Fiji’s Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka says he has been formally informed by the Solomon Islands that nearly two dozen donor countries will be excluded from the upcoming Pacific Islands Forum meeting. The move, which includes major powers such as the United States and China, is seen by Rabuka as a threat to decades of unity and cooperation across the region.
Rabuka told reporters that Fiji has been unfairly blamed for past tensions that nearly prompted Micronesian members to consider leaving the Forum. He stressed the importance of preserving the Forum’s spirit and the partnerships built by previous leaders, warning that fracturing now could undo years of regional progress. “We inherited these dialogue partners and development partners, and we should pass them on. If we create a fracture now, it could result in the fracturing and dismantling of the combined efforts of the Pacific Islands Forum and our dialogue and development partners,” he said.
Solomon Islands Prime Minister Jeremiah Manele defended the decision as a sovereign move made in the region’s best interest. He rejected claims of external pressure and argued that limiting attendance would help the Forum focus on core issues, including climate financing and Fiji’s Ocean of Peace proposal. The exclusion has stirred concern among Pacific nations, particularly those with diplomatic ties to Taiwan, a dynamic that has become a focal point in the broader regional contest between Beijing and Taipei.
The Solomon Islands’ decision comes against the backdrop of its 2019 diplomatic shift from Taiwan to China, a move that has reshaped regional diplomacy and heightened sensitivity around Taiwan’s participation in Pacific forums. Despite calls for Taiwan’s inclusion from several leaders, the Solomon Islands is steering the Forum toward a tighter core group of participants, a stance that some see as reflecting Beijing’s influence in the region.
Pacific leaders warn that excluding donor countries could deepen regional divisions at a time when unity is crucial for addressing urgent challenges such as climate change, resilience, and economic development. Yet Rabuka and other regional figures continue to advocate for solidarity, arguing that steadfast cooperation with both traditional and new partners remains essential to security and progress.
Additional context from across the region highlights the ongoing debate over Taiwan’s participation in the Forum. Samoa, Palau, and the Marshall Islands have voiced strong commitments to maintaining inclusive dialogue, while others emphasize the importance of keeping the Forum’s procedures aligned with long-standing practices known as the “Pacific Way.” The topic remains a live issue as leaders prepare for the Honiara summit.
Context and analysis
– The disruption of donor attendance could affect climate financing and development programs that Pacific island nations rely on, potentially shifting leverage and funding dynamics in regional initiatives.
– The shift toward a more selective Forum lineup mirrors wider geopolitical tensions in the Pacific, particularly regarding China’s growing influence and Taiwan’s regional role.
– While some leaders push for inclusivity, others argue that focusing on core issues and regional priorities may strengthen the Forum’s effectiveness. The coming weeks will test whether unity can be maintained without broad participation.
– The debate underscores the delicate balance Pacific nations must strike between sovereignty, regional solidarity, and engagement with global powers.
Summary
– The Solomon Islands plan to bar about 21 donor nations from the Pacific Islands Forum meeting has drawn mixed reactions. Fiji’s Rabuka warns of risks to regional unity, while Solomon Islands’ Manele frames the move as a sovereign decision aimed at focusing on core regional priorities.
Outlook
– There is cautious optimism that Pacific leaders can navigate this contested moment by reaffirming the Forum’s core goals—climate resilience, sustainable development, and regional security—while seeking constructive engagement with diversified partners. A unified approach that respects customary regional practices and inclusive dialogue could help the Forum emerge stronger and more capable of addressing shared challenges.
Positive note
– Despite tensions, the Pacific Islands Forum has a long history of resilience and shared purpose. By keeping dialogue open, prioritizing region-wide needs, and honoring the “Pacific Way” of mutual respect and cooperation, leaders may chart a path that reinforces solidarity, enhances climate action, and sustains momentum toward common development goals.
Leave a comment