The key Pacific diplomatic body has received a devastating blow on the eve of its first in-person meeting since the pandemic, as Kiribati announced it would withdraw from the Pacific Islands Forum (PIF).
The Pacific has become a place of intense geostrategic competition, as a result of rising Chinese interest, and the withdrawal of Kiribati will weaken the forum at a time when Pacific regionalism is facing fierce geopolitical attention has never been more important.
Taneti Maamau, the president of Kiribati, set out the reasons for the decision in a letter to the PIF general secretary which was first reported by 1News New Zealand, but which has been obtained independently by the Guardian.
“Kiribati has made the sovereign decision to withdraw from the Pacific Islands Forum with immediate effect. This decision was not taken lightly,” he wrote, adding that the decision “was never to offend or to be against any of our brothers and sisters in the Pacific islands. “
Maamau set out four reasons for the decision, most of which focus on his belief that the forum has not adequately addressed the concerns of Micronesian countries, including Kiribati, which threatened to leave the PIF more than a year ago. .
In February 2021, Micronesia’s leaders announced their plans to leave the regional body after their candidate for secretary general of the forum was approved in favor of a Polynesian candidate, despite a “gentlemen’s agreement” that the post work had to be shared between Polynesians, Melanesians and Micronesis Candidates.
Micronesian leaders had expressed their intention to leave the forum in late June, but last-minute talks in Suva last month between key Pacific leaders, including some from Micronesia, were thought to have settled the deadlock. .
The talks led to the signing of the Suva agreement, which included the formalization of the “knights agreement”, the commitment that a Micronesian candidate would be the next secretary general of the forum, the creation of a new PIF office in a country of Micronesia and the transfer of the position of the Pacific Ocean. commissioner in Micronesia.
At the time of signing, David Panuelo, president of the Federated States of Micronesia, said the deal raised the “big dark, dark cloud that had hung over the Pacific.”
However, in the July 9 letter, Maamau said Kiribati’s concerns had not been adequately addressed and that his country would not sign the Suva agreement or attend the forum, which will begin on Monday in Suva.
He said another reason for Kiribati’s inability to participate in this year’s forum was that the forum dates coincide with Kiribati National Day celebrations.
The decision comes at a crucial time for the Pacific region, which faces intense geostrategic interest from China, the US and Australia.
“It’s very clear that geostrategic competition is the backdrop to this PIF in a way that it has never been before. It’s the first time since the Cold War that the Pacific is really in the crosshairs of great powers, ”said Dr Wesley Morgan, a senior Climate Council researcher who is in Suva for the forum.
“This could be a blow to Pacific regional unity, and unity is really important if island nations want to take on key challenges, such as geostrategic competition and, of course, the region’s key threat: climate change. “.
Sign up for First Edition, our free daily newsletter, every weekday morning at 7:00 BST
The importance of Pacific regionalism was seen last month when Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi ran a marathon tour of the Pacific and presented leaders with a broad economic and regional security agreement to sign.
Pacific leaders rejected the deal, and Samoa’s Prime Minister Fiamē Naomi Mata’afa said it should have been raised at the Pacific Islands Forum, not in a sub-meeting.
Dr Anna Powles, a senior professor of security studies at Massey University in New Zealand, said the decision probably stemmed from a combination of domestic politics in Kiribati and frustrations with diplomatic processes.
“It is not yet clear what role China will play in this decision, but China will certainly benefit from an isolated Kiribati,” Powles said. “There has been concern about the nature of Chinese interest in Kiribati and the exploitation of fisheries, as well as potential strategic interest.”
Powles said Kiribati’s decision was a “devastating blow” to the Pacific Islands Forum, which served a crucial purpose in providing collective oversight of Pacific countries on issues such as fisheries and security.
“The 2050 Strategy for the Blue Pacific [the strategy document that will be presented to Pacific leaders at this year’s forum], which will be endorsed next week by leaders, speaks in very robust language about the importance of regionalism, the Pacific Way; losing Kiribati on the eve of this strategy is really devastating, in fact. “