Between Politics and Poetry
by Sudarsan Kant
Your recent debate with Nick Naidu on the political situation in Fiji unwittingly exposed a fundamental divide between the different interlocutors around the Fiji question and the proper course of action to pursue in solving the crisis. You have for sometime now insisted that substantive solutions must be congruent with the reality on the ground, and to pretend otherwise will not alter what has happened, and is happening in Fiji.
Neither you nor I suggest that we ought to elide over the hash that people have made of politics and society in Fiji for a very long time, but trying to wind the clock back to 1987, or 2000 or 2006 is certainly not moving forward.
Neither you nor I suggest that we ought to elide over the hash that people have made of politics and society in Fiji for a very long time, but trying to wind the clock back to 1987, or 2000 or 2006 is certainly not moving forward.
Thus far the unalterable facts remain unchanged, Qarase is still the deposed Prime Minister, and Bainimarama is in charge. A national charter has been drafted to provide a roadmap for institutional and electoral changes and for elections to be called in 2014. The government has imposed some restrictions on key institutions and individuals it has suspected of sabotaging the states attempt at reforms. Member countries, most notably Australia and New Zealand have responded to the political developments in Fiji with a package of sanctions and tough rhetoric, some which has hurt Fiji while the verbal crossfire’s have generated more heat than light.
Acknowledging the current situation as it stands does not necessarily mean agreement, but it does mean that a political solution can be worked out when you acknowledge the political reality in Fiji.
Unfortunately for some well meaning and decent people, this is a difficult pill to swallow; to accept what has happened is tantamount to approving and even colluding with the regime. So instead of offering workable political solutions, they offer poetry, harkening back to the democratic paradise that Fiji was prior to December 2006. We have appeals to what ought to happen, if only Frank is gone, what should have happened had Fiji not had bad leadership, if only people stopped with all the race stuff, etc. Frank Bainimarama and his people, the poets tell us have rudely disrupted the halcyon time and place that Fiji was, and only through his removal can we recover our innocence and joy.
Missing in the debate is an unwillingness to recognize that perhaps prior to 2006, the major institutions in the country had been weakened and damaged by successive elites and that it no longer functioned for the common good. It is also plausible to argue that these same institutions advanced the interests and objectives of a corrupt elite who would use whatever trope it could get its hands on to maintain power and control, whether it was an appeal to race, religion, class and yes, even democracy.
Unfortunately for some well meaning and decent people, this is a difficult pill to swallow; to accept what has happened is tantamount to approving and even colluding with the regime. So instead of offering workable political solutions, they offer poetry, harkening back to the democratic paradise that Fiji was prior to December 2006. We have appeals to what ought to happen, if only Frank is gone, what should have happened had Fiji not had bad leadership, if only people stopped with all the race stuff, etc. Frank Bainimarama and his people, the poets tell us have rudely disrupted the halcyon time and place that Fiji was, and only through his removal can we recover our innocence and joy.
Missing in the debate is an unwillingness to recognize that perhaps prior to 2006, the major institutions in the country had been weakened and damaged by successive elites and that it no longer functioned for the common good. It is also plausible to argue that these same institutions advanced the interests and objectives of a corrupt elite who would use whatever trope it could get its hands on to maintain power and control, whether it was an appeal to race, religion, class and yes, even democracy.
Evoking images of a past that did not exist is not a prescription for what currently ails us nor is ignoring reality a viable option. Yet this is what Nick Naidu wants us to believe in his fantastical suggestion that a referendum should be called to determine the regime and the republics fate. Even in the most ideal of democratic societies, referendums are recognized as a deeply problematic instrument to advance policy, does he or anyone truly believe that institutional, racial, religious and commercial forces will not attempt to influence the process in Fiji. Where were the calls for a referendum on the most egregious policies of the Qarase administration, or the Rabuka regime? Why is Frank held to a higher democratic standard than any of his previous predecessors?
As you time and again reminded your opponent and the listeners, we have to begin with reality as is, not as the poets tell us about what could or should be. kantsudarsan@hotmail.com
As you time and again reminded your opponent and the listeners, we have to begin with reality as is, not as the poets tell us about what could or should be. kantsudarsan@hotmail.com
6 comments:
Excellent summary. Some points that were made also might demonstrate why it is a good reason to wait until 2014 for new elections. It will give time for those with good intentions for Fiji, but who do not agree with Franks coup, to allow them to join in the rebuilding of a new democracy, without seeming to approve of the original coup.
The problemis that noone except those approved by Frank is allowed to open their mouths without being arrested. 15 more Methodist Ministers have been charged under PER for discussing Fijis future at a church meeting.
S.O.E.
@ Cama
Oh come on! These so-called ministers might have worked out a long time ago that they are here to "save souls" and nothing else. Somehow or other, they went off message.
Even those that go off message should be aloud to meet and talk in a free society. Only actions should be punished.
@Cama
"Only actions should be punished"? How? By rewarding the criminals with ministerial positions!!!!! lol. By handing them an 'out of jail' card? Where is Ratu Seniloli's medical report? What happened in Savua's trial in camera? We taxpayers have a right to know because we paid for all this garbage.
Where is Keans or the convicted soldiers that were paid to go to jail?
We can all throw previous issues at each other but until all all parties are free to talk and discuss issues both privatly and publicly there will always be a hidden underground ready to subvert the new administration.
Better a vocal public opposition than plotting in dark rooms. Better the opposition rallies the public vote than obtains guns and throws another coup.
This is the strenth of democracy that the public has a choice good or bad. They can regularly review this choice. Its called an election.
I believe that eventually Fiji will grow up and vote out any corrupt politicians. To do this we need a loud and active press not afraid to question any actions. Newspapers always have their own agenda but between the three papers in Fiji we were always able to get to the truth.
Teaching politics, civil rights and governance in schools is critical to training people to be able to wade through the crap spouted by politicians and make an effective vote.
Post a Comment