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.
No comments:
Post a Comment