By Francis Hualupmomi
Since Sandline crises followed by 9/11 PNG’s strategic culture remains static. The prime purpose of the state as a “rational strategic man” in its strategic interaction under the organizing principle of anarchy is to maximize strategic choices in consistent with national preferences – guarantee our security and survival in the new multipolar world.
There is compelling plausible why PNG’s strategic culture remains unchanged and under question or threat. To analyze this strategic scenario, we need to understand PNG’s strategic culture. Three questions worth answering: What is PNG’s strategic culture? Has it changed? What are the policy implications?
Strategic culture is a new concept in strategic studies and international relations borrowed from anthropology, sociology and less on psychology and historicism to understand how culture shapes strategic behavior and outlook of states under different conditions. Understanding strategic culture helps the state to rationally maximize strategic choices. This concept is complex but it can be defined within its own context. For this article’s sake, I refer to it as “shared beliefs, attitudes, ideas, norms, traditions that shape strategic behavior of state over a period of time under given conditions”. In this logic culture is not static but is dynamic, i.e. culture changes under different conditions. Hence, I define PNG’s strategic culture as benign in nature yet remain static despite rapid changes in internal and international environment.
There are several factors which physically and psychologically shape strategic culture: economy, geography and demography, history, culture, generational change, and technology. For instance, through the lens of strategic culture influenced by these factors we can calculate why Australia and PNG Defence Force behave differently or why Australian Defence Force is more advanced than PNG Defence Force? Premise on this definition, I attempt to define factors shaping PNG’s strategic culture in post-Sandline Crises.
First, economy is the most important element in shaping states behavior and outlook. Economy fundamentally influence the way actors may behave in its strategic interaction given the size of its economic power. For instance, a simple analogy of state as an abstraction of a rich man may use his economic power to want what he wants. State A with an economic power can use coercive force or non-coercive (normative) force over state B to want what it wants in consistent with its national preferences. Economy and military cannot be separated. Economic power is the function of military power projection. With economic wealth a state can project strategic capacity and capability. Without economic power a state is weak. For instance, China’s military modernization is shaped by its current economic power. PNG’s economic power can also shape its future strategic outlook in the region.
Second, geography and demography plays an important role in shaping strategic behavior of a state. The size, climate, topography, resources, ethnicity and population are important elements in considering strategic choices. PNG is the second biggest island apart from Australia in the Western Pacific theatre. Its location is geo-strategically and geo-economically important given its territorial and maritime positioning and abundance of natural resources. The nature of geography proliferate internal and external threats such as natural disasters, terrorism, transnational crimes and power competition over resources by big powers and complex ethnic rivalries. Population in a given state also makes a difference in which a state may behave towards others in its strategic interaction. PNG although small in population in world index, may still be the largest populated state in the region apart from Australia. Population determines the strategic capacity of the state.
Third, historical factor helps shape strategic behavior. History constitutes a continuous process of past social events which may explain why a state as a rational strategic man behaves over time, space and distance. For instance, East Sepik and Highlanders are warriors based on historical evidence. The pattern of historical social facts can help us understand why Sepiks and Highlanders are aggressive. Such behavior can shape individual perceptions in leadership to maximize national interests given strategic choices. For instance, based on historical evidence we can calculate why Somare is nationalistic and anti-colonialist or why Chan mishandle Sandline crises.
More over, cultural norms, beliefs and traditions also shape strategic behavior of state. PNG has a complex unique culture with more than 800 different languages and ethnicities which play an important role in shaping its strategic interaction in the international system. For instance, PNG’s strategic behavior can be defined as benign rather than benevolent due to its Melanesia culture of communalism, although some form of real-politic or realism metaphor exist in tribal warfare in different regions. Hence, we can argue that PNG’s non-intervention and non-interference in Fiji coup signifies how cultural norms constraint her strategic reaction. Culture therefore is a strategic constraint in PNG’s strategic interaction in regional politics. Culture also plays an important role in external relations. For instance, by understanding China’s culture we can calculate whether China is or will be a threat in the region. Cultural Identity can also help us construct our common enemy or friend in international relations, for instance, China and US threat perception in the region.
Nevertheless, generational change is also considered as important. Perceptions change behaviors with time, space and distance. The way generation thinks and act will affect strategic behavior. New ideas and culture shift perceptions of leaders, elites and ordinary populous in shaping strategic behavior and outlook. We expect clash of strategic thinking between orthodox western based thinkers and new eastern based thinkers, especially Chinese thinkers in PNG (Machiavellian versus Tsen Su). For instance, PNG’s strategic interaction highly depends on new ideas, norms or culture hence we may expect different future outcome, whether PNG will become a realist (belligerent) or liberalist (benign) power in the region is still unknown, let alone time, space and distance foretold.
Finally, since the end of Cold War with the triumph of capitalism over socialism (communism) the world has undergone a complex new wave of globalization driven by transportation, information and communication technology and innovation in technologies. The world has shrunk into a small porous international community. Technology has socially constructed an imagine community of real and potential threats never experienced before, for instance, terrorism, transnational crimes, cyber crime, spread of biological disease, etc. The new reconfigured international security community has extremely shaped how states develop new highly sophisticated strategic capability to project power with precision and speed in military modernization in what is called as “star wars”. PNG located within this new system is more vulnerable to real and potential threats.
Given these strategic factors, I argue that PNG’s strategic culture although has remained static since post-Sandline Crises is more benign due to its own strategic cultural constraint. The state has played a minimal role in securitizing threats perception with changes in internal and international environments. PNG’s strategic culture is still too conservative. What it needs though is to seize the current economic opportunity to rebuild its new strategic culture by modernizing defence force, police force and other state security apparatus. Defence doctrines and structure should be redefined with shift in global power from West to East and diffusion of global power from state to non-state actors driven by globalization and civic demands.
In summative, the internal and external threats suggest new strategic thinking in shaping PNG’s strategic outlook. The lost pride in strategic culture must be restored in a smart fashion. A new-look smart PNGDF supported by well advanced police and intelligence or strategic research organizations is the prime target if PNG is to attain a “harmonious, wealthy, wise and smart nation by 2050”.
Thursday, April 21, 2011
Thursday, April 14, 2011
PNG LNG Project and its Security Implications in Western Pacific Region
By Francis Hualupmomi
The PNG LNG project is prone to potential real security threats if necessary mechanisms are not set by the government before 2014.
In this edition, I specifically focus on potential real threats from internal and external environments pose to affect PNG LNG projects and western Pacific region. I begin by highlighting a brief background on geopolitics of energy security.
Energy is one of the most important geo-strategic and economic interests of any state to co-exist in the international system. Energy contributes to both economy and military power projection in order for a state to exercise its powers to “want what it wants”. In simple, it guarantees the security of a state to survive. For instance, in 1914, Lord Admiral Winston Churchill of British Navy use coercive force as a means to have control and access to Persian Oil to project strategic advantage over Germany.
In Defence Economics history, world wars and conflicts are fought over “who should own and have complete access” to energy sources. For instance, in World War II, Japan’s attempt to establish Great Asian Sphere of Influence with a strategic motive and intent to have control and access over material resources in Asia Pacific blindly led to invasion of Hawaii.
In modern times, the continuous competition, tensions, conflicts and wars by big powers, especially from West demonstrate the significance of energy. One must know that energy is a scarce resource and states have to compete antagonistically through use of coercive force or normative force to maximize their interests. The Gulf Wars, Libya invasion, Kosovo and Georgia crises, to name a few, are all cases of energy competition.
More interestingly, the fight against western imperialism or sometimes referred to as clash of civilization from terrorist groups mostly from Middle Eastern countries is continuous and will remain for the next century. With developments in transportation, communication and information technology, and innovative sophisticated technologies driven by the complex process of globalization, modern terrorism and transnational criminal organizations have mushroomed with more complex capacity to infiltrate borders to maximize their interests.
Given this historical trend and new developments in security in 21st century, is PNG LNG project safe to project economic power in the region?
From a strategic calculus, the LNG project is highly vulnerable and will attract potential real threats in PNG and western Pacific theatres. Several strategic scenarios are posited. In first scenario, terrorists groups, in particular political terrorism pose a potential threat given the fact that the project is a U.S led. Terrorists’ main target is U.S-allies strategic and economic theatres. The LNG project is no exception. Terrorists employ and deploy smart tactics to destroy strategic points such as physical infrastructures, shipping routes and civilians. In this scenario, we expect Port Moresby, Kutubu, Kopi and Juha Plants as credible threats (see PNG LNG map).
In second scenario, transnational crimes such as piratism, illegal gun smuggling, and illegal immigrants in maritime and continental border is most likely to further proliferate and worsening the scenario. In third scenario, Australia and New Zealand are credible targets of terrorism. Both countries, strong allies of U.S in the region will be targeted by terrorists from Middle East and Asia. As strategically positioned in the map, terrorists groups can use PNG as a strategic transit point via borders to attack Australia and New Zealand.
In fourth scenario, resource owners’ rebellion will continue to expand in scope as their demands are not met by the government and the investors. The Singirok GUN SUMMIT REPORT exposed the existence of gun, especially in highlands region as a potential real threat in the country. We expect a mercenary-like-military to be projected by resource owners to challenge the status quo. The bad side of the coin with resource owners rebellion is a possibility of small scale foreign military intervention should the national interest of the investors and state are under threat. The Bougainville and East Timor Civil crises are classic cases.
In the final scenario, miscalculation by PNG and U.S with potential investors such as China, Japan and other western countries may lead to geostrategic competition. We expect strategic maneuvering of warlike-games and proxy wars to escalate into tensions and conflict, however, grand scale war is unthinkable due to complex web of interdependence. Given these emerging new security challenges, what can PNG do?
• The government should seriously implement the Gun Summit Report;
• Modernize military power capacity and capability power projection;
• PNGDF military doctrines and structures should be realigned;
• Increase maritime, airspace and continental constant surveillance;
• Police capacity should be modernized in smart fashion to deal with these new challenges;
• Strengthen the National Intelligence Organization;
• Resource Owners issue should be managed cautiously; and
• Asia-Pacific Security Cooperative Framework should be strengthened.
Whilst more concentration is focused on economic aspects, security and strategic considerations are necessary to mend and fend off potential real threats. The success of LNG project to transform PNG into a modern middle income economy by 2050 and stability of the Western Pacific region depends on its national security arrangement and positioning.
The PNG LNG project is prone to potential real security threats if necessary mechanisms are not set by the government before 2014.
In this edition, I specifically focus on potential real threats from internal and external environments pose to affect PNG LNG projects and western Pacific region. I begin by highlighting a brief background on geopolitics of energy security.
Energy is one of the most important geo-strategic and economic interests of any state to co-exist in the international system. Energy contributes to both economy and military power projection in order for a state to exercise its powers to “want what it wants”. In simple, it guarantees the security of a state to survive. For instance, in 1914, Lord Admiral Winston Churchill of British Navy use coercive force as a means to have control and access to Persian Oil to project strategic advantage over Germany.
In Defence Economics history, world wars and conflicts are fought over “who should own and have complete access” to energy sources. For instance, in World War II, Japan’s attempt to establish Great Asian Sphere of Influence with a strategic motive and intent to have control and access over material resources in Asia Pacific blindly led to invasion of Hawaii.
In modern times, the continuous competition, tensions, conflicts and wars by big powers, especially from West demonstrate the significance of energy. One must know that energy is a scarce resource and states have to compete antagonistically through use of coercive force or normative force to maximize their interests. The Gulf Wars, Libya invasion, Kosovo and Georgia crises, to name a few, are all cases of energy competition.
More interestingly, the fight against western imperialism or sometimes referred to as clash of civilization from terrorist groups mostly from Middle Eastern countries is continuous and will remain for the next century. With developments in transportation, communication and information technology, and innovative sophisticated technologies driven by the complex process of globalization, modern terrorism and transnational criminal organizations have mushroomed with more complex capacity to infiltrate borders to maximize their interests.
Given this historical trend and new developments in security in 21st century, is PNG LNG project safe to project economic power in the region?
From a strategic calculus, the LNG project is highly vulnerable and will attract potential real threats in PNG and western Pacific theatres. Several strategic scenarios are posited. In first scenario, terrorists groups, in particular political terrorism pose a potential threat given the fact that the project is a U.S led. Terrorists’ main target is U.S-allies strategic and economic theatres. The LNG project is no exception. Terrorists employ and deploy smart tactics to destroy strategic points such as physical infrastructures, shipping routes and civilians. In this scenario, we expect Port Moresby, Kutubu, Kopi and Juha Plants as credible threats (see PNG LNG map).
In second scenario, transnational crimes such as piratism, illegal gun smuggling, and illegal immigrants in maritime and continental border is most likely to further proliferate and worsening the scenario. In third scenario, Australia and New Zealand are credible targets of terrorism. Both countries, strong allies of U.S in the region will be targeted by terrorists from Middle East and Asia. As strategically positioned in the map, terrorists groups can use PNG as a strategic transit point via borders to attack Australia and New Zealand.
In fourth scenario, resource owners’ rebellion will continue to expand in scope as their demands are not met by the government and the investors. The Singirok GUN SUMMIT REPORT exposed the existence of gun, especially in highlands region as a potential real threat in the country. We expect a mercenary-like-military to be projected by resource owners to challenge the status quo. The bad side of the coin with resource owners rebellion is a possibility of small scale foreign military intervention should the national interest of the investors and state are under threat. The Bougainville and East Timor Civil crises are classic cases.
In the final scenario, miscalculation by PNG and U.S with potential investors such as China, Japan and other western countries may lead to geostrategic competition. We expect strategic maneuvering of warlike-games and proxy wars to escalate into tensions and conflict, however, grand scale war is unthinkable due to complex web of interdependence. Given these emerging new security challenges, what can PNG do?
• The government should seriously implement the Gun Summit Report;
• Modernize military power capacity and capability power projection;
• PNGDF military doctrines and structures should be realigned;
• Increase maritime, airspace and continental constant surveillance;
• Police capacity should be modernized in smart fashion to deal with these new challenges;
• Strengthen the National Intelligence Organization;
• Resource Owners issue should be managed cautiously; and
• Asia-Pacific Security Cooperative Framework should be strengthened.
Whilst more concentration is focused on economic aspects, security and strategic considerations are necessary to mend and fend off potential real threats. The success of LNG project to transform PNG into a modern middle income economy by 2050 and stability of the Western Pacific region depends on its national security arrangement and positioning.
Wednesday, April 6, 2011
Is Pan-Melanesian Spearheading Group Concept Viable?
By Francis Hualupmomi, in P.R of China.
The Pacific region has witnessed a new political reconfiguration in the 21st century with regionalism as the strategic roadmap to drive its modernization agenda. The Melanesian Spearhead Group’s (MSG) new concept of constructing a Pan-Melanesian Economic Union signifies the new shift in economic globalization and confirms the rise of developing countries in a U.S-led liberal order. The question worth asking is: Is it viable?
Defining the Concept of Pan-MSG Economic Union within the Conceptual Framework of Regionalism
The concept of PAN-MSG ECONOMIC UNION is one of the species of the overarching concept of Regionalism. In order to understand the new strategic thinking in MSG, explaining regionalism is necessary. Regionalism is a concept driven by globalization. The complex web of interdependence propelled by transportation and information and communication technology (ICT) has shrunk the world into a global community providing both opportunities and challenges to especially, developing countries. In a nutshell, developing countries such as Brazil, China, India, and others have seized globalization as a political and economic means to pursue their national interest through bilateral and multilateral relations or regionalism respectively.
Regionalism may appear in different forms and size depending on the nature and scope of the interest of regional countries. The most common forms of regionalism are economic and strategic regional blocs, for instance, APEC, ASEAN, PIF, and others. The most advanced form of regional bloc is the European Union with its own parliament, constitution and currency. Most regional blocs have also expanded the scope of the concept into Trans or pan regional groupings such as Trans American Conference, Pan African, and others. For the sake of MSG, deriving lessons from developing countries such as Africa and Asia is highly recommended.
Regionalism appears to be one of the most important concepts in driving economic modernization in the 21st century. It was reported on Post Courier on Monday, 4th April, 2011 that the Solomon Island’s Minister for Foreign Affairs and External Trade, Peter Shanel, called on the 18th meeting of the MSG of countries – Fiji, Papua New Guinea (PNG), Vanuatu and FLNKS/New Caledonia – to form a Pan-Melanesian Economic Union. Given the geographic constraints, demographic challenges, lack of economic capacity, economic exploitation by external forces and lack of technological innovation and developments, MSG’s concept sounds viable to facilitate cooperation through economic integration. Today, economic globalization is the operative terminology in which global economies strategically maneuver the playing field to maximize their national interest. For developing economies such as in MSG, reducing systematic and persistent challenges is fundamentally imperative.
With PNG recently becoming the economic engine driving the Pacific economies, the construction of Pan-Melanesian Economic Union will require coherent strategic plans in translating its thoughts. The Minister patriotically, calls for member countries to further enhance their trade and economic interests, attract foreign direct investment and have post-summit dialogue with interested development partners to pursue their interest.
Advantages and Opportunities
The advantages of such an economic union are immense if managed prudently. The Pan-African Economic Community suggests a good case for MSG strategic planners to consider. The concept will enhance collaboration and collective cooperation in economic issues affecting member countries through integration. Small island member economies can cooperate in enhancing their interest with larger member economies. And most importantly, the union will have autonomy in pursing collective interest in major mega regional blocs such as APEC, ASEAN, EU, etc.
Given the history of colonialism and emergence of nationhood, the MSG member countries have seen slow progress of modernization. Both internal and external forces play an important role in shaping their slow progress. In general, governance issues, and overexploitation of resources by external forces through neocolonialism and imperialism remains systematic. The MSG countries cannot be isolated and blindly led astray by these forces. Given the magnitude of untapped natural resources, it is timely that this concept must be fully developed and given prominence. MSG is driving in the right direction to shape regional political landscape with PNG already gaining prominence in global economy.
The MSG bloc can cooperate within or externally to pursue their interest. With PNG being the biggest economy with vast natural resources, other member small economies such as Vanuatu and Solomon Islands can mutually benefit through economic and trade specialization. For instance, with PNG LNG, the MSG bloc can construct a regional Energy Cooperation Agency to safeguard its economies during fuel crises or it can use this agency as a leverage to influence geopolitics of energy summit.
Challenges
While increasingly rapid economic globalization brings ashore incalculable benefits under such an arrangement, MSG must not also ignore the bad sides of it. Since MSG, in my view has not yet matured, given its life span compared to others, managing and financing the union may be an issue. Establishing and sustaining it requires full members’ technical advice and financial support. Developing economies appear to be the losers in most cases with lack of experience. However, this does not preclude the construction of the union. The experience of similar arrangements in other developing countries such as in Asia, South America and Africa proved otherwise. MSG can do it as there is already a shift in power from East to West with Asia leading the way. The 21st century is the honeymoon of developing countries as witnessed by the world yet denied by the West.
Some Strategic Considerations
A concept has already been developed by Solomon Islands Government however it still requires more comprehensive thoughts. In my view, the framework should constitute these key objectives as the driving force:
• Achieve greater unity and solidarity between MSG countries;
• Defend the sovereignty, territorial integrity and independence of its Member States;
• Accelerate rapid political and socio-economic integration;
• Promote and defend MSG Positions on issues of interest;
• Eradicate all forms of neocolonialism or imperialism;
• Diversify cooperation with fast emerging mega regions such Asia with the rise of China, South America with Brazil and Africa;
• Consider Australia and New Zealand as important economic partners with no influence;
• Accommodate China, U.S and EU as key economic partners with no influence;
• PNG should take the lead in providing technical advice;
• West Papua Issue should be comprehensively considered in future; and
• Establish a Republic of Pan-Melanesia in the future to project power if possible.
Conclusion
The concept is timely and PNG should take the lead as the leading economic power in MSG. China, U.S and EU must not be ignored as important partners. Australia and New Zealand should be considered without influence. In order for it to work, MSG must protect its autonomy against external influence. Learning from past experiences from PIF should provide some lessons as the way forward.
The author is a Papua New Guinean currently studying a Master of Arts in International Relations at the Institute of International Studies, Jilin University, China. f.hualupmomi@yahoo.com. The views expressed here are part of author’s scholarly work and does not necessarily represent any organization or person.
The Pacific region has witnessed a new political reconfiguration in the 21st century with regionalism as the strategic roadmap to drive its modernization agenda. The Melanesian Spearhead Group’s (MSG) new concept of constructing a Pan-Melanesian Economic Union signifies the new shift in economic globalization and confirms the rise of developing countries in a U.S-led liberal order. The question worth asking is: Is it viable?
Defining the Concept of Pan-MSG Economic Union within the Conceptual Framework of Regionalism
The concept of PAN-MSG ECONOMIC UNION is one of the species of the overarching concept of Regionalism. In order to understand the new strategic thinking in MSG, explaining regionalism is necessary. Regionalism is a concept driven by globalization. The complex web of interdependence propelled by transportation and information and communication technology (ICT) has shrunk the world into a global community providing both opportunities and challenges to especially, developing countries. In a nutshell, developing countries such as Brazil, China, India, and others have seized globalization as a political and economic means to pursue their national interest through bilateral and multilateral relations or regionalism respectively.
Regionalism may appear in different forms and size depending on the nature and scope of the interest of regional countries. The most common forms of regionalism are economic and strategic regional blocs, for instance, APEC, ASEAN, PIF, and others. The most advanced form of regional bloc is the European Union with its own parliament, constitution and currency. Most regional blocs have also expanded the scope of the concept into Trans or pan regional groupings such as Trans American Conference, Pan African, and others. For the sake of MSG, deriving lessons from developing countries such as Africa and Asia is highly recommended.
Regionalism appears to be one of the most important concepts in driving economic modernization in the 21st century. It was reported on Post Courier on Monday, 4th April, 2011 that the Solomon Island’s Minister for Foreign Affairs and External Trade, Peter Shanel, called on the 18th meeting of the MSG of countries – Fiji, Papua New Guinea (PNG), Vanuatu and FLNKS/New Caledonia – to form a Pan-Melanesian Economic Union. Given the geographic constraints, demographic challenges, lack of economic capacity, economic exploitation by external forces and lack of technological innovation and developments, MSG’s concept sounds viable to facilitate cooperation through economic integration. Today, economic globalization is the operative terminology in which global economies strategically maneuver the playing field to maximize their national interest. For developing economies such as in MSG, reducing systematic and persistent challenges is fundamentally imperative.
With PNG recently becoming the economic engine driving the Pacific economies, the construction of Pan-Melanesian Economic Union will require coherent strategic plans in translating its thoughts. The Minister patriotically, calls for member countries to further enhance their trade and economic interests, attract foreign direct investment and have post-summit dialogue with interested development partners to pursue their interest.
Advantages and Opportunities
The advantages of such an economic union are immense if managed prudently. The Pan-African Economic Community suggests a good case for MSG strategic planners to consider. The concept will enhance collaboration and collective cooperation in economic issues affecting member countries through integration. Small island member economies can cooperate in enhancing their interest with larger member economies. And most importantly, the union will have autonomy in pursing collective interest in major mega regional blocs such as APEC, ASEAN, EU, etc.
Given the history of colonialism and emergence of nationhood, the MSG member countries have seen slow progress of modernization. Both internal and external forces play an important role in shaping their slow progress. In general, governance issues, and overexploitation of resources by external forces through neocolonialism and imperialism remains systematic. The MSG countries cannot be isolated and blindly led astray by these forces. Given the magnitude of untapped natural resources, it is timely that this concept must be fully developed and given prominence. MSG is driving in the right direction to shape regional political landscape with PNG already gaining prominence in global economy.
The MSG bloc can cooperate within or externally to pursue their interest. With PNG being the biggest economy with vast natural resources, other member small economies such as Vanuatu and Solomon Islands can mutually benefit through economic and trade specialization. For instance, with PNG LNG, the MSG bloc can construct a regional Energy Cooperation Agency to safeguard its economies during fuel crises or it can use this agency as a leverage to influence geopolitics of energy summit.
Challenges
While increasingly rapid economic globalization brings ashore incalculable benefits under such an arrangement, MSG must not also ignore the bad sides of it. Since MSG, in my view has not yet matured, given its life span compared to others, managing and financing the union may be an issue. Establishing and sustaining it requires full members’ technical advice and financial support. Developing economies appear to be the losers in most cases with lack of experience. However, this does not preclude the construction of the union. The experience of similar arrangements in other developing countries such as in Asia, South America and Africa proved otherwise. MSG can do it as there is already a shift in power from East to West with Asia leading the way. The 21st century is the honeymoon of developing countries as witnessed by the world yet denied by the West.
Some Strategic Considerations
A concept has already been developed by Solomon Islands Government however it still requires more comprehensive thoughts. In my view, the framework should constitute these key objectives as the driving force:
• Achieve greater unity and solidarity between MSG countries;
• Defend the sovereignty, territorial integrity and independence of its Member States;
• Accelerate rapid political and socio-economic integration;
• Promote and defend MSG Positions on issues of interest;
• Eradicate all forms of neocolonialism or imperialism;
• Diversify cooperation with fast emerging mega regions such Asia with the rise of China, South America with Brazil and Africa;
• Consider Australia and New Zealand as important economic partners with no influence;
• Accommodate China, U.S and EU as key economic partners with no influence;
• PNG should take the lead in providing technical advice;
• West Papua Issue should be comprehensively considered in future; and
• Establish a Republic of Pan-Melanesia in the future to project power if possible.
Conclusion
The concept is timely and PNG should take the lead as the leading economic power in MSG. China, U.S and EU must not be ignored as important partners. Australia and New Zealand should be considered without influence. In order for it to work, MSG must protect its autonomy against external influence. Learning from past experiences from PIF should provide some lessons as the way forward.
The author is a Papua New Guinean currently studying a Master of Arts in International Relations at the Institute of International Studies, Jilin University, China. f.hualupmomi@yahoo.com. The views expressed here are part of author’s scholarly work and does not necessarily represent any organization or person.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)