For starters (setting aside the libertarian arguments against state aid), New Zealand should cease all aid to Fiji which is filtered through the Fijian government. Secondly, New Zealand should refuse to recognise the new government, and make it plain that bilateral official relations with the military led government will not occur. Australia should do the same.
^
Fiji will ultimately emerge from military government and Australia and New Zealand should do a deal with the interim administration which goes like this:
^
- Set up a constitutional liberal democracy that puts limits on the powers of government and separates government into executive, legislative and judicial branches;
- Provide Fiji with a security guarantee against external invasion with both Australian and New Zealand armed forces;
- Abolish the Fijian armed forces, replace them with a strengthened Police and civil defence unit (useful for natural disaster relief).
^
Refusal to abolish the armed forces should be met with a threat to end all aid.
^
Fiji does not need armed forces, it faces no quantifiable threat from outside (internally it needs more effective policing), and it is incapable of contributing towards collective security efforts. It is clear that the Fijian military threatens its own population more than protects it. If it wants a military, let it be self sufficient, it clearly does not need any aid if it can fritter money away on arms.
^
Fiji will ultimately emerge from military government and Australia and New Zealand should do a deal with the interim administration which goes like this:
^
- Set up a constitutional liberal democracy that puts limits on the powers of government and separates government into executive, legislative and judicial branches;
- Provide Fiji with a security guarantee against external invasion with both Australian and New Zealand armed forces;
- Abolish the Fijian armed forces, replace them with a strengthened Police and civil defence unit (useful for natural disaster relief).
^
Refusal to abolish the armed forces should be met with a threat to end all aid.
^
Fiji does not need armed forces, it faces no quantifiable threat from outside (internally it needs more effective policing), and it is incapable of contributing towards collective security efforts. It is clear that the Fijian military threatens its own population more than protects it. If it wants a military, let it be self sufficient, it clearly does not need any aid if it can fritter money away on arms.
6 comments:
Well Helen Clark said that they are banning high ranking military officials from entering the country, ending our bilateral defence agreements with them, and calling for them to be removed from the Commonwealth. I have no idea what they will do in terms of the aid, but I can't imagine even Helen would trust Binimarama with the money. Also she her comments have made it clear she thinks his rule is unconstitutional and as such not legal, which makes it clear she doesn't recognise the government and that bilateral relations have ended.
It is clear that the Fijian military threatens its own population more than protects it.
With all of these coups I would have to agree.
Oh, and after getting Fiji to set up the system you suggested, they should do the same here, except leave us with a military, as we do have a need for one, unlike Fiji.
Bit torn on this. General B. says his cause is essentially one law for all Fijians, regardless of ethnicity. He's dismissing this govt as it plans to pardon Speight et al, and to take back land for ethnic Fijians only. Is this not a good thing? I'd like to see the army in Zimbabwe do the same.
That was not meant to be anonymous. It was me.
No, Sam it isn't a good thing. Land for one race is called racism. Also he is trampling freedoms left right and center. That is bad and makes it clear he is evil dressed up as good not good.
Kane, you may have misunderstood. He's dismissed the govt because the govt had legislation in the works to take back the land for ethnic Fijians only. He appears to be against that, along with against the pardon of Speight et al (whom he put away). Unless I misunderstand.
Sam I'm curious if that is the primary reason, you may well be right that his action could be justified. Media over here have provided little coverage sadly.
Post a Comment