisers of the march were.

Endangering public safety
ACP Wagambie explained that the march had to be stopped by police to prevent disorder stemmed that would endanger the safety of others in Port Moresby.

The anti-vaxxers carried a banner with messages condemning “666” and “artificial intelligence”.

Misinformation about the covid-19 vaccines is currently swamping genuine information available to Papua New Guineans and is allowing fear and confusion to gain momentum.

Asia Pacific Report reports only 1.2 percent of the nine million Papua New Guineans are vaccinated against covid-19.

According to the John Hopkins University covid dashboard, 29,715 cases of covid and 370 deaths have been reported on Papua New Guinea but health officials fear the real toll is far higher because of limited testing and records.

John Hopkins has reported that the total death toll from covid-19 has now passed five million globally.

Marysilla Kellerton is a Loop PNG reporter.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz