STRICTLY 4 THE ISLANDS: MY SINCERE APOLOGY TO CHRSITOPHER LUXON (AND THE AFTERMATH OF THE PACIFIC ISLAND’S FORUM)

Weekly Pacific Politics with Otis Whinney

I have to start today’s piece with an apology to our dear Prime Minister, Christopher Luxon. Last time around, I claimed that he would not be attending the Pacific Islands Forum (PIF) this year, but it turns out he did in fact make himself present. Luxon flew over and spent the last 36 hours in Palau, just in time for the hand shaking and photo ops that closed the gathering out. If Luxon wins this year's election, he will have the opportunity to make a much larger appearance—Aotearoa is set to host next year’s PIF, with all the drama that entails. Honestly, a cursory glance over the state of New Zealand politics makes it clear that Luxon probably has other things on his mind besides a gathering that he might not even be involved with in any capacity, but the PIF that concluded a couple weeks ago has left us with plenty of events to chew on. In general, this latest PIF has proven how broken these forms of regional engagement have become, with most of the biggest stories coming out of this relating to issues from outside the Pacific, issues the Pacific can’t agree on, and issues that can’t be addressed due to all of the absent leaders (not including Christopher Luxon, whom I must reiterate was present).

Those absences were diverse in cause, with some boiling down to ongoing health issues. Some have been quick to point out China’s disappointment in the presence of representatives from Taiwan at the PIF as another possible reason. Palau, the host-nation for this year's PIF, maintains diplomatic relations with Taiwan, and Taiwan’s Foreign Minister Lin Chia-lung was present at the PIF. China has yet to deviate from their one-China policy, and their Pacific envoy Qian Bo clarified that there will be “consequences” after this move from Palau and the PIF. Any country looking to have a formal relationship with China has to recognise this policy, but many still maintain informal relations with Taiwan, including New Zealand. The absence of Taneti Maamau, Kiribati’s Prime Minister, some believe may have been influenced by China, considering the countries’ close ties. Naero, another state closely aligned with China, did not participate in the joint-condemnation of the Chinese missile test in Pacific waters in July. Whether China was actively placing diplomatic pressure on these countries remains to be confirmed, but the reality is that Taiwan occupying this amount of discussions around the PIF highlights the larger issue. Winston Peters was also not particularly chuffed, considering how adamant he had been that the Pacific’s response to this should be united in opposition to further weapons tests by China.

While being interviewed on Herald Now, Winston Peters was pressed on whether the Pacific requires a strong presence from the USA to combat this influence from China. Peters argued what we actually need is collaboration from like-minded partners who share our values. A positive sentiment in theory, but one that is betrayed by Peters’ examples of countries who share these values. Name dropping Indonesia—a state currently responsible for a military build up in occupied West Papua that is seeing mass-displacements and violent action against those who resist, while the decades-long presence of armed insurgencies fighting against Indonesian occupation remain in a constant struggle with the state—is the clearest example of this. A union of countries in Melanesia, the Melanesian Spearhead Group (MSG), have been trying to facilitate a visit by the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights to occupied West Papua to further investigate the on-the-ground situation. While progress has been made, many indigenous Papuans of West Papua have remained frustrated with the delays since the request was first made in 2019. If this is Winston Peters’ idea of a country acting with Pacific values, then perhaps he doesn’t have our best interests at heart.

So, what should we take away from the PIF? I haven’t exactly painted the brightest picture, but if anything, perhaps the kerfuffle of the 2026 PIF can serve as a wakeup call to all involved that some serious work is to be done if our region is to tackle the crises facing us and our oceans.