Rewa high chief and former United Nations security executive Ro Naulu Mataitini has publicly warned that Fiji’s foreign policy is weakening because the government is sidelining its own diplomats and handing too much influence to foreign envoys. In a strongly worded social media statement posted on April 27, 2026, Mataitini called for a “strategic reset” of Fiji’s diplomatic posture as major powers step up their presence in Suva and across the Pacific.
Mataitini argued that political behaviour and a lack of strategic focus have eroded Fiji’s ability to defend its national interests. “For many years Fiji’s foreign policy suffered,” he wrote, adding that other countries are now establishing a strategic presence in Fiji, opening embassies, and dispatching well-resourced envoys and non-resident ambassadors to use Suva as a platform for influence in the region. He questioned whether Fiji is matching that effort abroad, asking pointedly: “Do we place the same priority on our ambassadors in Canberra, Beijing, Wellington or Washington? The honest answer is no.”
The high chief singled out Australia by name, saying successive Australian High Commissioners have “exerted and continue to exert enormous influence over our government.” He accused the current Australian High Commissioner of “selling Australia’s interests brilliantly” and said that success was “built on our political gullibility.” Mataitini warned that foreign envoys in Suva appear to enjoy “unfettered access to our ministers,” which, he said, risks shaping Fiji policy to the advantage of visiting missions rather than Fiji’s own strategic objectives.
Mataitini urged Fiji to better resource and leverage its Heads of Mission, rather than reducing posts to mere consular or protocol functions. “Are we resourcing our embassies to advance and defend Fiji’s interests? Or are we reducing them to protocol and consular offices? Are we leveraging the insights of our Heads of Missions (HOMs)?” he asked, framing those as central questions that demand a reset of engagement priorities.
His intervention comes amid broader discussions across the Pacific about increasing geopolitical competition and greater diplomatic outreach by global powers. Mataitini’s criticism adds a high-profile, domestically rooted voice to a debate often framed around external actors and regional security; his background in UN security work and traditional chiefly status give his remarks both international and cultural weight.
The statement is the latest development in an ongoing conversation about Fiji’s role in regional diplomacy and the resources allocated to its overseas missions. Mataitini’s call for a strategic review is likely to intensify scrutiny of how Wellington, Canberra, Beijing and Washington — and Fiji itself — conduct diplomatic engagement in the Pacific.