 |
| THE MOMENT: Paul's epiphany on the road to Damascus. |
|
Since leaving Fiji on a fishing trip, the renegade Colonel’s political journey has been likened to St Paul’s conversion after seeing the proverbial light – welcomed by some and regarded with suspicion by others, writes IVA TORA.
This is a modified version of an article that appears in the July edition of the Sydney-based print Magazine, Drum Pasifika and has been reproduced here with the publisher’s approval.
A story related to me by a politics lecturer tells of how President Lyndon B Johnson was asked by reporters where there was any truth to the rumour that FBI pit bull. J Edgar Hoover was about to retire – a move that would have been sure to launch a thousand champagne corks exploding across Washington and beyond. To those well versed with the political shenanigans on Capitol Hill, Hoover, as FBI Director, kept secret files on the extracurricular activities of anyone and everyone in Washington. The man had an obsessive voyeurism that guaranteed he had enough dirt to bring down a government. So when asked by the White House press corps whether Hoover was indeed about to retire, Johnson famously responded in that colourful nasally Texan drawl: “Weeellll, I’d Rather have him [Hoover] standing on thuh insaard pissing out than to have him standing on thuh outsaard pissing in.”
It’d be safe to say that those words, opined from a long-ago era, were sentiments the Fiji Freedom and Democracy Movement could happily relate to when Lt-Col Tevita Mara went fishing one day and ended up in Tonga. Since that infamous fishing trip, whose exact GPS has been the subject of many a colourful debate around the grog bowl, the movement has welcomed the renegade colonel who once had the ear of military strongman Frank Bainimarama. Since his departure for Tonga in May, they, like many others, have lauded him for his bravery in “seeing the light” and “crossing the floor”. The movement’s cause has been encouraged by, to borrow Johnson’s analogy, the Colonel’s eagerness to “piss and tell”. At the June 11 meeting of the Fiji Freedom and Democracy Movement in Quenbeyan, on the outskirts of Canberra, Mara spoke of the disillusionment he and fellow Colonel Pita Driti felt over the direction that Bainimarama had set the country on. “We were no longer following the vision laid down by Bainimarama. We started to question the decisions being made by the regime. Our questions became more and more vocal and we became the voices of dissent in the Military Council. It reached the point where we were both sent on leave and finally charged. It became apparent that Bainimarama had only one advisor, Aiyaz Sayed Khaiyum. In fact Khaiyum was not an advisor but a puppet master.”
Mara went on to point out that despite setting up the Fiji Independent Commission Against Corruption (FICAC), they themselves are guilty of corruption. “We all know about Bainimarama and Khaiyums’s salaries of over $700,000. I don’t think it is a coincidence, this week Khaiyum disbanded the organisation that monitors and controls government pay, The Higher Salaries Commission. We know about the massive government road building jobs that were awarded without tender.” This disillusionment was what apparently led to Mara’s change of heart and epic decision to switch sides. In his address to the audience gathered at the Canberra Forum, his apology and willingness to be held accountable for his actions seemed genuine enough. A number of pro-Democracy activists and sources who spoke to ‘Drum Pasifika’, agreed – at least on that score.
One Fiji-based activist who spoke anonymously for obvious reasons, said Mara’s motives “seem noble”. “So far, I have heard a lot of praise from this end about Roko Ului’s revelations and people are seeking closure over what they have been feeling for years now,” the activist said. “He is trying to make amends. He can also help change the direction of the military and ensure they become morally obliged to protect the people of Fiji - and not just protect the commander.” But while Mara was at pains to express his intention to be held accountable for his actions, he stopped short of accepting any ‘personal’ responsibility for the beatings of activists and dissidents – reports of which regularly appeared in the media before the imposition of the media decree. When ‘Drum Pasifika’ asked him what he would have to say to the families of those victims who had been abused by the military and killed, he denied any personal involvement. “I was not personally involved in the beatings of anyone.”
This claim is strongly denied by activists and other reliable sources. One source said he once witnessed Mara physically harassing an activist and not lifting a finger to stop the beating of an individual. “He may not have been personally involved but he was definitely the one giving the orders,” according to the source who now lives abroad for his own safety. Another Democracy activist says he was verbally abused by him. “I have been detained five times,” the activist told ‘Drum Pasifika’. “Once I was taken to Roko Ului's Office and he verbally abused me. This was in 2009 after the abrogation of the 1997 Constitution. In 2006, Xmas, Roko Ului was present at the military barracks when they rounded up pro-Democracy activists. Frank Bainimarama was also there. I could not see them abuse any of us because they turned [all] the lights off and we were beaten continuously.”
While Mara is no poster boy for human rights, the Fiji Freedom and Democracy Movement has decided it will embrace him with the attitude that they will “milk him for all he’s worth”. This is real politik at its most basic. While it makes good practical sense to students of the Machiavellian school, to individuals, however, who are familiar with the colonel’s history, Mara is someone who should be viewed with a great deal of caution. Mara and Jone Baledrokadroka – that other disillusioned army colonel – are now garnering as much support as they can from regional leaders, unions and other organisations to return Fiji to Democracy. While these attempts to secure international support are all well and good, at the end of the day, change can only come if there is a change of heart on the ground in Fiji. As one activist told ‘Drum’: “The problem is, there is no political will.”
Democracy movements outside Fiji can make as much noise and protest and take to the streets as much as they want, but the crucial missing ingredient is action at the grassroots level in Fiji. Earlier this year, a leaked Wiki Leaks cable cited the observations of one diplomat from the NZ High Commission in Suva who concluded that the people have to decide their political future. This could be read to mean that instead of tolerating and merely going along with the abusive whims of a dictatorship, the people have to make a conscious deliberate decision if it is change that they really want.
“There is a common feeling of dissatisfaction with the regime here but because of the censoring of the media and fear of arrests/abuses (coupled with a sense of impunity) people will not take to the streets unless there is a strong leader capable of uniting everyone,” another Democracy activist told ‘Drum Pasifika’. But fear did not stop ordinary people in other repressive regimes from South Africa to Egypt and Syria from taking to the streets and sacrificing their lives in the struggle for their basic rights. Try as I might, I just can’t picture the likes of Fidel Castro or Ghandi attending gabfests, mouthing off fluffy homilies on freedom, waving placards and simply going home to watch themselves on the six o’clock news.
These men were freedom fighters in the purest sense of the word; men who conducted their struggle on the ground — within their respective nation states.
Castro, with a small group of men, based themselves in the Sierra Maestra mountain range in Cuba for three years under wretched conditions and had the might of the US to contend with before winning his Socialist Revolution. They had the support of the peasants who put their own lives on the line for what they saw as a cause greater than themselves. Ghandi’s peaceful revolution was up against the force of British imperial power. In all these struggles – from the Bolshevik and Chinese revolutions to the Indian struggle for independence, and in more recent events, the common uniting thread is the prevailing political will. Wherever there is a political will present, no amount of guns or ammunition can stop its charge. Against that context, it is almost laughable that the public in Fiji have to be given assurances by an army officer that the army will not shoot if they were to protest.
The people of Fiji have given their tacit consent to the regime by virtue of their silence. It is, ultimately, a government by tacit consent. But is it mere fear or lack of political will or lack of any real leaders on the horizon that are hindering any kind of mass movement on the ground? For ordinary Fijians, as they long as they can get up every morning, get to work, put in a good seven or eight hours, and more importantly – put food on the table – then there is no incentive or reason to be taking to the streets. As long as there is a perceived sense of normality in their day-to-day lives, there’s simply not going to be any popular uprising. As a friend of mine explained, the concept of media censorship and freedom of speech are simply too abstract – or irrelevant – to the Fijian living in a housing estate in Tovata or the back blocks of Nausori. “As far as they are concerned, there is no connection between loss of media and speech freedoms and their own immediate lives so they have no reason to worry.
“Their issues are basic –feeding the family, making sure they get to work on time and the children are at school. “Issues like lack of media freedom and so on, are of concern only to the educated and and intellectual elite at the top of the pile. While there may well be a general sense of dissatisfaction among the greater Fijian population, it is simply not enough to warrant a revolutionary uprising. Mara is hopeful and optimistic that change will come soon to Fiji and he is adamant it must be and will be through non-violent means. But the last word goes to the Democracy activist who decided to stay in Fiji and brave the harsh political storms in that country. “The best solution for Fiji, he suggests, “is that all leaders begin to lead their communities into Peaceful means to taking Fiji forward. From 2006, we have called for a national Dialogue involving our leaders to take Fiji back to Democracy. “This process needs to be facilitated well and decisions respected! All parties need to truly come to the table without agenda's or preconceived road-maps (like that of the Peoples Charter).”
Editor's Note: You can buy a copy of Drum Pasifika magazine for $3.50 at news agencies across NSW, Queensland, Victoria, the ACT and the NT or visit the Drum Pasifika page on Facebook for a full listing of news agencies.
Mara replies to Iva Tora's article:
I welcome the Drum Pasifika article. It opens up a debate on a number of levels.
The main questions it raises are as follows:
1- Was my conversion to the democratic cause legitimate or just a scam to save my own skin?
2- How big was my involvement with the abuse of Fiji citizens by the military?
3- What is the point anyway as change can only come from within?
Let me start with the first question posed. I understand that words alone will not convince my doubters. Nor should they, Skepticism is a vital part of the democratic process. It is only by questioning leaders motives that we can understand the true reasons for their actions and their policies.
So I ask this of my doubters. Judge me by my actions. Judge me by my results. Judge me when we have democracy.
Whatever my motives, it is clear from my actions I am committed to bringing about democracy in Fiji.
The second question is about my involvement in the abuse by the military. The only way to get the truth is either before a court or before a Truth and reconciliation committee. Until then this will remain “He said, She Said!” which frankly achieves nothing.
I have said many times I will answer to the people of Fiji and I stand by that.
If I was truly worried about my involvement why would I pressing for change in Fiji. So long as the regime stands there will be no investigation into the abuse. Similarly if we end up with the Dictator’s Constitution in 2014 there will be a pardon for all involved and no investigation. It is only by bringing about true democracy that we will get the answers to these questions.
So please even if you are convinced that I have been involved in the beatings, please put your feelings on hold until we have returned Fiji to democracy. I repeat it is only when we have won back democracy for Fiji that I and the others involved can and will be investigated.
To answer the last point that change can only come from within. That is absolutely true and the ultimate goal of my campaign is to bring Fiji to that point. Iva Tora writes: The people of Fiji have given their tacit consent to the regime by virtue of their silence. It is, ultimately, a government by tacit consent.
She is right whilst there was no hope, the people of Fiji had no reason to make their opinions known and every reason to keep them to themselves. There was only danger in giving voice to true feelings about the regime.
One thing you can see in Fiji over the past few weeks. The debate about democracy has become more open, people are talking about the problems of the regime and people have hope that change is now on its way.
Added to that, the people are being hit where it hurts, in their pocket. Inflation is high, salaries are low, unless you are Bainimarama or Khaiyum. Unemployment is rising. Poverty is increasing. We also have the FNPF fiasco which is going to going to cut the incomes of thousands of Fijians. It is getting increasingly hard for families to put food on the table.
The regime is also putting in place ever more draconian decrees to keep themselves in power. They know there is trouble ahead and that is why they are looking at cutting union powers in critical industries. Why Public servants are not covered by the Employee relations decree. The only way they can keep control is through PER and media censorship.
My plan is to isolate the regime internationally, regionally and locally. I cannot go into details but the general thrust of the local campaign will be as follows:
1- To get the message of the Pro democracy movement to all of Fiji and not just those with Internet access. We will beat Media Censorship.
2- Co-ordination between the different groups in Fiji.
Both of those can only be done effectively from outside of Fiji.
In the short term my motives are irrelevant so long as my actions bring about a return of democracy. For those of you who believe in my guilt and want to see me punished remember that will only happen with a restoration of democracy.
So please, although we may make an unlikely alliance, we can only achieve democracy for Fiji by working together.
Thumbs Up for Democracy!
Ratu Tevita Mara
27th June
