Editorial: Keep China on Short Leash

Fiji needs to take a leaf out of the tourism industry, where there is a smiling Fijian at the front door and the doers out the back are getting the job done.

This would require a balanced mix of expatriate specialists and local expertise to get us out of our financial constraints and monetary complications.

Our debt to GDP ratio is reducing somewhat, but still relatively high.

This affects Fiji’s ability to borrow.

On a slippery slope to a failed State, propped up by remittances, we need good partners and strong alliances to get things done.

The country needs to seek assistance from its development partners to engage with experts and specialists who have Fiji’s interest at heart and whom we can trust, but more importantly, know what they are doing.

Japan, as an example, is a good development partner, particularly after Fiji became the lone Pacific supporter of the Fukushima dump decision.

Japan for instance, provide technical assistance and help towards identifying projects which would enhance Fiji’s livelihood, and then go about undertaking its own due diligence studies.

The Nadi River flood mitigation study is one such example.

We should be talking to them about what a good friend we are.

But lately, an economic realignment - coming two years after an initial position that said otherwise - has been observed between Fiji and China, via the Belt and Road Initiative which:

- promises to shape up Vanua Levu,

- via a rule-breaking exercise, could potentially allow them to carry out mineral exploration of half the country’s second largest province.

One is reminded of the design and material compliance fiasco associated with the country’s tallest tower that, though years past the due-date of completion, remains a shelled out white elephant.

If we invite the Chinese in, we need to do so on a short leash.

The Chinese could be invited in with a clear set of rules, which is better than not having any rules at all.

China has an important role to play here, and maybe they could be given a fair go, instead of demonising them.

They took an opportunity where national expectations leaned on the United States of America.

But the US is preparing for an election, so spending on a broke little Pacific Island is probably of no consequence to them.

Fiji does not necessarily need China as a security partner; we have Australia for that.

But China, as some could say, could fix all our monetary woes and problems.

Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka’s position in relation to the Vanua Levu road project in conjunction with the China BRI may be the type of engagement we can have with China, provided it does not compromise our sovereignty, or require us to engage in security deals (which other countries have entered into on similar Belt and Road Initiative deals, only to meet with a number of problems and issues).

We have a security deal with our near neighbour and Vuvale partner, Australia, but this should not preclude us from engaging with China for an economic partnership.

Old world scare mongers about the reds under the beds should be consigned to the historical waste paper basket.

Let us all get on with our development plans with partners who want to assist us, but with little or no bi-lateral ties, and in an informed, deliberate manner which benefits Fiji and its people.

Feedback: frederica.elbourne@fijisun.com.fj