With global powers barred, can Pacific nations find unity at their annual summit?

It’s been a testing time for Pacific regional unity.

So far this year, there have been rifts between Cook Islands and New Zealand over security arrangements with China; New Caledonia and France over independence for the French territory; and among various Pacific nations over deep-sea mining.

Now, geopolitical tussles are buffeting the annual Pacific Islands Forum (PIF) leaders’ meeting, held this week in Solomon Islands.

As regional leaders began preparing for their apex annual summit, there were disagreements over the regular dialogue with Pacific development partners held after the main meeting. Development partners include major outside powers such as the United States, China, France, United Kingdom and Japan, among others.

Last month, Solomon Islands Prime Minister Jeremiah Manele called off the meeting with these global partners. He argued that excluding outsiders will allow time to complete a review among members on how such external engagements occur.

However, most believe he was bowing to Chinese pressure to exclude Taiwan – Solomon Islands switched its allegiance from Taipei to Beijing in 2019.

Chinese rhetoric against Taiwan is sharpening. Earlier this year, a spokesperson for the Chinese embassy in New Zealand was blunt about the inclusion of Taiwan in the Pacific Islands Forum:

Taiwan is a province of China […] and has no qualification or right to participate in Forum activities whatsoever.

At last year’s summit in Tonga, China’s special envoy to the Pacific, Qian Bo, flexed his diplomatic muscles and insisted on the removal of a mention of Taiwan from the final communique.

Even so, the PIF 1992 Honiara Declaration does sanction a Taiwan dialogue during the annual gathering for those wanting to meet on a bilateral basis — that arrangement has persisted for more than three decades.

Next year’s host Palau will reinstate the more inclusive status quo.

An official statement from Taiwan ahead of this year’s forum makes clear it is in the region to stay:

We firmly believe in the inclusive spirit of “The Pacific Way” [and…] look forward to ongoing participation in the PIF.

The Pacific pushes back

Most members are not happy with the exclusion of partner nations, but all are still coming this week and will work out their differences, as they have done in the past.

Tuvalu, Palau and Marshall Islands recognise, and have development partnerships with, Taiwan. They believe the exclusion of outside powers is a missed development opportunity. Tuvalu Prime Minister Feleti Teo has been clear:

We do not need the competition and conflict overshadowing our development agenda in the Pacific.

Even countries that recognise China worry about the cost of exclusion. Senior representatives from Australia, New Zealand, Papua New Guinea and Samoa (all of whom are PIF members and will attend the summit) have expressed their disappointment in the decision to keep partner nations away.

The decision to call off the partner dialogue is divisive, but it is only a hurdle, not a hard stop. Those nations with diplomatic missions or visit visas to Honiara, including China, may well hold quiet bilateral meetings on the margins of the summit this week. However, Taiwanese representatives will not be present.

Setting the Pacific agenda

While exclusions and sharp reactions grab media headlines, much more crucial issues are on the summit agenda this year.

Climate change is top of the list. Buoyed by the recent Vanuatu-led triumph at the International Court of Justice, which ruled that states have a legal obligation to combat climate change, Pacific nations will look for more avenues to collectively seek climate justice.

Already Vanuatu, Fiji and Samoa have submitted a resolution to the Rome Statute (the treaty that established the International Criminal Court) for a new crime of “ecocide” to be added in recognition of the irreversible damage to ecosystems from climate change.

They are also pushing hard for more money to deal with biodiversity losses, and ensuring a new “loss and damage” fund to help vulnerable states recover from climate disasters is effective.

Another high priority will be next year’s COP31 climate meeting, which Australia and the Pacific are proposing to co-host. This would be a chance to push harder for global climate action to speed up mitigation and adaptation. Pressure will be on Australia to deliver on its host bid promises, and for others to step up or out of the way.

Pacific nations also need better access to targeted funds to adapt to rising temperatures and sea levels. They are working to capitalise their own Pacific Resilience Facility to make communities disaster-ready. However, the ambitious aim to secure US$1.5 billion (A$2.3 billion) from the global community will be set back by the decision to exclude partner countries from the talks.

Working together to combat problems

Another priority on the PIF agenda is advancing economic integration. Supply chains, labour mobility and regional connectivity all need a boost.

For example, poor internet connectivity is hindering economic development, while inadequate infrastructure is impeding the movement of people, goods and information across the vast region.

With rising geopolitical pressures and donors crowding in to offer aid and curry influence in the Pacific, regional frameworks and rules of engagement need strengthening. Former PIF senior officials Sione Tekiteki and Joel Nilon argue:

By building on existing frameworks and creating a cohesive set of standards, the Pacific can assert its autonomy.

Significantly, the Blue Pacific Oceans of Peace Declaration will be launched at this year’s meeting — a move to advance Pacific sovereignty. It aims to prevent regional militarisation, keep the Pacific nuclear-free, and protect oceans from nuclear waste and degradation.

This reflects a determination to cooperatively manage transnational pressures such as ocean exploitation, pollution, and crime and security intrusions from foreign elements.

Tensions between global powers permeate all corners of the world, and the Pacific is no different. External players can pull at the fabric of regionalism, but PIF members are the threads that bind the region.

In the past, external pressures have led to improved collective management. The development of one of the world’s largest sustainable tuna fisheries is a good example. Let’s hope that will be true in the future and unity will hold.