IN the past seven years, Solomon Islands has signed three security pacts with three counties – Australia, China and Papua New Guinea (PNG).
If one thinks these three security pacts or deals are enough for Solomon Islands to deal with its domestic affairs, one must prepare to accept that the country is on the brink of signing its fourth security pact or deal with Fiji in the near future. Information coming out from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and External Trade (MFAET) confirmed that groundwork for Solomon Islands and Fiji to sign a bilateral security deal is underway, which means these two countries are going to sign a bilateral security deal soon.
While the signing of these security deals attracts mixed feelings from Solomon Islands citizens, Solomon Islands government views the signing of these deals with these foreign partners as a way forward in addressing the domestic security threats within the country.
Before the exit of the Regional Assistance Mission to Solomon Islands (RAMSI) in 2017 following a 14-year presence in the country, Australia and Solomon Islands entered a security treaty in 2017.
Accordingly, the security treaty is known as, “ Agreement between the Government of Australia and the Government of Solomon Islands Concerning the Basis for Deployment of Police, Armed Forces, and other Personnel to Solomon Islands.”
In a nutshell, the signed treaty replaces an earlier treaty signed back in 2003 which gave birth to RAMSI.
The Solomon Islands Government under the leadership of then Prime Minister, Allen Kemakeza, signed the RAMSI Treaty with Australia, New Zealand, Fiji, Papua New Guinea, Samoa and Tonga, Cook Islands, Niue, Kiribati, Palau, FSM, Tuvalu, Nauru and Palau back in July of 2003.
The treaty spelt out the type of assistance that would be required under RAMSI during its course of duty in restoring law and order in Solomon Islands after the civil war that tore the country apart from 1998-2003.
RAMSI has done its part restoring law and order in the country before finally leaving the country in 2017.
RAMSI has done its part by doing the dirty work – cleaning the massive law and order issue triggered by the six years of civil unrest.
When RAMSI was about to leave in 2017 after the signed treaty expired, there were mixed feelings in the country, especially from the vulnerable population – women and children – who have expressed fears of the likelihood of Solomon Islands going down the dark path of civil unrest again because they did not fully trust the neutrality of the RSIPF.
While some shared the view that RAMSI should leave to allow Royal Solomon Islands Police Force (RSIPF) to take on the leadership of looking after the country’s law and order and security again, others expressed having lost their trust and confidence in the RSIPF due to its incapability in dealing with the 1998-2003 civil unrest, let alone the involvement of police officers from Malaita and Guadalcanal with the two warring factions.
Looking at the beneficiaries of the RAMSI Treaty with; Australia and all other Pacific Islands Forum member contributing countries, Solomon Islands has benefited massively from the treaty.
The arrest of the Isatabu Freedom Movement (IFM) War Lord, Harold Keke and his associates, the arrest of key members of the Malaita Eagle Force (MEF), the surrendering of guns by both warring sides, rebuilding of the RSIPF and restoration of law and order, which resulted in women and children being able to move around freely again after six years, are just some of the many positive outcomes of the RAMSI Treaty.
Nevertheless, the date for RAMSI to fully withdraw from Solomon Islands finally arrived in 2017, giving birth to the signing of a bilateral security treaty between Solomon Islands and Australia in the same year.
“The treaty allows for Australian police, defence and civilian personnel to be deployed to Solomon Islands to assist with a range of security threats, including natural disasters, where both governments agreed to.”
Solomon Islands benefited from the security deal four years later in 2021 when an unrest emerged in Honiara, resulting in mass rioting and looting that lasted for three days.
This was when Prime Minister, Manasseh Sogavare, requested Australia to support the country in dealing with yet another lawlessness that was beyond the capability of RSIPF to deal with.
Without the help of Australia, lawlessness would have continued for a week, months or even a year as people fought with RSIPF for a solid three days.
Before the arrival of the Australian armed forces in November 2021, shops in Honiara were looted, burnt down, properties damaged, three people lost their lives and two police stations destroyed. All this happened just within three days.
In a nutshell, the bilateral security treaty Solomon Islands signed with Australia has rescued the country. Thanks to the 2017 Bilateral Security Treaty with Australia.
Apart from the 2017 SI-Australia bilateral security treaty, in March of 2022, Solomon Islands signed a security pact with China. The security pact with China was signed three years after Solomon Islands switched diplomatic ties from Taiwan to China in September 2019.
While details of the security pact are yet to be made public, triggering a public outcry for the details thereof to be made public, China was up, supporting RSIPF with training, donation of vehicles and riot gears, providing replica guns for training and even invited a top group of RSIPF officers to train in China.
While the West and some local political analysts fear that the security pact with China would lead to the building of a China military base in Solomon Islands, Prime Minister Sogavare made it clear that the security pact will not allow China to build a military base in the country. The SI-China security pact is a five-year deal which will expire in 2026. Hence, it is up to the next government that will take on the leadership helm after the 2024 National General Election to decide whether to renew the deal or do away with it.
Prime Minister Sogavare has told the Parliament that the security pact with China is in the best interest of Solomon Islands and that the pact it is to deal with domestic security affairs of Solomon Islands.
The security pact will allow China to deploy police and military personnel to Solomon Islands whenever requested by the Solomon Islands Government.
Leading up to the signing of the security deal with China, the Malaita former Premier, Daniel Suidani, strongly opposed the idea of the diplomatic switch, stating that Solomon Islands does not need a security pact with China. Mr Suidani also expressed the view that the security deal with China is purposely aimed at Malaitans as they were strongly opposed to the diplomatic switch and to protect the current Democratic Coalition Government for Advancement to stay in power.
Suidani was of the view that the security deal with Australia is enough to deal with Solomon Islands internal security matters.
On Wednesday 8 February 2023, Solomon Islands signed yet another agreement with Papua New Guinea for the deployment of PNG Police to Solomon Islands.
The Minister for Foreign Affairs and External Trade (MFAET), Jeremiah Manele and the PNG Minister for Foreign Affairs, Justin Tkatchenko, sealed the Agreement in Port Moresby.
According to information released by MFAET, “The Agreement establishes a framework for cooperation between the Governments of Solomon Islands and Papua New Guinea for the deployment of police personnel to provide operational support and assistance to maintain law and order through peacekeeping or relief operations in the Solomon Islands.”
This particular security agreement attracted less negative commentary from Solomon Islands citizens and the Western world in comparison to the one signed with China.
With all these security pacts, one would ask why does Solomon Islands have to sign these security pacts.
The Deputy Secretary of the Ministry Foreign Affairs and External Trade, Cornelius Walegerea told journalists during the National Security Media Workshop in Honiara last month that the country entered these security deals because of internal security issues or gaps.
Mr Walegerea said there are internal security issues that expose Solomon Islands vulnerability as a country in dealing with its own internal security affairs. This exposes RSIPF’s incapability to deal with the internal security issues by ensuring law and order is upheld in the country.
The internal security issue is visible through the 2000 coup, 2006 riot and burning of China town and the most recent riot, looting and burning of Honiara in 2021.
The continuous exposure of the incapability of RSIPF to take full control of law-and-order issues in the country has forced the Solomon Islands Government to look elsewhere for support, resulting in the signing of bilateral security treaties with Australia, China and PNG as the way forward in addressing Solomon Islands internal security issues.
Turning back to the internal security threats in Solomon Islands and what could have been the reasons/reasons for this emerging culture.
Solomon Islands as a British Protectorate gained independence in 1978 and next month, Solomon Islands will be 45 years old.
Given the internal security issues faced by Solomon Islands since independence, Solomon Islands is like a 45-year-old man who is pressured by his children for failing his fatherhood responsibility in looking after their welfare, a 45-year-old father whose children who have run out of patience for failing to fulfill his promises to them.
Dr David Welshman Gegeo from the Solomon Islands National University (SINU) argued that the internal security threats or issues in the country could be the result of the following observed behaviors:
“A disgruntled youth that sees itself as being left behind and deprived of; equal access to educational opportunities, equal opportunities, equal access to health and medical care, equal protection under law, equal protection against discrimination on basis of ethnicity, the resilience to an impinging sense of moral decay, and a clear vision of a future.”
Dr Gegeo said, “ the internal security threat could be a result of a citizenry displeasure with; the emergence of a society divided by the haves and the have nots, political demagoguery- promises made by candidates during elections campaigns but not delivered on, decline in respect for important cultural practices, growing in domestic violence, exacerbated gender imbalance, a chronic dichotomous society where rural communities feel they belong to a different society abandoned by the central government, a decaying work ethics in all strata of Solomon Islands, and weak purchasing power of Solomon Islands dollar.
“Each of these conditions or factors alone may not cause or pose any potential threat to national security. However, left unattended to, they inevitably will all come together to a head, finally erupting as destructive street riots, etc. as it had happened so many times in Honiara.”
One might ask what gives rise to these security deals. Well the answer to this question is that the lack of capability by our RSIPF to deal with internal security matters is the reason why Solomon Islands is looking for support from other counties to address its domestic security threats.
Is Solomon Islands better off without the security deals? Given the weakness of RSIPF in dealing with domestic security issues, signing security deals with other foreign countries is the way forward at least for now.
The success story of RAMSI in restoring law and order in Solomon Islands, the timely involvement of Australian armed forces, Papua New Guinea police and Fiji police in restoring law and order in Honiara during the 2021 riots is a clear example that Solomon Islands really needs those security pact agreements. In other words, for now, Solomon Islands has greatly benefited and continues to benefit from these security deals.
These security pacts also allow the partnering counties to also assist Solomon Islands in times of natural disasters, which is a good thing.
While collective security is a good thing and a normal acceptable behavior in many sovereign countries, it only exposes Solomon Islands as a weak country that does not have the capacity to deal with its own internal security affairs.
If one thing Solomon Islands must learn moving forward, it is strengthening its police force by closing the existing gaps that continue to weaken the force. Some of the existing gaps in RSIPF as seen during the civil unrest are lack of discipline and also nepotism. This is evident in the way RSIPF members take sides instead of protecting the country during the civil unrest from 1998 to 2003.
Signing of the security pacts with other countries is a clear indication that Solomon Islands as a country is weak and needs assistance.
Solomon Islands is a country of just over 700,000 people and to see its police force incapable of dealing with its internal security affairs is worrying. With a 2.4 percent national population growth rate, Solomon Islands will soon pass the one million population mark. This highlights the importance of Solomon Islands strengthening its police force now to prepare for what is ahead.
Moving forward, Solomon Islands should use the current security deals to do capacity-building for RSIPF. If Solomon Islands is to strengthen RSIPF on its own, it could mean allocating more budget to the Ministry of Police, National Security and Correctional Services (MPNSCS).
However, an increase in budget allocation to MPNSCS could also mean cutting the budget allocations to other key ministries like the Ministry of Rural Development (MRD), Ministry of Infrastructure Development (MID), Ministry of Agriculture and Livestock (MAL), Ministry of Health and Medical Services (MHMS) and Ministry of Education and Human Resource Development (MEHRD) which could also have a negative impact on the country.
The more Solomon Islands relies on outside forces – Australia, Papua New Guinea, China and Fiji to address its internal security issues – the level of trust and confidence of Solomon Islanders in RSIPF will remain low.
By the look of things, Solomon Islands as a 45-year-old country needs to work on its weaknesses by first doing a self-reflection, putting its resources together and finding a lasting solution for is ongoing internal security threat which continues to expose the incapability of RSIPF and political leaders to come up with a solution to deal with the internal security affairs of this sovereign country.
By WILSON SAENI in Auki
