We Say 1

When interviewed by an Australian newspaper in April, the Cook Islands Prime Minister, Robert Woonton is reported to have described the Pacific Islands as the "soft belly" of an international fight against terrorism. It would not be a surprise to learn that the words were put into Dr Woonton¹s mouth by the journalist who interviewed him.

"Dr Woonton, are the Pacific Islands the soft belly of the international fight against terrorism?"
"Oh well, yes, I suppose so."

Back at home Dr Woonton might just as well be asked by a local journalist: "Prime Minister, is the Australian notion that the Pacific Islands with terrorist training camps busy heavily disguising Islamic fanatics to pass as happy-go-lucky Polynesians so that they can easily penetrate Australia with evil intent, just hogwash?"

"Oh, yes."

Pacific Islands representatives have been summoned to Wellington this month to be advised on how to apply new anti-terrorist rules to their domestic situation. United Nations members and most Pacific Islands states must conform to the 12 new counter-terrorism conventions.

The Pacific Islands need to look at this matter from the perspective of having air and sea service links with markets, including tourism markets crucial to them like the United States, Australia and New Zealand, cut with disastrous consequences for their pathetically weak economies. They must virtually guarantee that their national airlines for instance, won¹t have their aircraft turned into flying bombs aimed at the Sydney Opera House or Auckland¹s Eden Park rugby stadium. In these times, the issue of terrorism is one of utmost gravity.

The hitches with remarks like the one attributed to Dr Woonton is firstly, it draws undesirable attention to the element of accuracy of it. And secondly, to an extent, it is also an exaggeration likely to make Pacific Islanders bristle with annoyance about again being portrayed as naive buffoons capable of allowing their archipelagos to become offshore launching pads for attacks on places that sick-minded suicide squads are directed from afar to assault.

The number of countries in Oceania that offer adequate cover for would-be terrorist needs is fortunately rather limited. The cover needed is a lot of people and quite a lot of space so that they can be present with little chance of attracting inquisitive attention to themselves.

Another need is immediate access to trunk travel routes, in particular, air routes and probably also access to comparatively sophisticated telecommunications services.

The list of countries to be excluded from this category is rather obvious. But then perhaps, Dr Woonton has already compromised the Cook Islands by exposing it as being soft bellied.

The list of countries in Oceania that can be classified as having undesirable environments could be exploited, like Fiji, perhaps shouldn¹t be mentioned. Who knows? To do so could imbue otherwise ignorant undesirables with some undesirable ideas about exploiting soft bellies.

So far, the region has been fortunate. Since the end of the Second World War, terror has had a domestic brand; thugs in the Solomon Islands, rascals in Papua New Guinea, goons in Fiji and right wing thuggery in New Caledonia.

But perhaps terrorists have already tried to penetrate the region. Former Fiji intelligence sources confirmed that there was an attempt by three Middle Eastern characters posing as schoolbook distributors to bomb the United States embassy in Suva

In this edition of Islands Business, Alfred Sasako, a Solomon Islands cabinet minister and former journalist, dwells on a Syrian organ is at on¹s desire to divert a cargo plane to his country on a mission that may have been the real cause of the subsequent arrival of the Australian-led RAMSI intervention force.
As commentators point out, Pacific Islands governments perceive security as being mainly a matter of food, economic and social security for small societies that exist in isolated and taxing circumstances.
The spectres of suicide bombers, even if only transiting ones, and serious transnational criminality are thankfully not yet menaces that disturb placid life in the Pacific.

But the Pacific Islands must not be complacent. If just one of them becomes an unwitting stepping stone into a place that terrorists have targeted, the already heavy burden required of weak economies compelled to comply with anti-terrorism strategies will grow.

Yet islands governments should also be prepared to stoutly resist such intrusions as the drastic security regime being prepared for application to Australians by their government.

This provides for radical attacks on personal liberty and freedoms. Police and government spies would be empowered to secretly arrest, detain and interrogate for long periods and without immediate access to legal protection, practically anyone they treat as being a suspect.

The New South Wales Council for Civil Liberties says that neither the American nor British intelligence agencies have anywhere near the detention powers of the Australian spy agency. Excesses in the use of these powers are inevitable.

Australia is pressing for more and more requirements on beneficiaries of its aid and trade policies. Woe is the day that islands governments are pressed to emulate its latest counter-terrorism laws. Some Pacific Islands politicians and policemen are of a mentality that would gleefully find excuses and victims for making grossly abusive use of them.