Fiji, paradise at crossroads?

Ravi PERERA

"The Fijian is humble, speaks softly rather than raise his voice. He listens courteously rather than rebuff rudely".

FIJI: This appreciation of his people by Ratu Ganilavu, a paramount chief of the Fiji Islands of more recent times, was obviously made in an effort to highlight their cultural differences with the Indians, the "other" people now calling his beloved ancestral land home.

The average Fijian as ordained by his Melanesian bloodline is big, strong and athletic. His traditional bond with tribe and land has given him a sense of gravity and loyalty.

Many outsiders find this aspect of the Fijians, particularly when combined with the natural, easy-going disposition of the pacific islanders, powerfully attractive.

Until "history" began towards the end of the 18th Century with contact with exploring European sailors, the Fijians evidently led a lifestyle preoccupied with waging war on neighbouring tribes.

In the short intervals between these aggressive forays they occupied themselves fishing or attending to the little gardens of yams and greens in their bountiful island homes. It is recorded that cannibalism was rife.

Unbeknown to the brave warlike tribes of the Fiji islands, the first contact with the strange pale men on their large ships foreshadowed the closing of the chapter on their accustomed way of life. A new era, defined by written laws, colonies, strange foreigners, plantations and global markets had begun.

In 1874, bowing to a vaguely understood reality which was nevertheless perceived as irreversible by the Fijians, the high chiefs put their mark of acceptance on a Deed of Cession whereby they threw away their war clubs and placed the destiny of their beloved islands in the care of a distant European island whose star then was shinning splendorous.

Efforts of the colonial government to establish cane and cotton plantations in Fiji proved a lot more controversial and were to have a drastic impact on its future course. The large number of workers needed to work the expanding plantations could not be found within the country.

The British turned their eyes to India, their huge teeming colony in Asia, to find an answer to the problem of labour for the plantations in Fiji.

The passage of Indians to work as indentured labourers in distant colonies in the Pacific, Caribbean and Africa was a saga which could only be rivaled for its sufferings and deprivations by the African slave trade the centuries before.

Their recruiters had promised these bedraggled immigrants a regular salary and a new home which many of them assumed was somewhere in India.

A large number of those who en-shipped from ports such as Calcutta and Bombay perished in the rough seas while en-route to their destinations. When they finally arrived in Fiji it was realised that only a few among them even had a registered name.

The Fijians were only curious witnesses to the unfolding developments in their country. It was generally assumed by them that these obviously deprived people, after earning a few dollars working in the plantations of the white man, will return to their own land.

But the Indians stayed on. They worked hard, built the plantation industry, prospered, educated their children and in time came to almost equal the Fijians in numbers in the country.

Culture

In culture and temperament the Indians were the opposite of the Fijians. The constant bickering among the newcomers, their apparent attitude of covert but permanent dissent, the chaotic social conduct where every one wishes to speak at the same time and the lack of hierarchical order were things unfamiliar to the native sons of the land.

They reasoned that the perceived paisa-counting avariciousness of the new immigrant was the outcome of a faraway culture preoccupied with poverty and competition for scarce resources.

The Indians also viewed the Fijians with fear and misgivings. They thought of them as intimidating, unambitious and absorbed in tribalism. There was very little social inter-action between the communities.

The Indians lived in farms and towns while the Fijians preferred their villages. While the tough Fijian is in his element in the bruising game of Rugby the Indians went for Soccer where physical contact is less frequent. The Indian plans his investments carefully. A Fijian will think nothing of partying all night with his friends on payday.

For the Fijian, the dangers and the rugged physicality inherent in soldiering, was heaven recreated. When their faraway Sovereign to whom they had now pledged their loyalty went to war in Europe, the Fijians served her with notable dedication. Even today the country's army is almost totally constituted of native Fijians.

In 1970 Britain, bored with her imperial responsibilities in the distant outpost granted independence to Fiji, an act, viewed with anxiety by both communities. As a colony Fiji had prospered and was considered the most advanced economy in the South Pacific.

The Constitution adopted in 1970 acknowledged the Fijian claim to primacy and introduced the idea of race-based electoral rolls, which accentuated the divide. Their undeniable economic gains made it easier for the Indian community to reconcile with a situation where they were politically less than equal.

The appointment at the outset of the patrician High Chief Ratu Kamisese Mara as Prime Minister, a moderate respected by all communities, helped to achieve almost two decades of peaceful progress in Fiji.

The elections of 1987 upset the apple cart. In a close result, the Labour Party, which was led by Dr. Bavendra a Fijian academic, defeated the ruling party thus moving the experienced Ratu Mara to the opposition. Not only was Dr. Bavendra a commoner, but it was also widely accepted that the union based Labour Party was predominantly Indian dominated.

This deeply rankled the Fijians who saw it both as an affront to their High Chief as well as an attempt by Indians to gain control of the government using a few Fijians as a front.

A few weeks later Colonel Sitiveni Rabuka, a reputed soldier, led the Army in a coup, which deposed the short-lived Bavendra government and reinstalled Ratu Mara as Prime Minister before getting back to barracks.

This unconstitutional act led to the suspension of Fiji from the Commonwealth as well as to various economic sanctions by international organizations.

The period, which followed, was marked by attempts to find a stable constitutional arrangement for the divided nation, which included the adoption of two Constitutions, in 1990 and then in 1997.

Coalition

The 1999 elections saw a coalition of political parties led by labour leader Mahendra Chaudry gaining power, making him the first ethnic Indian to become Fiji's Prime Minister.

Chaudry's declared intention of whittling down some of the privileges accorded to the native Fijians and his somewhat abrasive style set the stage for the coup of May 2000.This was led by a failed businessman by the name of George Speight who was of mixed Fijian ethnicity.

Speight simply marched on parliament with a small group of renegade soldiers and Fijian toughs to oust the civilian government by an act of plain thuggary.

In Fiji the power to coerce is exclusively in the hands of the native Fijians who by and large had no sympathy for the Chaudry government and preferred to remain mere spectators to the ugly drama enacted at their parliament.

In fact the recently deposed Prime Minister Laisema Qarase described George Speight's blatant attack of the concept of constitutionality as 'an act of God'.

The military, which was under the command of Commodore Voreqe Bainimarama, after watching anxiously for a few weeks the humiliation of an elected government by the riff-raff of the Suva settlements, staged what was called a counter-coup to neutralize Speight.

During this operation Commodore Bainimarama almost lost his life at the hands of mutinous soldiers sympathetic to Speight's ultra-nationalism.

The Military eventually brought the situation under control and installed a government under the Premiership of Laisema Qarase, which was thought necessary in order to appease the nationalistic sentiments of the Fijians. Bainmarama however insisted that Qarase bring to book the shadowy supporters of Speight and that there should be a 'clean' government.

The Commodore was disappointed on both these expectations. The Qarase government was not only tardy on moving against supporters of George Speight's coup, it even deliberately hindered the investigations, one time ordering the Australian Prosecutor handing the matter out of the country. The trail of evidence apparently pointed towards the core of the Fijian business and political elite.

Corruption

The post 2000 era also saw an increased perception of State corruption. While unemployment and urban poverty were on the rise, certain elements in society seem to have money to burn. The government's answer to the resentment of the majority towards this conspicuous consumption by a few was a proposal to further tax the Indians.

When Commodore Bainimarama launched his coup on December 5 this year it was deja vu for the people of Fiji. For sure, this coup can be distinguished from those preceding. All the previous aggressions have been directed in one way or the other towards curtailing the political aspirations of the Indian community.

But in this coup, the Fijian army, which is uniformly constituted of native Fijians, is calling a Fijian dominated government to account.

Bainimarama'a action has once again opened the can of imperial worms. Both, the native Fijians as well as the immigrant Indians are victims of a history over which they had no control.

Constitutional correctness, which is the basis of deposed Prime Minister Qarase's claim to Premiership, is not necessarily founded on justice either. Obviously, the coercion inherent in a coup violates our sense of a democratic system.

But equally, the rights and wrongs of a race based electoral process such as in Fiji, the basis for Qarase's constitutionality, depend very much on which community one belongs to.

By departing from the traditional basis for Fijian coups, Bainimarama has in a complicated way, refused to countenance complicity in previous aggressions against legality by the Fijian establishment. If taken at face value, for a nation, which seems to have adopted double standards when judging such actions, it is a step in the right direction.

In the past, the Fijian establishment was more than eager to forgive the marauders as long as they were acting in the name of the sons of the soil. Could the army, having paraded as a guarantor of Fijian interests then, now become a truly national institution?

The answer lies primarily with the Fijians and their powerful army. Can this fourth coup make all the 'wrongs' of the previous three 'right'?