Has the Pacific’s Ocean of Peace concept been hijacked?

Analysis: As geopolitical tensions increase in the Pacific region and numerous security alliances are rapidly forged, questions are being raised over whether the Ocean of Peace concept is being hijacked.

The Ocean of Peace Declaration was made last year by members of the Pacific Islands Forum, recognising the role of civil society in peacebuilding. However, the emphasis of the initiative seems to have quickly shifted.

Australia last week signed the Vuvale Union and Ocean of Peace Alliance treaties with Fiji, the latest in a series of regional pacts Canberra has forged with Pacific Islands countries.

He said the new treaties underlined Fiji’s position as a regional leader.

“The Vuvale Union and the Ocean of Peace Alliance have a really strong regional component,” Australia’s High Commissioner in Suva, Peter Roberts said in a post on X.

“I think we’ve all seen during this fuel crisis how important Fiji is as a hub. And we’ve seen on security matters how important Fiji is as a regional leader, including through Prime Minister Rabuka’s vision for the Ocean of Peace.”

According to Roberts, the treaties empower Australia and Fiji to support the Pacific region in efforts against security threats such as transnational crime, cyber crime and illegal fishing.

“Including in this Fiji and Australia supporting the establishment of the Ocean of Peace Centre, in close co-operation with the Pacific islands Forum. So you’ll see Australia and Fiji standing together in support of the stability and prosperity of the region.”

The Vuvale Union is backed by around AU$1 billion in funding for Fiji by Australia over a decade, while Australia is also funding the Ocean of Peace Centre to the tune of around AU$22 million

Geopolitical commentator Dr Connor Graham from the Lowy Institute said Australia sees great value for money in these arrangements.

He said Australia was driven by the aim of keeping China out of Pacific waters and maintaining its position as the dominant security partner in the region.

“I’d note as well, a billion dollars over ten years is a lot of money. But it’s relatively small fries in terms of defence, and the rest of the defence budget and militarisation. So I think this sort of defence through diplomacy is quite a cost effective use of money.”

While Canberra notches a big diplomatic win, regional civil society has been left wondering where it all leaves the Ocean of Peace Declaration.

The declaration came together off the back of significant engagement with – and made provision for the leadership of – Pacific civil society in peacebuilding, especially women and Indigenous communities.

“This meaningful inclusion was celebrated and consultation followed on the premise of institutional support for conflict prevention and mediation initiatives grounded in culture, like those that were so successful with the Bougainville conflict, or in bringing Kiribati back into the Forum,” Pacific historian AUT lecturer Marco de Jong said.

But now, with the signing of the Ocean of Peace Alliance and plans to establish the Centre, the language has shifted from being about conflict prevention, peacebuidling and mediation towards deterrence, and the countering of China through military means.

It coincides with the plan of the Australian-led Joint Heads of Pacific Security to insert itself into the Pacific Islands Forum-led regional security architecture, and to advance a regional deployment framework

Joey Tau, the coordinator of the Pacific Network on Globalisation and the chair of the Pacific Regional NGO Organisations Alliance, said that as civil society, they welcomed the original Ocean of Peace initiative

“But our main concern is that we hope such a declaration is not co-opted or used as a strategy to advance external security and military interest of external parties.”

He said the Ocean of Peace concept should be something that draws from existing regional priorities and responds to legacy issues for the Pacific.

These include self-determination problems in West Papua and New Caledonia; the planetary biodiversity crisis; exploitation of ocean resources; nuclear testing and new threats of nuclearisation in the region.

“One, the Rarotonga Treaty, which declares our region is a nuclear-free region, and secondly, other initiatives as such, need to be informed by the Pacific. And when I say Pacific, Pacific peoples.

“With the proposal of a peace institute, I think it needs further consultation. It needs to be informed by Pacific people, and one that is not determined by external parties.”

Pacific Women Mediators Network coordinator of political engagement Sharon Bhagwan-Rolls is concerned about the lack of focus on peacebuilding in how the Ocean of Peace initiative is being developed.

“For us, demilitarisation is at the top of the agenda,” she told RNZ Pacific.

“You can’t talk about peace with simply saying that it is the absence of violence or conflict. We have to talk about peacebuilding in the operationalisation of the Ocean of Peace Declaration, and that has been clear for us from the start.”

She said it was important not to see peace building as simply a regional security agenda.

“It is critical that the future or the operationalisation of the Ocean of Peace Declaration through the Pacific Islands Forum needs a stronger focus on peace building in practice, not simply from seeing peace through a traditional security or militarised lens, but through a civilian lens, through a civil society lens, through a people-centered lens.”

“It’s important that we don’t just see peacebuilding as simply a regional security agenda,” Bhagwan-Rolls said.

“We feel that there is a need in forging alliances to also support the forging of peace-building alliances and not just security alliances, and that peace cannot just simply stand as a word of inaction, but we talk about transformative peace.”

As far as the Ocean of Peace Centre is concerned, de Jong said its ultimate purpose had not been made clear, leading to speculation within regional civil society.

“Certainly, regional civil society asked for a peace centre, but maybe they got a military base instead,” he said.

“This has, in effect, shifted the focus of the Declaration itself towards deterrence, and the countering of China through military means.”

Regional civil society is also concerned that the Ocean of Peace initiative is being dominated by Australia and Fiji – not necessarily with Pacific regional buy-in

Tau said that to declare something as regional required wider consultation, not just an agreement between two countries.

“Anything of a peace regional peace institute or anything further along those lines needs proper consultation,” he told RNZ Pacific.

“So I must caution: what stems from a bilateral agreement should not very much impact the regional steps. We have to caution ourselves around that, it calls for wider consultation, and I think that that is the proper process of informing policy.”

Bhagwan-Rolls said they would continue as a civil society peace building network, and as a feminist peacebuilding network, to bring attention to the priority issues from their members and communities right across twenty Pacific Island countries and non-independent states.

She called on the foreign ministers of the Pacific Islands Forum to ensure things don’t move too hastily and that substantive consultation with civil society peacebuilders takes place.