Recent developments highlight the complex moral implications of Fijian Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka’s unwavering support for both Donald Trump and Israel. In November 2020, during his tenure with the Social Democratic and Liberal Party (SODELPA), Rabuka publicly declared his support for Trump in the U.S. elections, citing Trump’s backing of Israel as a key factor. He stated his intent to wait for Trump’s victory to be confirmed, despite not being a U.S. voter.
Following Trump’s first term, during which he faced significant controversies, including the infamous Muslim ban and his attempts to contest the 2020 election results, Rabuka continued to engage with Trump’s narrative. He drew parallels between Trump’s challenges and Fiji’s political landscape during the 2018 elections, expressing a belief in solidarity with Trump’s claims.
Rabuka’s support for Trump has shaped government policies, with Fiji’s coalition government publicly backing Israel at international forums, including a notable statement at the International Court of Justice in early 2024, where Fiji was the only nation besides the U.S. to do so. Furthermore, Fiji participated in voting against a UN resolution to end Israel’s presence in the Occupied Palestinian Territories, demonstrating a commitment to align with U.S. positions.
Despite Fiji’s longstanding relations with Israel, recent developments indicate a deteriorating economic situation, exacerbated by the U.S. government’s imposition of hefty tariffs on Fijian exports. Rabuka’s coalition government, while asserting strong geopolitical alliances, faces criticism as domestic public services struggle amidst economic stagnation.
The moral cost of unwavering support for powerful nations is stark, as seen with the 32 percent tariffs labeled “Liberation Day” by Trump, significantly affecting Fiji’s economy. Rabuka’s administration has expressed being caught off guard by these tariffs, indicating a disconnect between diplomatic affiliations and tangible benefits for the Fijian people.
The primary lesson from these developments is that allegiance to powerful allies does not guarantee favorable outcomes. Historically, solidarity with oppressed nations has often spurred positive change, whereas appeasement tends to yield little in the face of power. To foster genuine partnership and economic democracy, there is a growing call for Fiji to re-evaluate its strategies, particularly in light of its struggles to assert its identity and priorities on the global stage.
As Fiji continues to navigate these turbulent waters, there remain opportunities for building alliances that prioritize the well-being of its citizens over mere diplomatic posturing. Emphasizing solidarity with other Pacific nations and advocating for economic democracy could pave the way for a more promising future for Fiji and its people.
Leave a comment