The Papua New Guinea Prime Minister, Sir Julius Chan, has condemned the Australian Foreign Minister, Alexander Downer, over Bougainville. He suggested that relations with Australia had soured since the change of government and that if Australia had any concerns about the use of Australian-provided helicopters in Bougainville, Papua New Guinea could get helicopters elsewhere.
The outburst may be explained by Sir Julius’s frustration at the dismal failure of his policy in Bougainville. When Sir Julius came to power, the world had hopes he might succeed in bringing peace. He cut through the earlier impasse by arranging a meeting with the Bougainville separatist leader, Francis Ona. Alas, nothing came of it, and Sir Julius went from the olive branch to force. He doubled the presence of PNG troops and imposed some tough conditions on the civilian population in order, he thought, to break the back of the Bougainville Revolutionary Army. That met with no success either.
Mr Downer has rightly questioned Sir Julius’s approach, and events on the ground show that the crisis can only be settled by peaceful means. Moreover, he was right to question PNG’s aggressive use of Australian-supplied Iroquois helicopters which resulted in six Bougainvillians being shot dead by fire from one of the helicopters. And it was proper to question the $20 million defence package if PNG could not live up to its terms. Sir Julius asserts that Australia is being neo-colonialist. Not so. Australia, as supplier of military aid has not only the right, but the responsibility to ensure that the conditions of the supply are adhered to, in particular that the helicopters will not be used in an aggressive way.
It may well be that Sir Julius has a point, at least in theory, when he complains about the public way in which Mr Downer made his points. Foreign countries with which Australia deals have a right to expect Australia to put its position and concerns at a diplomatic level first, so that they have the opportunity to respond before there is any public posturing. That said, the Australian Foreign Minister also has a responsibility to the Australian public and that means explaining policy and responses to the Australian public. Sir Julius’s yearning for the days of the Keating Government when difficulties were solved with a quick phone call between Prime Ministers or Foreign Ministers is a little nostalgic, largely because the Keating Government was not dealing with such a publicly demonstrated breach of the terms upon which the helicopters were given. It required a public response. Besides, the PNG Government can hardly complain it was not warned. Mr Downer made Australia’s position clear on his first visit and made the position clear to PNG’s Foreign Minister, Kilroy Genia, before the public statement. Perhaps the message did not get to Sir Julius.
The essential problem is not Australia’s questioning of PNG’s actions, but PNG’s actions themselves. Sir Julius is living in fantasy if he thinks he can either force or con Bougainvillians to any settlement that does not involve substantial autonomy. When the mine on the island was operating, Bougainvillians rightly complained of its environmental impact and the fact that the economic benefit seemed to be going to the central government a people of a different ethnic mix. It was a recipe for resentment. And the violence will not stop nor the mine restart without a radical change in PNG’s approach.