Revisiting Manus Detention Diplomacy

Francis Hualupmomi
Last week Australia’s Immigration secretary Andrew Metcalfe and Pacific parliamentary secretary Richard Marles had quietly travelled to Port Moresby to revisit the closed Manus detention center raising heated controversy in Australia and PNG. Whilst the ‘Manus Detention Diplomacy’ may obviously not be in PNG’s national interest, it however, may also be used as an opportunity to maximize outstanding national interest should government favors it.
It appears obvious now that the struggling Labor government is contradicting its own manifestos and perhaps compromising national interest by returning to Howard’s ‘hands on’ policy in the region – a slap in the face of its constituencies. Even Gillard contradict herself during campaign in emphasizing East Timor and Malaysia as an alternative choice. Manus detention centre as a Pacific solution under Howard’s regime was dismantled by former Prime Minister Kevin Rudd in settling rough diplomacy with Pacific Islands especially PNG.

Since end of colonization, Australia continues to exercise “hands on” and “ignoring politics” in her external relations with PNG. Canberra continues to assume PNG as its colonial periphery to exploit and impose what it perceives as a testing ground. Australia has an attitude problem in dealing with not only PNG but the rest of the Pacific island countries – she has not learnt her mistakes, for instance with Fiji.
Meanwhile, several political issues remain unsolved between PNG and Australia until Kevin Rudd’s regime. Gillard has misunderstood Labor’s policy towards PNG which Rudd has set in precedence. Australia-PNG bilateral relations under Howard regime was a mass, a repeat of it will not be in the best interest of Australia’s tax payers and PNG government. Most Australian feels that Gillard is too pushy and incapable of handling internal pressure of flooding of unwanted refuges.
The proposal of revisiting Manus detention centre has advantages and disadvantages. PNG government may expect incentives if it accepts the proposal. Whilst the choice of refusal of proposal is in national interest, PNG however, may think of employing it as a leverage to influence policy outcomes with outstanding bilateral issues.
An advantage is that Manus local economy will be serviced by investments as a part of the promise package. PNG may use this proposal as an important opportunity to push for equal regional trade agreements discerning Temporary Workers scheme and others. There is no logic in Canberra being too ignorant in honoring this trade proposal yet ‘telling us what to do’. PNG cannot be blinded by this conservative attitude. If Gillard thinks PNG is a dumping yard, she is probably constructing a mistake as PNG is no longer a sleeping pill let alone her rise in the region. The government should strongly push for Australia to reconsider the scheme and other trade agreements. More so, PNG should negotiate for support on sinking atolls problems in Manus.
Politically, Canberra has continued to calculate NA under Somare-led regime as militant given his past radical anti-colonialism sentiments. Controversially, the politically motivated Motigate saga compounded with other governance issues led by civil societies and the current proposal suggest that PNG should advice Gillard to embrace a “hands off-policy”.
As far as Australia’s national interest is concerned, Gillard should concentrate in dealing with changing dynamics of geopolitical shift in the region. With global shift in power from the West to East with the rise of China constructing a new reconfigured multipolar system, instead Canberra should be playing the Pacific cards to win hearts and minds of PNG. Australia is slowly losing PNG – this is the greatest concern and conundrum. PNG by now is very assertive in its regional approach and has some form of economic power to influence policy outcomes should Australia fail to honor her commitments.
Treating PNG as colonial backyard may not work for Australia. Australia should by now pay some respect for PNG as the leader of Pacific islands nations. One may argue the Pacific archipelago is no longer Canberra’s conventional playing ground. With changing pattern in Pacific politics, Pacific is a contestable theatre where non-zero sum game once pursued by Canberra will be trade-off with new wave of interdependence. Hence Canberra may expect different political outcomes in PNG diplomacy.
On the contrary, in essence, Manus province at the first instance may not service the policy. Manus is also facing the dilemma of sinking atolls which PNG should pay close attention to. Whilst this is the major issue in the island nations, there is an escalation of social discontent and fear among people with Islamism migrants with respect to terrorism and religious fundamentalism. Some argue that there could be a sense of disparity in living standards between refugees and local populous in Manus.
Dealing with refuges from Asia, especially boat people and Middle East has been a problem in Australia. Australia has had a hard time managing it. This trend will continue and Gillard has to deal with it adequately. Given coming elections, this will be a test for her and the Labor party. Australia’s tax payers are counting on her leadership in dealing with soft and hard politics.
More so with late recent death of Osama Bin Laden, it may also be postulated that Australia may find herself in dark shell pondering the infiltration of refuges as potential threats. Increase in Muslim asylum seekers only proliferate threat perception.
The approach under which it (detention centre) has been processed earlier suggest lack of less coherence and pure ignorance as evidenced in the way Australian foreign officials behave towards PNG’s officials. Nonetheless, Australia’s push to have PNG as a regional facility centre is a slap in the face. PNG should refuse in total such scheme as it only paints Australia’s conventional interventionist (neocolonialism) approach.
In my view, Gillard proposal is not in the best of interest of PNG. This is an internal problem which Canberra, as the middle power, has the capacity to deal with it. PNG cannot be used as a dumping ground for exercising external policies. However, should PNG consider this proposal, then it must strongly push for Australia to accommodate PNG’s national interest.