Premium
This is an archive article published on May 23, 2000

Gun-to-head business

Four days after Fiji's democratically elected government was overthrown by armed men led by a businessman, the political picture in the Pa...

.

Four days after Fiji’s democratically elected government was overthrown by armed men led by a businessman, the political picture in the Pacific island nation remains murky. New complications have arisen over the weekend. One flows from President Ratu Sir Kamisese Mara’s statement that he would not guarantee that he will retain the government of Mahendra Chaudhury, the ousted prime minister. “I can’t say that I will put back the government that caused all this problem,” he said.

It is a surprising statement, seeming partially to condone the coup, from a president who was the bulwark of democracy in the first few days, a president who condemned the coup and promised to uphold the law. Now, although Mara has said he will not remove Chaudhury he has made it clear he expects the prime minister to resign. Similar sentiment is expressed by Sitiveni Rabuka, leader of the 1987 coup and former prime minister who is acting as intermediary between Mara and the present coup leader George Speight.

A second complicating factor is the council of chiefs meeting in Suva, the capital, today. It is not known how politically important this body of traditional leaders has been in previous crises. At present if this indigenous Fijiian institution is pitted against modern democratic institutions and procedures, Fijiians could be in for a prolonged spell of civil disturbances with a high probability of violence.

Story continues below this ad

Initially it appeared the coup would be short-lived. It was an unconstitutional seizure of power and promptly condemned internationally. The US State Department warned of substantial consequences and the Commonwealth Secretary-General of swift suspension from the Commonwealth.

Fijiians paid a high price in terms of political instability, lost international standing and wasted economic opportunities after the last coup in 1987. It was, therefore, thought another coup 13 years later would not be popular even among indigenous Fijiians on whose behalf Speight says he acted to remove the Chaudhury government. President Mara publicly asked the coup leaders to “follow lawful means in raising their dissent” and army and police declared support for the constitutionally elected government.

All this tended to suggest it was only a matter of time and tactics before Chaudhury and his colleagues who are being held hostage would be freed and would return to power. On the eve of the gathering of Fijiian traditional chiefs, the picture changed. Mara and Rabuka are now indicating they would like Chaudhury out. What this means is a messy compromise is being sought through which all sides, the democratic and the coup leaders, can claim victory. If George Speight can be bought off and his hostages are released, what becomes of Chaudhury? What all new and dangerous precedents will be set if a prime minister is replaced at gunpoint? Some of these questions will be answered over the next few weeks.

Political management of a sharp down-the-middle ethnic divide like Fiji’s, half indigenous Fijiians and half ethnic Indian is far from easy. But unless its leaders find and stick to constitutional ways of managing the conflict between the people, political peace will elude Fiji.

Latest Comment
Post Comment
Read Comments
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement