Bainimarama broke his promise to the EU

Blogger S.Daunitutu
I am not sure if the approach by Fiji to lash out at the PIF accusing it of marginalising its members, was the right one let alone true.

If I remember correctly, it was Fiji that told Australia and New Zealand that it didn’t want them to dictate terms to its affairs.

It was also Fiji that broke its promise to the EU in regard to the elections and the twelve point agreement on which the massive $350million aid was sealed.

Voreqe’s position in the Pacific region has been compromised by the way he choses to ignore the request for dialogue, instead he shows a careless attitude towards diplomacy and fairness.

The two big brothers, Australia and New Zealand would very much like to accomodate Fiji in proper engagements at which they would like to hear the IG’s plans and reciporicate accordingly with an opposition or alternative to get to a solution for Fiji and the region as a whole.

This has been a trend for the IG, in which their way is the only way for Fiji, and the rest have to agree. It seems, they are oblivious to the fact that Fiji is part of the Pacific Island Nations that agree collectively to what is good for the region, not to mention, the world which is bound by all sorts of international laws and agreements, which were put in place to encourage good diplomatic, business and other forms of foreign exchanges.

I don’t see anything wrong with that, but if you are not willing to participate in diplomacy, there is a good chance that no one will be prepared to engage you in any form of bipartisan exchange.

This non commital attitude is ingrown in the political landscape of our Nation, in the past twenty years, new parties have sprung up, introducing individual agendas and pointing Fiji to imaginary horizons, captivating the innocent and naive population.

The latest episode was a grand perfomance by Mahendra Chaudary in the 2006 multicabinet government, as reiterated by the deported High Commissioner of New Zealand, Mr. Michael Green at the Australian National University on Friday’s seminar which I attended.

These few words said alot in my view, “The multiparty cabinet was going quite well, it was not given a chance to build a reputation”

Fijians have had enough of coups, and everyone is seaching for a solution to the “Coup culture”, why didn’t we give that option a chance to manifest itself in our democracy.

It had both the predominant Fijian party in SDL and the the other major player, the Indian party FLP at the wheelhouse. There were shared porfolios and Mahendra was given the Deputy Prime Ministirialship.

I think that the race card would have to be dealt evenly given that circumstance, there would be equal input into the Government mechanics with both parties intergrating their policies into one governing organ.

That failed because important people at the helm of leadership, were not prepared to lookout for others, rather, they wanted others to lookout/up to them.

To conclude, I disagree with Mr. Kubuabola when he said the PIF was marginalising its members, rather the problem was in us and we exposed it after 2006.