Pacific contradictions - telling Fiji what to do

Before and during the coup, Fijian women of all ages did not stand mute.

Women and young people took a prominent role in seeking to promote a peaceful resolution. On December 7, 2006, seven young women from the Emerging Leaders Forum (ELF) issued a statement calling for the rule of law and adherence to lawful processes.

These members of the ELF - a network of young women graduates of the Fiji Women’s Rights Movement ELF program - pointed out that important matters were being overlooked, such as the 35 per cent of Fijians living in poverty and the dire need for education. They highlighted the negative repercussions of powerful countries in the region imposing sanctions and withdrawing support from Fiji. Poverty would be exacerbated and education interrupted or absolutely denied by cancellation of international scholarships, programs and aid.

Meanwhile, members of the Coalition on Democracy and Peace were lobbying on issues including the implementation of a long-term strategy. Part of the proposed long-term strategy was a Presidential Commission of Inquiry to address Fiji’s history of conflicts. The proposal also sought to have the inquiry address the root causes of these conflicts to look towards positive avenues and mechanisms for resolution. The Coalition includes women of standing, intellect and good sense.

In the first week of December, a key group comprising Suliana Siwatibau, Viri Buadromo, Shamima Ali, Sharon Bhagwan Rolls and Wadan Narsey delivered the proposal to Government House, the RFMF (Republic of Fiji Military Forces) and the Prime Minister’s Office.

Sadly, the Pacific Islands Forum appears to be unaware of the Coalition on Democracy and Peace, its members, the issues they have raised and the proposal.

Yet even the UN Security Council - probably the most masculine division of the UN - is capable of seeing women in the landscape. Resolution 1325 affirms, among other matters, “the important role of women in the prevention and resolution of conflicts and in peace-building”. It stresses “the importance of women’s equal participation and full involvement in all efforts for the maintenance and promotion of peace and security, and the need to increase their role in decision-making with regard to conflict prevention and resolution”.

Is the Pacific Islands Forum listening? Is it even aware of UN Resolution 1325?

Commenting on such an obvious omission, Dr Shirley Randell, an Australian who worked for many years in the Pacific and is now working in Africa, says:

I keep being surprised, although perhaps I should not be, that Pacific women apparently still fail to make the grade for inclusion in the Eminent Persons Group in the Pacific. Perhaps all pretension should be discarded and these high level men’s privileges should be called exactly what they are: Eminent Men’s Group. What a weakness that at so many levels the Pacific still refuses to tap into the skills, expertise and wisdom of half its population.

There is, of course, another irony in all this. Australia is a prominent member of the Pacific Islands Forum - perhaps the most powerful member. In this country, we have a current prime minister who is determined not to allow anyone to become an Australian citizen unless, among other matters, they profess a belief in the “equal rights of men and women”. And yes, he consistently puts “men” ahead of “women”.

Surely if we are to assert belief in equality of women and men in this country, we cannot be a party to establishing “Eminent Persons Groups” that have no women in them? Back at the beginning of the 20th century, courts consistently held that women were not persons. Hence, women were disentitled from participating in privileges such as the right to practice law and medicine. One might have hoped that here, at the beginning of the 21st century, we had moved on.

Sadly, it appears not. In the circumstances, do we have a right - through the Pacific Islands Forum and this “Eminent Persons Group” - to tell Fiji what to do?