Rewa High Chief Ro Naulu Mataitini has launched a sharp public rebuke of Fiji’s foreign policy, accusing political leaders of sidelining career diplomats and allowing foreign powers to shape national decisions. In a social media statement published this week, the former United Nations security executive said Fiji’s diplomats have been reduced to ceremonial and consular roles while foreign missions in Suva are “resourced properly” and expand their influence across the Pacific.
“There is something about politicians. To get elected, they will promise anything. But once inside Parliament, too many follow their worst instincts,” Mataitini wrote, faulting what he described as a culture of “ceremonial glorification” and a “delusion embraced without self-awareness.” He warned that the rhetoric and behaviour of some elected officials have eroded Fiji’s ability to defend its national interests abroad.
Mataitini stressed that the region’s rising strategic importance has prompted an accelerating diplomatic build-up in Suva. “New embassies are opening. Non-resident ambassadors are flocking to Suva. They see Fiji as a platform for influence in the Pasifika. They send their best people. They resource them properly,” he said, urging Fijian policymakers to match that effort in capitals such as Canberra, Beijing, Wellington and Washington.
Raising pointed questions about capacity and intent, the Rewa chief asked whether Fiji is prioritising and resourcing its Heads of Mission (HOMs) to “advance and defend Fiji’s interests,” or simply reducing overseas posts to protocol and consular offices. “Are we leveraging the insights of our Heads of Missions? Or are we allowing foreign envoys in Suva — with unfettered access to our ministers — to shape our policy to their advantage?” he wrote, calling for what he called a strategic reset of Fiji’s foreign engagement.
Mataitini singled out Australia as an immediate example of imbalance. He asserted that “three Australian High Commissioners” have exerted “enormous influence” over the Fijian government and said the current Australian High Commissioner was “selling Australia’s interests brilliantly,” a success he attributed to Fijian “political gullibility.” The chief did not name the individuals he referred to in his post.
The statement from Mataitini, a customary leader and former UN security executive, represents a notable intervention from the chiefly ranks into a debate usually dominated by politicians and career diplomats. It underscores growing unease among some local observers about how Fiji navigates an environment of intensified great-power engagement in the Pacific — a trend reflected across the region as global tensions elevate the strategic value of island states.
Mataitini’s comments arrive at a moment when Pacific diplomacy and foreign policy are under increased public scrutiny, amid wider regional concerns about external influence and the need to protect national sovereignty. He urged leaders to treat diplomatic appointments and missions as instruments of national strategy rather than ceremonial postings, but stopped short of proposing specific policy changes in his post.
No response from government ministers or Fiji’s foreign ministry to Mataitini’s critique was available at the time of publication. The remarks are likely to fuel ongoing conversations in Suva about how best to resource and use Fiji’s diplomatic network as global powers deepen their presence in the Pacific.