Age of the Pacific?

by Dom on March 28, 2011

With the general buzz about the rise of China entirely predicted and forseeable and the intensifying focus on the Pacific as a region, it is interesting that we are starting to hear politicians talk about this as the Asia Pacific Century. What has it been before? A backwater? Not a pivotal battlegroud? Not the centre of cheap manurfacturing?

But if we do accept that it will be a golden age for the pacific, what does this entail? Further exploitation? Further posting of foreign soldiers? Under-development, under-utilisation of local labour, low wages? Democratic advancement? But thats just an accident, so why is it such a goal? More coups for Fiji and further sanctions, pushing it closer to China? The rise of Australia and New Zealand militarily?

Fiji will lead the Pacific, the same way it seems to be leading Melanesia and the spearhead group. Where will it lead the Pacific? Closer to China, at China treats Fiji like it should; a large state in a region of small states. Comparitively Fiji is small, but look at it this way: Fiji is the mature brother in a large family that needs a lot of help and can be vulnerable at times. Keep the brother on side and the rest of the family will follow, or at least toe the line.

So, century of the Pacific it is. China’s century in the Pacific.

Questions, comments, thoughts, retorts?

Leave a Comment

Previous post:

Next post: