Comment:
New
iTONGA columnist, Sione Masina comments on the the Fiji Coup
Christian Concern or Complicity ñ the Choice
for the Chiefs and the Church
The Fiji military has appealed to the churches and the chiefs to put
pressure on rebel leader George Speight to release the hostages. How the
church and the chiefs of Fiji are handling this crisis will have long term
effects on the behaviour of not only Fijians but future generations of
Pacific Islanders.
Already, one generation of Pacific Island students were brought up in
the wake of the Fiji coups of 1987. This generation saw how you can use
guns to overthrow a democratically elected government, change the rules
to suit your own ends (or the ends of your supporters) in the name of culture,
tradition and indigenous rights. And eventually gain acceptance by the
countries most vocal in their opposition at the outset.
George Speight has indicated his strong belief that after a couple of
years, he will be accepted by those countries now most vocal against him
and his supporters just like Rabuka.
Speight and hostages, Chaudry and Baba
In the meantime, the poor can suffer the consequences, the rights of
the Indians and others can be trampelled upon and the law can be implemented
by those with the guns.
As the hub of the Pacific, Suva has long been the home of regional educational
institutions such as the University of the South Pacific, the Fiji School
of Medicine, the Pacific Theological College ; the base for regional
organisations such as the Forum Secretariat, United Nations agencies and
other aid donors.
Many Pacific Islanders who were students in Fiji at the time of the
1987 coups are now in positions of power in their own governments. This
might explain the lack of a strong response from some of Fijiís neighbours,
who are preoccupied with their own problems. The latest coup in the Solomon
Islands (dubbed a copy cat coup by the media) is a testimony to what a
generation of Pacific Islanders have learnt from the example set by Rabuka
in 1987
In addition to the US$30 million worth of damage caused in the central
business area in Suva, millions of dollars have been spent in evacuating
students from all around the Pacific; the amount of energy and time wasted
on arranging for the safety of regional students plus the productivity
lost due to the closure of organisations, many of whom are serving other
Pacific Island countries. And thatís not counting the trauma and psychological
suffering of the hostages, their families and the rest of the nation.
Much of the aid for the Pacific is spent in Suva because of costs, convenience
to the aid donors and the trust by Pacific Island governments that their
people will be safe in Suva. But at the beginning of the new millenium,
Pacific Island governments must be questioning the wisdom of this trust.
And the aid donors, many of whom focus their programmes on the development
of good governance, must also be questioning the wisdom and long
term effects of operating their programmes from Suva.
The people in the Pacific are continually reminded of their growing
inter dependence as part of the regional and global economy. The Pacific
Islands are linked in regional and national development efforts to improve
the standard of living of the Pacific community.
The Secretary General of the Commonwealth Don McKinnon recently urged
the Melanesian countries (PNG, Vanuatu, Solomon Islands and Fiji) to work
out their own problems.
In Polynesia, Samoa is reeling from the effects of the assassination
of one of its government Ministers, Tonga is beset with problems arising
from what some describe as the inflexibility of the monarchy to accommodate
pressing changes. Tuvalu and Kiribati are faced with sea level rising,
population increases and AIDS.
What is needed is a clear vision of the type of society Pacific Islanders
want to develop for their children. A vision of the principles and values
Pacific Island citizens should practice and live by in the future, especially
how to treat their fellow human beings. A vision which encompasses the
best of the multicultural environment which Suva used to embody and what
is required to strengthen the ongoing support required for that vision
to become a reality.
Not the interpretation of traditions, culture and religion to suit the
ends of interest groups being fronted by few gun toting rebels holding
everybody to ransom.
In one of the reports broadcast by the BBC, Jonathan Head said ìIt is
Fiji's tragedy that, such is the weakness of its democratic institutions
and its political leadership, a half-baked bid for power by an unapologetic
racist, might actually succeed.î
The fires after the looting....
While everybody has a role to play, the chiefs and the church are the
two institutions which can best help to bring about peaceful change and
acceptance of a participatory political system to help meet the needs of
Pacific Islanders.
Both of these institutions have failed miserably in this role. Which
of the two can best face this challenge for the future?
The reputation of the chiefs looking after the interests of their own
people has been more than tarnished in many Pacific Islands.
The recent revelation by Rabuka that Ratu Mara knew of his plans to
carry out the 1987 coup before he executed it has not contributed to an
increase in the respectability, reliability and integrity of the chiefs.
In Fiji, many members of the chiefly families benefitted from the Rabuka
regime. The National Bank of Fiji (NBF) scandals led to the depletion of
the national coffers in excess of $40 million. So many chiefs were implicated
that the Great Council of Chiefs (GCC) was sometimes referred to as the
Great Council of Thieves. And the NBF became No Bloody Funds.
Many would agree with the description by Dr Brij Lal (Fiji Times June
8, 2000 page 7) that ìsadly, the GCC stand today a diminished body of dithering
men and women, confused, partisan, manipulable, unable to exercise their
much sought after -ñand much hoped for role as the custodians not only
of indigenous Fijian but Fijiís broad national interests as well.î
And what about the church?
The church is the major institution influencing the beliefs, moral values
and principles guiding Pacific peopleís behaviour. In the case of Fiji,
they have failed miserably in developing principled, upstanding Christian
leaders.
They have helped to raise children such as Rabuka and Speight and their
supporters. People who will stop at nothing to gain what they want. As
long as they pray on Sundays, push for a Christian state and denounce idol
worshipping foreigners.
The vision of a gun toting group of Fijian young men walking along
singing hymns after having shot and killed a policeman and gone on a rampage
of destruction of equipment in the Fiji TV station, threatening Radio Fiji
employees and intimidating journalists at the Centra Hotel, will always
stick in my mind, a departing expatriate said.
The picture symbolises the confusion and aims of Speight, and his supporters.
And begs an answer to the question How can people who claim to be Christians
support Speight and his band of terrorists? How can those people who have
sworn on the bible to uphold law and order, defend the government and uphold
the Constitution readily forget these vows and openly support violence
and terrorism to achieve their ever changing objectives? And do it all
in the name of God?
The church can therefore do so much more to ensure that the behaviour
of their flock is guided by Christian principles rather than the laws of
George of the jungle.
On day 15 of the hostage crisis, the Methodist Church of Fiji admitted
ìresponsibility for failing to teach its people who make up the majority
of the perpetrators and supporters in the unlawful activitiesî. To admit
some responsibility is a big step.
On day 21, the military appeals to the chiefs and the churches to put
pressure on the rebels in Parliament to give up the hostages.
The churches should be more involved in trying to address the root causes
of abuse of human rights and social injustices, not promoting the interests
of the elite and the powerful. The silence of the church can only be interpreted
as complicity.
As Father Winston Halapua of the Anglican Church once said ìChurch Ministers
should do more than just sing Hallelujah. Where we see injustices, it is
our duty to speak out and work towards changing things. Silence breeds
Violence.î
The events happening in Fiji (and the Solomon Islands) are a testimony
to church leaders not speaking out enough about the injustices ordinary
people are facing in the Pacific today.
Hopefully, there is a solution in sight. In the meantime, the church
in Fiji must review its role and responsibility to develop a more principled
future generation of Fiji Christians. For the rest of the Pacific Islands,
it is vital that future generations are brought up to understand that the
behaviour of Speight and his thugs is totally unacceptable to Pacific Island
people.
And more importantly, how they can use the democratic processes and
institutions to work towards making the necessary changes to improve their
lives.
The Pope recently apologised for the harm caused by the Catholic church
because of their intolerance for people with different beliefs. It took
the Catholics over a thousand years to do this. Let us hope and pray that
Fiji does not take as long to learn this valuable lesson.
Now that the Methodist church has admitted some responsibility for the
action of the looters and those who support Speight, the Fiji Council of
Churches and other faiths are challenged to work towards a just solution.
While prayers are necessary and can be powerful, as the Bible says, it
is the truth which can set us free.
comments: Email S.Masina
|