Fiji coup in perspective

[Louis Proyect <lnp3@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

[Today's NY Times has an article that is invaluable for understanding the
May 19th coup in Fiji. It is the very first account that puts the fight
over control of timber resources into the foreground. I strongly urge
everybody to read the entire article at:
http://www.nytimes.com/2000/09/14/business/14FIJI.html. However, I do want
to highlight 3 sections of the article that are especially illuminating.]


1. ALTHOUGH TIMBER WAS ONE OF THE MAIN RESOURCES ON THE ISLANDS,
COLONIALISM HAD DEPRIVED INDIGENOUS LANDOWNERS OF THEIR PROPER REWARD:

<startquote>
Nearly all the land in Fiji belongs to familial groups of indigenous,
ethnic Melanesians, much as crown property in England belongs to the queen.
Though land is often leased long-term for public and private uses, the
holdings are a birthright of native Fijians, a situation that sets them
apart even from multigeneration Indo-Fijians, who represent half the
population and who dominate Fiji's commercial sector.

In the 1950's and 60's, the British colonial administration leased land to
plant trees, including pine, which is a fast-growing softwood, and Honduran
mahogany, a slow-growing hardwood. The leases paid landowners only a
nominal rent ? an average of about 4 cents an acre each year ? for what was
seen as an experiment. Many, but not all, of the leases gave landowners the
rights to share profits if the planting proved successful.

When the pine began maturing in the 1980's, a decade after the British
left, the new Fiji government established its own company, Fiji Pine, to
harvest the trees. But the company mostly shredded the logs into chips and
exported the chips to Japan at low prices, usually AT A LOSS.

Landowners, after realizing no profit from pine, scrambled to make sure
they made money on mahogany, which is just now ready to start cutting.
<endquote>


2. THE RULING PARTY CUT A DEAL WITH BRITISH INVESTORS THAT SHORTCHANGED THE
INDIGENOUS LANDOWNERS. IN EXCHANGE, FAVORS WERE GRANTED TO INDO-FIJIAN
SUGAR-GROWERS.

<startquote>
Mr. Chaudhry's new government promised a quick decision on timber sales.
Even without Mr. Speight's help, Mr. Pettit felt he had the superior bid.
His main challenger was the Commonwealth Development Corporation, a British
concern with a 40- year track record in Fiji. But Mr. Pettit had a much
more ambitious proposal that valued the mahogany crop at $210 million
versus about $65 million for the British company.

What Mr. Pettit apparently did not know at the time was that Mr. Chaudhry,
the first ethnic Indian prime minister in 13 years, needed the backing of
Fiji's former colonial patron in negotiations with the European Union over
export supports for sugar. Sugar is Fiji's No. 1 industry and a business
dominated by ethnic Indians; Britain could help with sugar subsidies, but
the British wanted Commonwealth Development to get the timber concession.
Moreover, the new Fijian government ? unlike Mr. Speight ? seemed to have
an instinctual distrust of foreign bonds.

As promised, Mr. Chaudhry decided the matter quickly. He told the British
company that it was the "preferred bidder," subject to final talks. Mr.
Pettit, having already invested about $2 million in Fiji, sensed disaster.
He recruited the American Embassy to intervene.
<endquote>


3. ANGER OVER CHAUDRY'S SWEETHEART DEAL SPILLED OVER INTO MASS PROTESTS IN
THE STREETS OF SUVA IN LATE MARCH, TWO MONTHS IN ADVANCE OF GEORGE
SPEIGHT'S COUP.

<startquote>
But the uproar in the capital seemed to solidify landowner opposition to
Mr. Chaudhry. Some 10,000 indigenous Fijians marched through Suva in LATE
MARCH, calling on the government to cease making decisions on two key land
issues: the mahogany and renewal of leases on land used to grow sugar cane.

Mr. Speight's landowner coalition was encouraging the protesters, in
language that became overtly racist. They asserted that ethnic Indians
could not be trusted to reach crucial decisions on native land matters.

On May 19, landowners again marched on Suva, this time 20,000 strong. While
the march degenerated into a riot that destroyed some ethnic Indian-run
businesses, Mr. Speight took over the parliament building with seven
paramilitary troops and captured Mr. Chaudhry and his cabinet. The rebels
held them as hostages for almost two months.
<endquote>


Louis Proyect
Marxism mailing list: http://www.marxmail.org/