SUVA: One of the features of Fiji's political crisis is the vigorous and pungent
tone of debate in the three national newspapers in spite of
military rule and the revoked 1997 constitution with its guarantee of free speech.
While civil society debate has narrowed sharply since elected prime minister
Mahendra Chaudhry and his sacked government were kidnapped
and held hostage in Parliament on May 19, letters to the editor remain outspoken.
In fact, correspondents are far more ready to call a spade a spade than the
relatively timid editorial writers.
In a smorgasbord of opinion this weekend, correspondents warned of United Nations
sanctions against Fiji, named suspected
"master movers" behind the putsch, highlighted traditional rivalries
between tribal chiefs, discussed the human rights of the
hostages, acknowledged the Chaudhry government's progressive policies for the
poor of all races, and delved into the history of
ancient Rome as a lesson for Fijians.
Decrying the continued imprisonment of the former Chaudhry government - now
into the 16th day - Fijian political commentator
and pro-democracy activist Jone Dakuvula, a onetime human rights investigator
in New Zealand, wrote about the coup motives in
the Daily Post.
He warned about what Fiji could face if it joined the 12 pariah states which
have been subjected to United Nations sanctions in the
past decade.
"These sanctions ranged from oil and arms embargoes, flight bans on aircraft
and supply of parts, bans on ships carrying their
national flags, freezes on funds and other assets owned overseas, restrictions
on
travel of political leaders and senior officials [and others]," he wrote.
Dakuvula also noted that the UN secretary-general's special envoy, Sergio Viera
del Mello, who visited Fiji more than a week ago,
said the UN would consider sanctions against Fiji if coup leader George Speight's
"putschists in Parliament should seriously harm
or kill their hostages, or succeed in removing the President and abrogate the
1997 constitution".
A resolution on sanctions against Fiji would oblige all member states of the
UN to act in accordance with the resolution against Fiji.
Dakuvula argued that Speight's supporters should ask themselves: "Is it
worthwhile having the whole world impose sanctions
against Fiji and even dying in a fight with the Fiji Military Forces in Parliament
just so people like [extreme nationalist] Iliesa
Duvuloco, [rebel information minister] Simione Kaitani, Rakuiti Vakalalabure,
Pecei Rinakama, [media adviser] Jo Nata and
[former Opposition Leader] Ratu Inoke Kubuabola can occupy ministerial office
in government buildings
without an election?" he wrote.
"For that is the primary reason for this 'coup'.
"The reason given that we indigenous Fijians were being threatened with
extinction and alienation of our land by Mr Chaudhry and
his government and that we need the above people in ministerial offices to protect
us from the indigenous holocaust is a load of
rubbish."
Another Fijian, Asaeli Lekutu, claimed the first coup leader in 1987, Sitiveni
Rabuka, was the "master mover".
"It is now evident from what is unfolding that the whole episode played
out in Fiji is being masterminded by Mr Rabuka," he
wrote.
But Rabuka's plan was at a stalemate for two reasons:
* Rabuka had not anticipated the resolve of Speight and his followers who were
"gaining support" among Fijians.
* He was not directly involved in control of any phase right now - although
he pulled strings from the rear.
Elenoa Sikivou says: "The political unrest is a great log-jam in the river
of Fijian history where pervasive racism has unfortunately
been used to camouflage other Fijian differences.
"After the signing of the Deed of Cession in 1874, many respected tribal
chiefs who refused to sign the Deed were disregarded
and unrecognised by the [British colonial] order of the day in having any primary
authority.
"The gerrymandering of administrative boundaries under the new supremacy
legalised districts, provinces and confederacies
thereby undermining the powers of some of the traditional tribal chiefs.
"Since the creation of this new supremacy, the feeling of betrayal has
created a 'cold war' passing over generations through oral
tradition. Now today, Fiji has at last woken up to a rhetoric of change.
"There has to be a blueprint for a new system."
Osea Naisau, writing in the Fiji Times, compared Fiji with ancient Rome.
"Julius Caesar was forewarned by a soothsayer to be wary of the Ides of
March," he wrote.
"He took the warning lightly and this resulted in his being annihilated
by conspirators. Some of his closest friends were included in
the line-up.
"We here in Fiji should, in future, be wary of the month of May.
"This month will be remembered and recorded by historians as the time
when the rape of democracy occurred - twice."
The first coup was on May 14, 1987, and the third on May 19, 2000.
Although most correspondents were Fijian, there were Indo-Fijian letter-writers
too.
Linda Narayan, defending the Indo-Fijian stake in Fiji, wrote:
"We are not taught to steal as was shown on TV with looting by mothers
and children. In comparing India's rejection of Sonia
Ghandhi as Prime Minister to Indians wanting to take a leadership role in Fiji,
all I ask is what have the Italians done for India?
How many Italians call India home?"
"Ask what the Fijians have done for Fiji - almost everything. I must add
that [former prime minister Dr Timoci] Bavadra was also
a Fijian."
"Why was he overthrown? Was it because he wanted the best for both major
races?"
This text may have been edited to protect the writer.
This site is best viewed using Netscape 4.0 or higher.
Any problems or kind suggestions, please email: webmaster@lookinglassdesign.com
last revision June 2, 2000