The Pacific Islands Forum and its secretariat represent a complex bureaucracy that requires individuals at least a year to fully comprehend. This political organization strives to balance the diverse interests of its 18 member states, with the goal of enhancing regional solidarity.
It operates based on a combination of formal rules and informal practices, which include a set of unwritten guidelines known as the “Pacific way” that influences all operations. My involvement with the Forum Secretariat spans various roles, most recently as Director of Governance and Engagement, providing me with a decade of experience in highs and lows of regionalism.
In my view, regionalism is fundamentally about facilitating collaboration among Pacific nations at all levels. I began my tenure at the Forum Secretariat during a period of strained relations with Fiji, following the country’s suspension from the Forum in 2009. This tension affected interactions at all levels, including within the Secretariat itself, where there were even rumors of a potential relocation to Samoa.
During this time, much regional work began to occur outside the Secretariat, undermining the organization’s influence. Critics claimed that the Forum had become disconnected from the people it aimed to serve, a sentiment echoed in the 2013 Review of the Pacific Plan, which stated that while the region needed regionalism, the Forum had “lost its politics.”
This feedback motivated me to enhance the Secretariat’s role in uniting leaders and initiating political discourse around challenging issues hindering regional collaboration. Such efforts posed challenges, as leaders typically convene only once a year, with frequent changes in political leadership complicating matters further.
While Secretary-General Tuiloma Neroni Slade’s term was marked by Fiji’s suspension, he endeavored to protect the Forum during tough times. Dame Meg Taylor is remembered for her commitment to broader stakeholder engagement, particularly involving civil society, through initiatives like public submissions under the Framework for Pacific Regionalism.
Internal discussions on restructuring the Secretariat’s work unveiled significant divisions among staff but ultimately laid the groundwork for the conceptualization of the Blue Pacific narrative. This initiative shifted the focus of Pacific regionalism from mere cooperation to a strategy that harnessed the collective strength of its members.
The discussions led to the development of the 2050 Strategy for the Blue Pacific Continent, emphasizing that successful regionalism requires a clear plan. Two persistent political issues marked my tenure with the Forum: membership dynamics and the recognition of Taiwan.
Fiji’s full re-engagement with the Forum did not occur until 2019. Notably, Fiji was instrumental in bridging the rift caused by five Micronesian nations announcing their withdrawal following the appointment of Henry Puna as Secretary-General. The subsequent Suva Agreement resolved this issue, though credit is often overlooked for individuals who prioritize regional unity.
The admission of New Caledonia and French Polynesia as full Forum members in 2016 represented a significant shift, challenging the political foundation of the Forum itself, and perhaps inadvertently strengthening other regional groups like the Pacific Small Island Developing States, which includes only sovereign Pacific states.
Another contentious issue is Taiwan’s status within the Forum, which escalated recently, as seen in Nauru in 2017 and Tonga in 2024. With rising geopolitical tensions, this topic is expected to create further friction among member states, especially as only three Forum members maintain affiliation with Taiwan, while China continues to exert influence.
Looking ahead, Secretary-General Baron Waqa’s tenure will have to navigate potentially divisive issues, including deep-sea mining, self-determination movements, nuclear contamination concerns, and Taiwan’s role within the Forum. How Pacific states address climate issues and human rights will also significantly shape the direction of regionalism.
Overall, regionalism is a challenging and evolving process marked by change and complexity. It is primarily about people and relationships, as strong interpersonal connections often drive foreign policy priorities better than formal documents. While regionalism serves as a crucial modality for sustainable development, it is characterized by fickleness, as members often have varying perspectives and limited resources that hinder consistent participation.
The narrative of the Forum’s role in Pacific regionalism grows more prevalent amid increased geopolitical engagement, but maintaining unity through common goals remains essential. Ultimately, it is the people of the Pacific who are central to regionalism, reminding us of the foundational purpose behind these collaborative efforts.
From my perspective, the Forum Secretariat has seen the best and worst of my contributions and has also exemplified both challenges and triumphs. The demanding environment fosters collaboration with a “Pacific family” ethos, and despite frustrations, the pursuit of meaningful connections drives the collective effort.
When departing, the hope is to leave behind a legacy that encourages the next person to continue striving for unity and progress within the region. This encapsulates the reality of Pacific regionalism as it stands today.