Fiji Elections: We need home-grown solution as Western media still jaundiced to Fiji

Fiji Elections: We need home-grown solution as Western media still jaundiced to Fiji

Thakur Ranjit Singh

As Fiji approaches the historical 2014 election on 17 September, 2014, one thing is evidently clear: there has been no indigenous, i-Taukei Fijian leader in Fiji’s history, who could ever win the hearts of the migrant Indo-Fijian community in Fiji, as much as Bainimarama has done. Despite all the venom of western media and his opponents, Vorege Bainimarama has been the most visionary leader that a multi-racial and multi-ethnic Fiji has seen. Ratu Sir Lala Sukuna, Ratu Sir Kamiseses Mara, Sitiveni Rabuka, Mahendra Chaudhry and Laisenia Qarase have been left behind in the scrapheap of history, as Bainimarama looks for a home grown solution in a multi-racial fledgling democracy, plagued with ethno-nationalism and divisive politics.

He may not be perfect-but he is the best Fiji has seen so far. And in the process, expect some collateral damage, as any history-in-making produces.

FRANK BAINIMARAMA-the most popular ever Indigenous Fijian leader to the migrant Indo-Fijian community. The most visionary I-Taukei leader ever that Fiji has seen for a multi-racial country which is struggling with its democracy.

Every man and his dog, with their Western concept of failed democracy in Fiji had painted Frank Bainimarama as a villain and a selfish, self-centred man. The latest one is Nick Naidu, who represents an almost defunct organisation, the Coalition for Democracy in Fiji in Auckland.

Naidu’s claims on TV 3 interview on 15 September 2014 substantiates the reason why Frank Bainimarama is sceptical and suspicious of a free press in general and Western concept of press freedom in developing Fiji, in particular.

Naidu claims that Bainimarama is a person who only thinks of himself and nobody else. If Naidu and TV 3 had bothered to read that morning’s NZ Herald’’s article by its ethnic reporter, Lincoln Tan, they may think twice about airing such blinkered and jaundiced interview.

According to Tan, Nadi (Fiji) taxi driver Vinod Kumar said he "cannot wait" to have his say on who will form the next Fijian government.

The 55-year-old grandfather, whose son Shanil lives and works in Auckland, is "90 per cent sure" he will be voting for Frank Bainimarama and his Fiji First Party when the polls open on Wednesday.

"The West just don't understand, they think just because we had a military coup that makes Frank a bad person," Mr Kumar said.

"But life for us ordinary folks has improved so much under him. The roads no longer have potholes, crime is down and more children are going to school because schooling is now free."

He said small things, such as free school buses for students, go a long way because most in Fiji were "generally quite poor".

Mr Kumar said many Fijians were excited at the prospect of voting and election rallies were attracting crowds of thousands.

FRANK BAINIMARAMA-  a man for all people, seen here when he visited the Golden Temple in Amritsar, India. Lord Krishna in Bhagavat Gita said "when there is atrocity, and good and saintly are mistreated by demons, then I take a form of human and come to take away your pains and give justice" Your truly thinks, Bainimarama is one such form, who is seen as a savour of Indo-Fijians in Fiji.

That shows the diametrically inconsistent White mainstream media in New Zealand which is still somewhat jaundiced and unsure on Fiji issues. My journalism studies at Auckland University of Technology (AUT) in 2009 and 2010 revealed in my research papers that some of NZ media, who hardly employ ethnic reporters, were very opposed to happenings in Fiji just because Fiji had kicked away an unsuitable concept of Western Democracy, has kicked out some NZ reporters and did not at all miss the step-brotherly treatment given by NZ and Australia. Fiji marched along oblivion of Ostrich syndrome and snub by these neighbours. Fiji got other friends and ignored these two countries which now appear to be mending the bridges they burnt.

TV 3 failed to ask and Naidu failed to volunteer the information that democracy has become a dirty word in Fiji, especially among the Indo-Fijians who were starkly mistreated by previous ethno-nationalist and blatantly racist governments, masquerading as a democracy.  NZ and Australia, as supposedly civilised First World neighbours failed to keep a tab on the wrongdoings of Qarase regime which virtually had rendered Indo-Fijians to a third-class status. It was only the blessings of 2006 takeover of Qarase regime that gave back Fiji some hope.

If today I could call myself a Fijian and enjoy dual citizenship of NZ and Fiji, and still have that dignity as a Fiji citizen, it is because of the same Frank Bainimarama that the Western World takes all opportunity to project as some villain, because he rejected western imported failed system against a home-grown solution. What Fiji needed was an understanding of the world and a local solution to its fundamental problems. Fiji cannot be blamed for befriending China, Russia, Cuba and Korea when its neighbours, founded on bible and Christianity never showed much love for their neighbour.

FRANK BAINIMARAMA visited Auckland on 9 August, 2014, and huge crowd flocked to see him. He was mobbed by people, as if he was a Bollywood star. But all the White New Zealand mainstream media saw and reported on was a handful of protesters. NZ media has always been seen as too white, and too prejudiced to Fiji. With changing demography and population make-up of New Zealand, its media still does not reflect the colour of the nation in its newsrooms.

So many good things have taken place in Fiji, and consequently the credibility, authenticity and mandate of Coalition for Democracy comes into question for not knowing their Fiji. The leaders of other parties’ visited Auckland, nobody heard or saw. When Bainimarama visited Auckland on 9 August, 2014 at Vodafone Event Centre the place was overcrowded with people and Frank Bainimarama was mobbed like a Bollywood star. The blinkered Mainstream media in Auckland were blind to some 2,000 supporters but only saw a handful of protesters.

So many people know what perhaps Nick Naidu and TV 3 need to know about this popular Fijian leader. Frank Bainimarama rescued Fiji from chasm of racism and divisive politics, camouflaged as democracy. Fiji needs a home-grown solution, no more of imported failed western concepts. The elections in 2014 is a step in that direction. And when history is in making, as was USA’s 200 years ago, we are bound to have some collateral damage.

E-mail: thakurji@xtra.co.nz

[About the Author: Thakur Ranjit Singh is a post graduate scholar in honours in Communication Studies from Auckland University of Technology. From a system which could give him a relevant job, he has started his blog sites, FIJI PUNDIT (www.fijipundit.blogspot.co.nz) and KIWI PUNDIT (www.kiwipundit.blogspot.co.nz) and publishes what the other media does not tell] 

Ganesh Utsav at Ram Mandir in Auckland marks His birthday

Ganesh Utsav at Ram Mandir in Auckland marks His birthday

Thakur Ranjit Singh

Shri Ram Mandir Charitable Trust introduces Indo-Fijian Hindus to Ganesh Chaturthi, and celebration of birth of Lord Ganesh. All are invited to the festivities at Ram Mandir in Henderson on Saturday and Sunday 6^th and 7^th September, 2014.

Ganesh is widely worshiped as the god of wisdom, prosperity and good fortune and traditionally invoked at the beginning of any new venture or at the start of travel

For Indo-Fijian Hindus, celebration of birthdays of deities come naturally, especially the elaborate ways of over a week celebration of Ram and Krishn. However, birthday of Lord Ganesh, which is marked during Ganesh Chaturthi has not been celebrated as elaborately as birth of Ram and Krishn. This may be because Ganesh Chaturthi is mostly widely celebrated in  Maharashtra, Gujarat, Tamil Nadu, Goa, Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka, Odisha, Kerala and Chhattisgarh. In Fiji, the majority of Girmitiyas came from Indo- Gangetic plains, from Bihar, Uttar Pradesh and nearby areas, hence it did not get that much prominence in Fiji. But things are changing with a globalised world and all are now getting an insight into birthday of Ganesh.

Ganesh Chaturthi is the Hindu festival celebrated on the birthday (rebirth) of Lord Ganesh, the son of Shiv and Parvati. It is believed that Lord Ganesh bestows his presence on earth for all his devotees during this festival. It is the day when Ganesh was born. Ganesh is widely worshiped as the god of wisdom, prosperity and good fortune and traditionally invoked at the beginning of any new venture or at the start of travel. The festival, also known as Vinayak Chaturthi ("festival of Ganesh") is observed in the Hindu calendar month of Bhaadrapad, starting on the shukla chaturthi (fourth day of the waxing moon period). The date usually falls between 19 August and 20 September.

Baby Ganesh

During the festivity, there are traditions and rituals that people perform during the Ganesh Chaturthi Hindu festival. People begin preparing months in advance by making check lists, selecting eco-friendly idols, reading up yummy recipes and thinking of innovating decoration ideas to celebrate the festival on a grand scale. Hindus also follow the rituals in Bringing Home the Ganesh Idol, many of whom choose to perform the Ganesh Staphna (Installation of the Idol) by themselves including performing the Ganesh Visarjan (Immersion)

For the first time for Hindus in Henderson, Auckland, Shri Ram Mandir Charitable Trust (SRMCT) is organizing Ganesh Utsav at its (partly completed) Ram Mandir complex at 11 Brick Street, Henderson, Auckland. For the convenience of people, arrangements are made for a Samohik (combined) Pooja of 2 days.

This will be held on Saturday 6 and Sunday 7 September, 2014. The programme begins on Saturday 6 at 7pm with Bhajans, Sthapna at 8pm, followed by cultural items at 8.45, rounding off with mahaprashad (dinner) at 9.30 pm.

Ram Mandir and Community Centre, as it will look after completion.

On Sunday 7^th September, pooja is from 9-11am, with Sampuram Yagn at 11am, prasad and mahaprashad at 12pm and Visarjan at 1pm. This will be through a bus trip for devotees to take Ganesh murti for visarjan at sea. Devotees need to register for the bus trip.

For the first time, SRMCT is organizing this Samohik Pooja of multiple families, sitting in rows of 10, performing pooja collectively. For a contribution of $201, each family gets a reserved numbered pooja space, a 5 inch Ganesh Moorti, all pooja samagri for 2 days, singhasan and pooja vedi for families to take home.

Singhasan, Ganesh Murti and Pooja Vedi will belong to the devotees after Pooja

Each day, devotees will have to bring 21 laddoos, flowers, prashad, dubh grass and individual or combination of 108 items, comprising of almonds, cashew nuts, sultanas, mishri (candy), flowers or dubh grass.

Pradhan Acharya is Pundit Nand Lal Shastri and his assistant is Pundit Vishal Joshi. Booking is necessary and can be through Umesh (mobile 022 681 1763) or any Trustee.

Devotee families are urged to be part of this historic occasion where we all get together for a collective celebration and prayers. Do not be disappointed, register quickly as we have only hundred numbered and reserves spaces. For further information visit SRMCT’s website at www.shrirammandir.org.nz or contact the Executive Trustee Pravin Kumar at pravin_lotus@hotmail.com.

E-mail: thakurji@xtra.co

[About the author: Thakur Ranjit Singh is blogger at KIWI PUNDIT and FIJI PUNDIT, is a media commentator and Volunteer Media Liaison Officer for Ram Mandir Charitable Trust]

Government by Greed - PART 6: Key Support for the 1987 Coup

Government by Greed - PART 6: Key Support for the 1987 Coup

By Guest Writer, Subhash Appana

A political coup-de-tat is no small undertaking by any standards. It involves treason as by its very definition it attempts to overthrow a “legitimate” government by extra-legal means. In fact, force and violence are necessary complements of any coup-de-tat. And in order to “build” the scenario to justify a coup, an orchestrated process is activated. The aim is to create a situation that allows a treasonous, yet quietly-supported, coup-maker to say “there was no other way”.

SITIVENI RABUKA - The Father of All Coups on 14 May, 1987

This is exactly what happened in Fiji, and that is exactly what Rabuka said after he executed the Father of All Coups on 14^th May 1987. The common thread that bound all who supported that coup, whether overtly or covertly, was the perceived need to protect the Fijian heritage and save the Fijian race from the hegemonic designs of a foreign race, the Indo-Fijians. There were mainly 2 reasons for this perception: one, a sustained policy of divide and rule based on ethnicity; and two, a lack of understanding and appreciation of the mechanics of democracy.

Within this framework of politics, the obvious Indian “threat” acted as a diversion that temporarily covered ominously developing undercurrents that were to plague ethnic-Fijian politics and the country in later years. The Taukei Marches of 1987 allowed many of these undercurrents to surface and join the general wave of dissatisfaction, resentment and rage that swept the main centres of the country. Even in these marches, individual grievances and aspirations remained quietly submerged as the convenient rhetoric of “Indian threat” was enough to rally key support.

Many have pointed fingers at the chiefs, and especially Ratu Sir Kamisese Mara and Ratu Sir Penaia Ganilau who was Governor General at that time. Many have rubbished Ratu Mara’s explanation when he said, “How could I stand by and watch my house on fire?” This statement has generally escaped objective scrutiny as the tendency had been to expect Mara to stop the 1987 coup or take an openly opposed stance after the fact. He did neither because he was a thinking man who could probably “see” things that couldn’t be openly articulated at the time.

The point is that as a chief, Ratu Mara could not stand back and watch his country and his people get destroyed. It was the same for Ratu Penaia who was not only Ratu Mara’s close political ally, but also Ratu Mara’s brother-in-law through the marriage of his son, Ratu Epeli Ganilau to Ratu Mara’s daughter, Adi Ateca Ganilau. More interestingly, Ratu Penaia was also Ratu Mara’s superior as Tui Cakau and head of the Tovata confederacy, within which Ratu Mara’s Lau province fell.

RATU SIR KAMISESES MARA: Perfect marriage connection in Fiji meant that he had relatives in top hierarchy in all three Confederacies in Fiji 

And as mentioned earlier, the second confederacy of Burebasaga fell in line because its paramount chief, the Roko Tui Dreketi, was Ratu Mara’s wife. This left Kubuna, which was headed by Ratu Sir George Cakobau at the time. Ratu George’s first cousin, Ratu Edward Cakobau’s 2^nd son, Ratu Epeli Nailatikau is married to Ratu Mara’s daughter Adi Koila Mara. This completed the family link at the apex of the 3 confederacies. Moreover, Kubuna also had among its inter-linked chiefs the Toganivalu clan from Tailevu who were heavily represented in the Mara cabinet through Ratu David, Ratu Josua and Ratu William Toganivalu.

In addition to the above chiefly links, any analysis on chiefly support for the 1987 coup cannot ignore the fact that the first rationale for that coup involved removal of the Indian threat from the political equation of Fiji. From this perspective the chiefs were duty-bound to support that coup because it was seen as a necessity. Opposition could not have been justified in any way and once the rebellion gained momentum, there was simply no room for diplomatic chiefly intervention.

The second important point of support for that coup had to come from the Fiji military. In 1987, the RFMF was a largely foreign peace keeping-focused entity. Since 1978 when troops were deployed to UNIFIL in Lebanon, the size and skills of the RFMF had expanded significantly. And the bulk of troop recruitment involved rural Fijian youths who had virtually no real exposure to the “Indian threat” that they had always heard of – they had no opportunity to see Indians in any other way.

Rural Fijian youths who were recruited in the Military had never met and encountered Indo-Fijians, and were gullible to believe that Indians were trying to take over Fiji. They were seen as Bati- traditional warriors who were there to defend Fijian  heritage.

In fact when they did come to Suva, they were faced with a barrage of things Indian – taxis, businesses, shops, houses, and Indian people all over the place. This left them with little doubt that there was indeed an “Indian threat” to Fiji. Little has been made of the fact that these young soldiers literally saw themselves as modern-day bati (traditional defenders) when they donned the colours of the RFMF. And as bati they were defenders of the Fijian heritage. Nobody epitomized this better than Sitiveni Rabuka, his decision to execute the 1987 coup had largely to do with this – in fact this was very likely the sole compelling reason at the outset. Military support therefore, was virtually guaranteed once the decision was made.

The final card had to do with foreign reaction to an unthinkable act of treason in the Pacific. There was little arguing that this variable had to be factored in because Fiji would not have accepted a reduced international status at that juncture – unlike the stance taken now by Commodore Bainimarama. When David Lange tested the ANZUS alliance by closing NZ ports to US nuclear vessels in 1985, Fiji’s strategic importance had reached a new high.

Thus US geopolitical concerns within the framework of the ever-heating Cold War provided the foreign lifeline that the coup plotters needed. And even though foreign complicity was a little more subtle and complicated to pinpoint, noted CIA operative Vernon Walters was in Fiji and did meet Rabuka 2 weeks before the coup. He was later providentially posted as US Ambassador to the UN and played a pivotal role in minimizing subsequent international condemnation of the Rabuka Coups. And US involvement did continue sporadically until the 1997 constitution brought back normality to the country – was this a case of belated conscience and regret?

The 1987 coup thus had key support from the chiefs, military, sections of the Fijian community and the US. It was supposed to provide a transitory point to a new model of governance for Fiji. Why then did Fiji have to wait 10 years before the 1997 constitution was finally enacted?

Stay tuned for Future articles: Government by Greed - Coup at Last -: A Coup Gone Wrong -: An Intense Power Struggle -: Spawn of the 1987 Coup -: The Personal Tug-of-War. To come later.

[E-Mail: appanas@hotmail.com  / thakurji@xtra.co.nz

SUBHASH APPANA- the author of these series of articles: GOVERNMENT BY GREED 

[About the Author: Subhash Appana is an Indo-Fijian academic with Fijian family links. He was brought up in the chiefly village of Vuna in Taveuni and is particularly fond of the Fijian language and culture. Subhash has written extensively on the link between the politics of the vanua, Indo-Fijian aspirations and the continued search for a functioning democracy in Fiji. This series attempts to be both informative and provocative keeping in mind the delicate, distractive and often destructive sensitivities involved in cross-cultural discourses of this type.]

Government by Greed - PART 5: 1987 - The Impossible Coup

Government by Greed - PART 5: 1987 - The Impossible Coup

Guest Writer-Subhash Appana

A political coup-de-tat has few civilian parallels in terms of rationale, planning, logistics, back-up support, follow-up and consequences. In Fiji, the unthinkable had happened at the April 1987 elections – the carefully camouflaged and internally inconsistent myth of democratic power in perpetuity was finally blown. First there was disbelief, then consternation, then confusion followed by complaining and anger. It is at this point that the coup-makers stepped in to provide guidance to a relatively small portion of the country that appeared to be reeling like a plane without a pilot.

The message that these saviours brought was not about democracy and the inevitability of changes in government, but on how the Fijian people were under threat from the greedy, dishonest and covetous designs of the “kai Idia” or the Indians. This was an old message that had potent political traction and it became the mantra that rallied the masses. Local reggae band Rootstrata, came up with a stirring number about Fijian self-determination, the Fijian way – ‘o cei o ira (who are they), they sang. There was thus no other way for Fiji at that juncture.

 

 Two former Prime Ministers of Fiji-Ratu Sir Kamisese Mara and Brigadier General Sitiveni Rabuka. The latter came to power through barrel of a gun after he was dubbed the Father of coup in Fiji. Many feel that the Eastern Chiefs and Ratu Mara were behind 1987 coup, and they used Rabuka as an instrument to wrest back power from Bavadras' democratic government.

Rabuka clearly stated this in his (now oft-questioned) book, “No Other Way”. Of course if the Fijian leaders, especially the traditional ones had spoken up and stemmed the tide, coup might have been avoided because the rationale for it would have been nipped – no disturbance, no need for coup! The problem was, this was very difficult and it did not leave (or create) room for a re-look at Fiji politics in order to change it and make it more appropriate to the changing times. Bavadra & Co were hardly likely to re-think a model that had just brought them to power.

There was a more significant development within those orchestrated disturbances that has so far been given scant notice by analysts of the 1987 coup and Fiji politics. The framework within which the disturbances were unleashed involved a cadre of fiery, reactionary, peripheral leaders, who had been agitating for public recognition, as front men. Behind this frontline was a group of shady “controllers” who, in turn, were following directives from a high command. The public only got to see the “faces” and has continued to speculate about the “non-faces”.

More importantly, at some stage the rebellion acquired a momentum and direction of its own. The front-men, who were supposed to follow directives and exit centre stage when required, suddenly had too much power, energy and ambition. Taniela Veitata, Manasa Lasaro, Jona Qio, etc. began to plan and make independent pronouncements. Those who were supposed to be under control were suddenly out of control. That’s where the 1987 coup went wrong, and that’s what Fiji is still reeling from today.

Coming back to the planning of that coup, the plotters needed backing from a number of quarters. Firstly, they needed a smattering of lower-level traditional leaders – there was no shortage of these. Then they needed leaders in an urban setting. And of necessity, this included peripheral unionists, churchmen and thugs. All those whose political (and therefore, economic) ambitions had somehow been kept in check by the Mara government suddenly sprang to centre stage.

This was the opportunity they had been waiting for and they made the most of it while chanting the potent mantra of “down with the kai Idia”. Defenders of the Fijian heritage suddenly sprang up all over the place as the fever took hold and rebellion gained momentum. Many supporters joined simply for want of nothing better to do, many were drawn by the power of the preachers and the occasion that was created. Many thought they were really defending the Fijian heritage. Many expected fallouts and were already fingering Indian houses that they’d move into.

That was the nature of the rebellion that preceded Rabuka’s coup.

A second, more important concern that troubled the plotters of that coup was what would happen afterwards. For an orderly transition from the brink of created chaos, they needed to fall back on Fiji’s main leaders who commanded traditional Fijian backing – they needed leaders who could control both the masses as well as the keepers of the law (police and military). This meant they had to have the support of Ratu Sir Kamisese Mara, Ratu Sir Penaia Ganilau and Ratu Sir George Cakobau. These three leaders stood at the pinnacle of the Fijian chiefly system ie. the traditional power structure at that point in time.

 

The original Coup-maker-Sitiveni Rabuka, who has now gone into oblivion, and the coup culture he opened up in 1987 still affects Fiji.

The Fijian traditional administrative system that was shaped and fossilized by Governor Arthur Gordon after cession in 1874 has the country divided into 14 provinces which are in turn grouped into 3 confederacies – Kubuna, Tovata and Burebasaga. Each of these confederacies is headed by a paramount chief. In 1987, Kubuna was headed by ex-Governor General Ratu Sir George Cakobau. Tovata was headed by the then GG Ratu Sir Penaia Ganilau. And Burebasaga was headed by Lady Ro Lala Mara, Ratu Sir Kamisese Mara’s wife.

Ratu Sir Kamisese Mara was thus not a paramount chief in his own right, but he was the husband of one. On top of that, he had been groomed for and headed the modern structure of government that was essentially juxtaposed on the traditional structure. Moreover, Ratu Mara had been earmarked to lead Fiji by Fiji’s most prominent colonial-era chief, Ratu Sir Lala Sukuna. In fact it was Ratu Sukuna who played cupid in helping hitch Mara with the young lass from Burebasaga who would later become the Roko Tui Dreketi, the paramount chief of Burebasaga.

Former Roko Tui Dreketi, Adi Lady Lala Mara with husband Ratu Sir Kamiseses Mara. It is said that it was Ratu Sir Lala Sukuna who was instrumental in helping Ratu Mara wed Adi Laldy Lala Mara.

The coup plotters of 1987 had to prepare to contend with the expected fallout after Rabuka executed his Treason at 10. Fiji would be rudderless and leaderless amid the vacuum that would be created by removing the Bavadra government. The trouble-makers were mainly urban Fijians who had been harnessed for the disturbances. They could be controlled by their newly-created leaders up to a certain extent only. The main source of stability had to come from traditional sources – the paramount chiefs.

And the 1987 coup did have either explicit or implicit support from this all-important source as without military and chiefly support a political coup-de-tat was not possible in Fiji at that point in time. 

Next, how could this be true? Keep tuned, coming in Part 6:

“…….. force and violence are necessary complements of any coup-de-tat. And in order to “build” the scenario to justify a coup, an orchestrated process is activated. The aim is to create a situation that allows a treasonous, yet quietly-supported, coup-maker to say “there was no other way”. This is exactly what happened in Fiji, and that is exactly what Rabuka said after he executed the Father of All Coups on 14^th May 1987. The common thread that bound all who supported that coup was the perceived need to protect the Fijian heritage and save the Fijian race from Indo-Fijians.

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

 

Subhash Appana- the author of this series of articles on "Government by Greed"

[About the Author: Subhash Appana is an Indo-Fijian academic with Fijian family links. He was brought up in the chiefly village of Vuna in Taveuni and is particularly fond of the Fijian language and culture. Subhash has written extensively on the link between the politics of the vanua, Indo-Fijian aspirations and the continued search for a functioning democracy in Fiji. This series attempts to be both informative and provocative keeping in mind the delicate, distractive and often destructive sensitivities involved in cross-cultural discourses of this type.]

Government by Greed: PART 4: The Military Card Had to Be Played

Government by Greed: PART 4: The Military Card Had to Be Played

By Guest Writer, Subhash Appana.

Earlier articles in this series contended that in the initial post-1970 scheme of governance (and politics) in Fiji, there was always an unarticulated expectation that the Royal Fiji Military Forces (RFMF) would play a pivotal role in ensuring that government remained in the hands of Chiefs, and by extension the Fijian people. The 1987 elections forced this hand in the pack of cards that was always stacked in favour of ensuring just that within the façade that was widely taken as democracy in Fiji.

SITIVENI RABUKA, 3rd in RFMF in 1987, was identified as the person who could execute the "dirty" job for the Easter Chiefs

After the 1987 elections, as the orchestrated rebellion against the verdict of the ballot box became more strident and violent, a dark silent group began making overtures to the RFMF. And Lieutenant-Colonel Sitiveni Rabuka was identified as the right choice to execute a coup-de-tat even though he was number 3 in the military hierarchy. The Commander, Ratu Epeli Nailatikau, was a Bau chief of very high rank – he could do without the inevitable stain. His number 2, Colonel Jim Sanday was of mixed-blood and therefore, not to be trusted fully. Focus thus fell on Rabuka.

At that point in time, Rabuka’s future in the military was extremely bleak. He was only able to maintain his hold within the top brass through patronage from his high chief, Ratu Sir Penaia Ganilau, who was also the Governor General. In fact Rabuka had already begun to look for jobs outside the military; he had applied for the post of Police Commissioner and had actually been interviewed for it. The post had instead gone to PU Raman, an Indian.

It was no secret that Rabuka was hugely popular and commanded widespread loyalty within the rank and file of the Fiji military. He was also a hardcore traditionalist who believed in the divine right of chiefly control and ethnic Fijian rule in Fiji within the framework of Christian (preferably Methodist) doctrine. More importantly, Rabuka was a strict disciplinarian who was known to deliver. And most importantly, a coup presented him with a crucial opportunity to redeem himself within the military.

This is what the planners saw. What they did not see was that Rabuka was smarting from his “fall from grace” in the military. He had allowed Major Kadavulevu Cakobau to come back to Fiji from Sinai against orders from Queen Elizabeth Barracks. And he was lined up for a court martial that was only avoided through external pressure from the GG’s office. The fact that he took this decision in Sinai showed that he was prone to independent thinking – this was also missed in assessing him.

On the other hand, Ratu Mara was devastated with his fall at elections 1987 even though he did not show this. As a chief and main architect of independent Fiji, he had a noble vision that he thought would serve the myriad interests in the country. His biggest disappointment came from the fact that he was apparently not supported by the Indian electorate after all that he’d tried to do for that community. Ratu Mara therefore, felt betrayed especially by the Indo-Fijian community.

RATU SIR KAMISESES MARA- he was disappointed with Indo-Fijians for not supporting him in 1987 election which he lost. Hence, Rabuka was identified as the third officer to ensure the Chiefly and Fijian control in Fiji through Military. The events of 1987 proved that democracy had failed in Fiji - it did not ensure proper transition of power through ballots, as the lost politicians and Chiefs who lost through ballot had to resort to BULLETS. Fiji is paying the price for this even today.

On the other hand, he had foreseen problems with the 1970 model of governance. That’s why he mooted the idea of a government of national unity around the 1982 elections. He appeared to be quietly searching for a new model to suit the changing circumstances. This need again stared him in the face in 1987 as the Taukei Movement went on the rampage. Many have criticized Ratu Mara for his inaction and reluctance to enter the fray at that critical juncture.

There would have been sound reasons for this disinclination by that thinking gentleman of noble birth and prolonged British grooming. Firstly, the Fijians were genuinely angered because they felt that their generosity had been abused by an ungrateful immigrant community. This negativity had gained too much momentum. Secondly, Ratu Mara’s hold on Fijian leadership had become precarious because people were openly blaming him for selling out the Fijian heritage. In fact, after 1987 he was no longer considered the sole undisputed leader of the Fijian people.

SUBHASH APPANA, the Guest Writer , who grew up with I-Taukeis, wrote this article as an insider who, despite being an Indo-Fijian, wrote from a good understanding of I-Taukei point of view. 

And three, it can be hazarded that Ratu Mara saw in the turbulence of 1987 an opportunity to once again draw up a new model of governance for Fiji. He therefore, saw coup-de-tat as an unsavoury necessity that would open up opportunities for more suitable and enduring political solutions. A consensus approach appeared to be impractical given the entrenched positions between the 2 main ethnic groups – a forced solution was therefore, the best approach.

To appease the hordes, quell crime and bring about some semblance of order, the men at QEB had to be released not to uphold the rule of law, but to upend it. A Schumpeterian creative destruction framework therefore, guided decisions among Ratu Mara and like-minded. There was full confidence that Rabuka would be reined in shortly after he executed the coup because there would be need for a civilian administration. And more importantly, there would be need to appease the shocked international community and explain the unpardonable situation.

So the orchestrated disturbances were allowed to escalate as Rabuka executed his operational plans for the fateful day. He handpicked a team leader in Captain Savenaca Draunidalo, an Eastern soldier who had served as ADC to the GG, and assembled an elite squad of committed soldiers who shared his own traditionalist, fundamentalist concerns. The international dimension that had been hovering on the fringes again entered the picture. Bavadra had followed the NZ lead of 1985 and declared Fiji anti-nuclear, this irked the Americans and they acted by sending over a high-level decorated operative.

CAPTAIN SAVENACA DRAUNIDALO, who was reportedly the Team-Leader Rabuka appointed to assemble and prepare an elite squad of committed soldiers who shared his own traditionalist, fundamentalist concerns, for executing the coup.

Vernon Walters had been in Teheran in 1953 when the CIA supported Shah Pahlavi’s coup against Dr. Mohamad Mosaddeq. He was again involved in a coup by some generals in Brazil in 1963. In 1975 he was in Chile when General Pinochet toppled the Allende government. And in 1987 the very same Vernon Walters was in Fiji. Two weeks before 14^th of May, he met Lieutenant-Colonel Sitiveni Rabuka. Not the army commander, not his deputy, but the 3^rd man, Sitiveni Rabuka.

Everything was finally in place: the taukei marchers, power preachers, escalating and apparently uncontrollable crime and violence, chiefly withdrawal, US complicity, key business support, and a primed military goon squad under the command of a committed senior officer. Next stop, treason at 10. Keep tuned.

[E-Mail: appanas@hotmail.com  / thakurji@xtra.co.nz

Stay tuned, COMING SHORTLY - Part 5:1987 - The Impossible Coup

Ratu Sir Kamisese Mara was thus not a paramount chief in his own right, but he was the husband of one. On top of that, he had been groomed for and headed the modern structure of government that was essentially juxtaposed on the traditional structure. Moreover, Ratu Mara had been earmarked to lead Fiji by Fiji’s most prominent colonial-era chief, Ratu Sir Lala Sukuna. In fact it was Ratu Sukuna who played cupid in helping hitch Mara with the young lass from Burebasaga who would later become the Roko Tui Dreketi, the paramount chief of Burebasaga.

[About the Author: Subhash Appana is an Indo-Fijian academic with Fijian family links. He was brought up in the chiefly village of Vuna in Taveuni and is particularly fond of the Fijian language and culture. Subhash has written extensively on the link between the politics of the vanua, Indo-Fijian aspirations and the continued search for a functioning democracy in Fiji. This series attempts to be both informative and provocative keeping in mind the delicate, distractive and often destructive sensitivities involved in cross-cultural discourses of this type.]

Fiji Election 2014- Part 2: Controls on Media and Divisive Politics promote better race relations

Fiji Election 2014- Part 2: Controls on Media and Divisive Politics promote better race relations

By Guest Writer: Rajendra Prasad, Auckland, NZ.

Author and political commentator on Fiji affairs, Rajendra Prasad, who authored Tears in Paradise – Suffering and Struggles of Indians in Fiji 1879-2004.

Corruption was the fastest growing industry during the era of democratic rule in Fiji. It is not to claim that it has vanished but it is being addressed. Much maligned Prime Minister Bainimarama and Attorney-General Aiyaz Khaiyum have declared their assets, which gives startling comparison to the wealth of leaders who were Prime Ministers of Fiji except Rabuka who had the harvest but was not astute enough to hold it in his granary. All others, except Rabuka, are multimillionaires. It clearly shows that there is prestige, power and unlimited wealth that draw many, not through genuine desire to serve, but to take advantage through such placement. Some say Rabuka chose a different lifestyle and either misunderstood or underestimated the treachery in Fiji politics. Once a hero to his people, following the military coup of May 14, 1987 but today he is shunned and no political party needs him or wants him. His plight is no different to George Speight except that he is serving his sentence and Rabuka will remain a prisoner of his conscience for the rest of his life.

In the build up to the 2014 elections, racial attacks through the media or other public forums, a common feature in the past elections, was demonstrably absent. However, the Internet is being extensively used, sometimes savagely, where the Blogs and Facebook sites give opportunity to people to rant and rave to their hearts content.  What is good about this medium is that Internet is an even playing field where everyone can contribute on issues of common interest. The voices of the weak cannot be stifled. Undoubtedly, the political parties are also using this medium to their best advantage. But on the ground and in public, racial comments and open display of racial hostility is not visible. Credit must go to the Bainimarama Government for facilitating this remarkable change and for the first time, equality and dignity of every citizen of Fiji is not only being seen but felt across the nation. It has not only given dignity to Fijian citizenship but also raised sense of patriotism in Fijians as never before.

FRANK BAINIMARAMA- credited with implementing policies to stem out racism and divisive politics, the fruits of which are evident in Fiji as witnessed by the Author.

It has contributed to a demonstrable change, as the two dominant communities’ live in harmony and go about their day to day business without rancour or bitterness. Go to the towns, markets or sports arenas, the people of Fiji are one happy lot who relate well with one another. There is happy and respectful exchange of greetings and hearty banter, followed by laughter that is an evolving as Fiji Way, replacing the meaningless Pacific Way. Letters to editor columns carry the same spirit and not the nasty ‘snarling’ of the past. Indo-Fijians follow the Fiji Sevens team with same fervour as the iTaukei, including Indo-Fijian women. Bollywood has also infiltrated the iTaukei hearts and minds, drawing them to the TV screens and rigid following of their favourite programmes. Go through the iTaukei settlements and it is not unusual to hear the Bollywood beats echoing, as they do from Indo-Fijian homes. This medium is also enhancing race relations, which is also transforming hearts and minds of Fiji’s peoples, as they realize and accept they are one people and Fiji is their home.

There has also been a physical transformation, which cannot go unnoticed. ITaukei girls, with their frail features and straightened hairs, adjusting to modern fashion trends, are easily mistaken for Indo-Fijians. The effect of the roti and curry across the nation is palpable. 

Those muscular features of the iTaukei are diminishing and the Policemen in sulu, without the bulging calf muscles, look starved. On the Indo-Fijian front, the kava has contributed to the diminishing physique. Indeed, there is physical harmony among the peoples of Fiji that cannot be apprehended. However, Fiji can only become the utopia of our dreams if there is political harmony. This can come about when advocates of racism are disabled in the interests of the nation. Racism has favoured a few who benefit from the spoils. Racism does not build but destroys nations. Fiji has suffered too much from it for too long. Those closure of the racial ‘kennels’ has brought about perceptible change that needs to be nurtured with care, caution and thoughtfulness.

Indeed, democracy in Fiji was a label without the basic ingredients of equality, justice and dignity. Democracy that is reconfigured to pursue racial discrimination is not democracy but tyranny. Both form and content comprise its inseparable limbs. Worldwide such autocratic democracies abound and it usually entails the tyranny of the aristocracy, propped by the Armed forces, against the majority. Fiji has had a parting of ways between the two on December 5, 2006 and a new era in Fiji politics began, much to the disgust of the ruling elite who had a long reign, using it to restore it to power whenever it was lost, as in 1987 and 2000. With this detachment, a new era in Fiji politics began, which will culminate in first democratic elections on September 17, 2014. The field is open and those deposed in 2006 and their associates are back with their ideologies and banners to retake what they considered to be their birth right. Truth, morals, ethics and principles will become the immediate casualties, as victory at any cost becomes the name of the game.

 

What amused and also saddened me was the sheer lack of remorse and moral conscience of some of the leaders, convicted for abuse of office or violation of taxation laws, as they campaigned for their political parties. They moved around defiant and dismissive of their past when common decency expected them to leave the public domain. Indeed, the fodder of deceit and lies are aplenty and the simple and gullible sometimes fail to distinguish between the grain and chaff.

An unholy alliance, and marriage of convenience, where political enemies become friends for political expediency? [Fiji Sun Photo]

Sometimes, it is beyond the bizarre, as one person, a recent arrival to the mainland from Vanua Levu told me that the Government was wrong in fining Chaudhry F$2 million, as he was paying the farmers evicted from their leased land $28,000 each from the funds he held in Australia! He genuinely grieved that now the poor farmers cannot be helped because the Government had taken all the money in fines. I was gobsmacked by the naivety of the person whose seriousness in his belief was inscrutable. Will this election be won on deceit and lies or will it be won on truth and understanding? Only time will tell. God Bless Fiji!

E-Mail: raj.prasad@xtra.co.nz / thakurji@xtra.co.nz

[About the Author: Rajendra Prasad is the author of Tears in Paradise – Suffering and Struggles of Indians in Fiji 1879-2004), former Ba Town Clerk and an analyst on Fiji’s struggling efforts to seek an appropriate form of democracy.]