| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
163244
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
With the development of the new Framework for Pacific Regionalism and through collective action on issues such as climate change, home‐grown Pacific regionalism is arguably strengthening. The admission in 2016 of French Polynesia and New Caledonia as full members of the Pacific Islands Forum, however, could potentially shift the balance of policy influence away from Pacific Island members towards that of the Forum's metropolitan members (Australia, New Zealand and now France). While it is early days, this research note makes some beginning observations about where the balance of influence is likely to tilt. We conclude that despite their status as non‐self‐governing territories, New Caledonia and French Polynesia have at times successfully pursued their own interests over those of France and both have much human and economic capital to offer their Pacific Island peers. We also suggest that assuming France's territories will align with the geopolitical interests of Australia and New Zealand and potentially move the Forum back towards a neoliberal agenda, denies the political agency that Pacific Island countries have been increasingly exercising over the Forum's policy. On balance, rather than acting as France's Trojan horse, we argue that the territories’ membership will further strengthen the Pacific canoe.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
160007
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
This article explores the early potential of the Framework for Pacific regionalism, a new political process that Pacific nations are using to establish regional development priorities. The emergence of this process is positioned within a context of a desire for a new era of Pacific-led regional development collaboration. The early outcomes of the Framework are outlined and examined. Specifically, the article questions whether it is meeting aspirations for ‘game-changing’ development goals that enjoy greater levels of ‘ownership’ amongst Pacific leaders. It also explores whether the new process canbe seen as evidence of a new era of ‘post-hegemonic’ regionalism in Oceania, characterised by a revitalisation of regional political debate; a rejection of ‘economism’; and the reassertion of indigenous and civil society concerns.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|