28 July 2021, NIICE Commentary 7218
Nikolay N. Goryachev
Each of the three Pacific sub-regions has a unique place in Oceania due to their historical heritage and conditions of modern states formation.
Micronesia (northwest): In the early 20th century, the islands of Micronesia were divided between three foreign powers: the United States, which took control of Guam following the Spanish–American War of 1898 and claimed Wake Island; Germany, which took Nauru and bought the Marshall, Caroline and Northern Mariana Islands from Spain; and the British Empire, which took the Gilbert Islands (Kiribati). During World War I, Germany’s Pacific island territories were seized and became League of Nations mandates in 1923. Nauru became an Australian mandate; while Germany’s other territories in Micronesia were given as a mandate to Japan and were named the South Seas Mandate. During World War II, Nauru and Ocean Island were occupied by Japanese troops, with also an occupation of some of the Gilbert Islands and were bypassed by the Allied advance across the Pacific. Following Japan’s defeat in World War II its mandate became a United Nations Trusteeship administered by the United States as the ‘Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands’. Nauru became independent in 1968. Today, most of Micronesia are independent states, except for the US Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, Guam and Wake Island, which are US territories. Thus, Micronesia is now the region where the US presence is probably the most significant.
Melanesia (west): This region includes the four independent countries of Fiji (independence from Great Britain in 1970), Vanuatu (independent from 1980), the Solomon Islands (independent from 1978), and Papua New Guinea (independent from Australia in 1975). It also includes the French special collectivity of New Caledonia and parts of Indonesia – notably the Maluku Islands and Western New Guinea, which is the Indonesian part of the island of New Guinea.
Polynesia (east): This region is the richest in terms of its political structure. First, there are independent states here: Samoa, Tonga, Tuvalu and New Zealand. Second, overseas and external territories and countries also are located here: Pitcairn, French Polynesia, Wallis and Futuna, Norfolk Island. Third, there are also regions that are part of the other states: USA (Hawaii) and Chile (Easter Island). Fourth, there are dependent territories (Rotuma, Tokelau) and self-governing states in a free association or supervision (American Samoa, Cook Islands, Niue). This diversity in itself determines the political complexity of the Polynesia region. By this complexity, the clash of interests of various powers that are very remote geographically is likely to emerge here.
Regardless of their geographic location, during the Second World War, the states of Oceania were an important springboard for the Allies in the fight against Japan. It should also be noted that Oceania as a region was little affected by the direct confrontation between the USSR and the United States in the Cold War. Although the arms race, provoked by the Cold War, caused significant damage to the region during nuclear tests on its territory. To some extent, it can be said that the region suffered in the Cold War, although it did not participate in it.
The processes of decolonization that took place in the world in the 1960-1970s also had an impact on the entire region, however, for various reasons, they did not completely end. Nevertheless, some territories, although they remain formally dependent, has all the attributes of independent states. Accordingly, they have the opportunity to pursue a policy in their own interests. Nevertheless, historically, the most economically developed are either the largest territories in the region – that is, Australia and New Zealand, or those that are part of the economically developed states (Hawaii) or are in association with them. Therefore, in a sense, in modern geopolitics, they tend to be more important than other countries and territories of the region. That is, they are regional political hegemons.
But in the modern world, the political value doesn’t only play an important role. The natural resources owning is now becoming more important. Moreover, more important is how effective management of them by the authorities of the states is being made. It is in Oceania that there is an excellent example of how the country’s economy can suffer due to ineffective management of natural resources – the example of Nauru and the phosphate mining in 1970-1980. Currently, one of the territories of Oceania – New Caledonia has the richest reserves of nickel. And it cannot be ruled out that the situation may repeat itself. On the other hand, the states of Oceania (with the exception of Australia and New Zealand) remain largely geologically underexplored, and in some cases, do not have enough funds to develop the extractive industry, hence, are forced to rely on foreign investment. In the future, the struggle for resources can become the main catalyst for both economic development and environmental including other problems in the region.
However, in recent years, globalization has brought countries of different levels of development closer together, obliterating many differences. The change in the world order, which is primarily influenced by the political growth of China, presents the regions of Oceania with a new challenge i.e. it has also become an arena of geopolitical struggle along with the struggle for their natural resources.
The work on diplomatic recognition of Beijing as opposed to Taipei, which has been carried out by the Chinese government continuously since the country’s admission to the UN, is already yielding results in the region. In 2019, the Solomon Islands and Kiribati announced the establishment of diplomatic relations with the PRC, which became an unequivocal diplomatic victory for Beijing. Given the current tensions in relations between Australia and China, such moves by Beijing could bring an element of instability to the region on a broader scale. China is a relatively new player in the region, but at the same time incredible in its power.
Therefore, the leading role in determining the real position of small states and territories of Oceania in the world should belong to the regional organization, the very existence of which is precisely due to the question of the need for political unity. The Pacific Islands Forum can become a platform for consolidating political course, despite the fact that in February 2021 the states of Micronesia announced their withdrawal from it. In this case, the whole question is, what is primary is the desire of leaders to earn political points through populism, or whether they pursue a real goal of development. This political organization has all the prerequisites in order not only to unite countries politically, but also to work out a common strategy for the development of the region in order to avoid resource and debt traps.
