'NZ would consider sending troops to Fiji - Key' Monday Apr 20, 2009
New Zealand would consider sending armed forces troops into Fiji if they were needed to stabilise peace as part of a multi-lateral action, Prime Minister John Key said.
The Government was not "sitting here planning today to do that" but would consider it if the need arose, he told TV One's Breakfast show.
"If it was part of a multi-lateral effort to stabilise peace in a dangerous situation in Fiji of course New Zealand would consider that (sending in troops)," he said.
"It's very concerning in Fiji ... I think it's tragic actually."
He said there was always the threat of a fight back from the Fijian people.
Foreign Minister Murray McCully said yesterday the Government was considering strengthening sanctions against Fiji but would not impose tourism and trade restrictions.
"Sacking the judges, clamping down on personal freedoms, media freedoms, it doesn't get much worse than that," he said.
"That's a traditional mould for a military dictator and it hasn't had a happy ending anywhere in the world."
Fiji's President Ratu Iloilo scrapped Fiji's constitution and fired the judiciary earlier this month after three Appeal Court judges ruled the military takeover in 2006 was illegal.
Self-appointed Prime Minister Commodore Voreqe (Frank) Bainimarama was re-appointed prime minister and immediately issued decrees which included media censorship and immunity from prosecution for soldiers.
His explanation has been that he won't hold elections until reforms have been implemented to change the system, and the timeline has been extended to 2014.
The Pacific Island Forum, the Commonwealth and the European Union are urging Cdre Bainimarama to return Fiji to democratic rule but he has so far ignored them.
Questions to ponder are:
- Should NZ send troops to Fiji? If so should it be part of a multi-lateral effort? or should NZ stop sitting back and waiting and take a stand against the military dictatorship and restricted freedoms occuring?
- Is Fiji at the current state where intervention is necessary or does it require even worse conditions to justify intervention by troops?
- Are there other solutions NZ could consider to help Fiji's situation?
- What role should the likes of the UN and other international organisations mentioned at the end of the article take?
- Considering Fiji is one of NZ's closest neighbours and that in 2006, 37,746 New Zealand residents of various ethnicities were born in Fiji, but also that Fijian people born in New Zealand accounted for 47 percent of the total Fijian population in New Zealand in 2001- should NZ care about what happens in Fiji?
I would be interested to hear what anyone thinks...
Should New Zealand send troops to Fiji? I would err on the side of not, at least not without it being, as John Key stated, "part of a multi-lateral action". In my eyes public opinion and media tone are always more critical of countries and people who take action rather than not. By this I mean its much easier to avoid mistakes by doing nothing.
ReplyDeleteThe first example I can think of is with regards to US military history. With widespread criticism of the Iraq operation today, many parallels are drawn with the Vietnam operations of several decades ago. The US is widely seen as being "up to it's old tricks," continuing some sort of imperial mission. Yet how many times are we reminded of their operations in Operation Joint Endeavour, conducted by Nato in Bosnia in '95, in which US troops made up a substantial part of the overall force and whose airforce was one of the most decisive factors in the success of the operation. Nor are we ever reminded of the massive threat of Saddam Hussein in the Middle East situation pre- Gulf War II, namely the volatility and risk of another dictator that may have had WMD's.
Now don't get me wrong, I am trying to put forth an unbiased opinion. In no way am I commenting on whether the Iraq War was justified, whether the situation is even better in Iraq today (some would argue it is not) or on any other aspect of US foreign policy. My only point is that popular opinion is balanced towards a focus on negative things as opposed to positive action. I see this in terms of simple economics: the media and press are for-profit-organisations. Like any other business they need to make money. And what sells newspapers better than a delicious international scandal with an extra helping of blame?
The US is constantly criticized for what is perceived as a history of negative foreign intervention without ever a mention of its positive roles.
I just wonder whether it is worth the risk of New Zealand taking unilateral action in Fiji, given that, were things to turn to custard, New Zealand probably couldn't help but come out worse off for what would be, undoubtedly, a noble cause (though the risks of this may be somewhat lower than I'm making them out to be).
But then should we instead be acting on purely principled grounds for what is good for humanity, ignoring any possible image concerns? What does everybody else think?
Lastly I love a good quote so I'll chuck one out there from the journalist and former editor of The New Republic, Murray Kempton:
'A critic is someone who comes onto the battlefield when the war is over, and shoots the wounded.'
Relevant? Perhaps not. Quotability factor? Off the freakin scale!
So we are going to send in our army but we won't send them aid? Hmm, What a pointless, money wasting exercise!!
ReplyDeleteNZ troops are mostly trained as 'peace keepers' but what exactly does this entail? And we have sat and watched even more horrific conflicts in the past, and still never done a thing, such as Bosnia and Cambodia.
Economic sanctions will do little to help, it could only fuel an uprising if the masses get too hungry and sick of the regime.
Maybe if NZaid wasn't going to be absorbed into Mfat TOMORROW then we could send more doctors, teachers, farmers and mechanics to Fiji to teach the population how to farm proper commodities and not just cash crops, if we taught them how to fix their mechanical water pumps so they cpuld keep them running instead of pumping water by hand, if we taught Fijian children to read and write then when they grew up they would want to be upstanding citizens and not become bullies and form political parties that control their army and take over the government.
By absorbing NZaid into Mfat the divide between rich and poor countries within the Pacific will increase. For Pacific and Asian countries to receive aid from us they will have to lower their trade barriers, forcing farmers to grow cash crops to survive. African countries will receive next to nothing as they have no commodities we desire. Aid will become a bargaining tool for countries which is ethically unreasonable. Finally, students studying Development and Politics will have to either fight for the dwindling employment positions withing Mfat or will be forced to seek employment overseas.
A group is meeting outside the main door of the law school at 12pm tomorrow to protest this announcement which is at 12:30 at Parliament.
I wouldn't support any kind of intervention unless the situation got a lot worse. What are we going to do, march in and demand they hold elections? According to what, the ethnically-based electoral system which they had before the coup? Or are we going to write a new constitution for them? The kind of situation Key is talking about, from what I can see, is one in which violence were to break out and peace keeping forces would be required to stabilise the situation. That kind of thing would be justified, but I can't really see any justification as things are for us to send troops in.
ReplyDeleteYes the situation needs to be a lot worse for any kind of military intervention. If we get involved now and things become a bloodbath it looks bad on our part. There would have to be signs of killing off people, the punishment of people, so far we have only seen media suppression and no clear evidence of violence towards it's people.Fiji doesn't pose any direct threat to us either it is not likely that they are going to invade New Zealand any time soon.
ReplyDeleteI think it is coming close to a point where NZ should be sending troops into Fiji. The total disregard that has been shown by the military regime towards the requests made by NZ and Australia is unacceptable.
ReplyDeleteMany people say that the situation should be a lot worse before NZ acts, but that’s traditionally what always happens. It’s the ambulance at the bottom of the cliff theory that NZ often lives by. Here is a situation where we can assist to maintain the safety and health of the citizens of one of our neighbours, so we should not be waiting until there are signs of people being killed before we act.
I see NZ acting in association with Australia to establish a peaceful presence in Fiji with troops ensuring that there is no major deterioration of the peace within Fiji. This will then assist to make the transition back to democracy that much easier.