- 09\02\2012 - Frank unintentionally phasing out Fiji Military Forces

posted 15 Jun 2012 23:11 by fiji democracy freedom movement victoria

The fact is if you look at the unfolding dynamics you will clearly see that the RFMf has developed templates for destabalisation since the first coup d’etat in 1987

if you look at the template Rambo used and the one which was used in 2000 and then again in 2006 you will see that there are common threads running through all of them:

(a) the takeover is always “justified’ on a pretext which deflects focus away from the RFMF and onto the political arena

(b) there is always a destabalising “third force” which the RFMF uses as a justification for its intervention

(c) once the officers get into power, they seek to entrench that power by imposing themselves into the civilian political system and they look for positions within the civilian structure either as Govt or as administrators – they seek to change the Constitution and the legal system and thereby entrench themselves into positions of Governance

Rambo basically worked with the Taukei Movement in 1987 – he had his meetings with the leadership in the Epworth hall in downtown Suva in the period leading up to the 1987 coup d’etat – that link with the Taukei Movement allowed him to use them as destabalising “third force” which he was then able to bring into his justifications for why he did the 1987 coup detat – its the same as green flag operations - it also allowed him to have a “third force” which could raise the tempreture everytime they needed a destabalising event to give credibility to the RFMF’s ongoing “interventionist” role

basically the cover they set up was that (a) the Taukei Movement was a destabalising third force in the country (b) that destabalising third force is a serious risk for the country (c) in order to keep the country from descending into instability the RFMf has had to “step into secure the stability of the State”

of course it helped when they were in coordination with the Taukei Movement – because that gave things an air of credibility – i.e that they could present to the world a story that the Taukei movement was really a dangerous force which required the RFMf to step in and remove Parliament in order to preserve the stability of the State

in 2000 the same thing happened – similar template. the third force were the Itaukei ethnonationalists – but that one went off balance when the ethnonationalists refused to play their role of third force and instead decided they wanted to be the main force – in the end though the RFMf prevailed – the Govt was changed - and then the RFMf wanted an ongoing role in the governance of the nation which eventually led to its tension with the civilian arms of the State

so in 2006 the same template was used again – this time the political corruption was the basis for the takeover. the stated intention was that it was necessary to cleanup Fiji to ”build a better Fiji”.

we are basically developing a Pakistan dynamic - they’ve used the same templates in Pakistan to justify millitary coup d’etats - and the officer cadre have developed templates for running millitary takeovers against their Govt.

but as you can see all these destabalisation tactics have been very expensive for the country – because the millitary has eaten the biggest chunk out of the Fiji national budget since 1987 and has basically not contributed any comparable return on that money – for the amount of money which has gone into them, they should be producing a rate of return 10 times what they eat up – thats how you qualify the value – 100 million a year and the govt should be getting a return on that investment of at least 1 billion a year from the RFMF – but its nowhere near that, matter of fact its nowhere near even 10 per cent of that 100 million per year plus the blow outs to their budget they’ve been making since 2000.

all those monies should have gone into strengthening our economy and growing it – instead its gone into destabalisation activities and coup d’etats which have done nothing to develop this country, only regress its development

these things need to be looked at camly and rationally – and when you look at the numbers and look at the patterns which have developed over our last twenty four years of development vis a vis this institution called the RFMF, you will see very clearly the costs benefits for the country – and the costs have far outweighed the benefits.

nobody else destablises this country – its the RFMF. their weapons are used in coup d’etats – and the templates for destabalising the country have involved active connections between third force destabalisation groups and the RFMF – that was established clearly in 2000 when George Speight and his guys had a clear connection to the RFMF – which is how they managed to source the weapons they used in the attempted putsch.

we can’t deflect the focus onto politicians and ethnonationalists and all those guys – they don’t have the guns to mount those coup d’etats – and those groups gain strength via their connections with the RFMF – just like the militia’s in Pakistan are tied into the Pakistani ISI.

these are serious issues about our development.

and this is why the regional and international powers are moving to limit the supply of arms and hardware to the RFMF – its a process of downsizing which is now coming from without – we don’t have a say in it because the sanctions simply mean that the capabilities of the RFMF are being downgraded until eventually it will be unable to engage in these types of coup d’etats anymore, let alone peacekeeping - we are seeing the phasing out of the RFMF now – and its one of the effects of the FB coup d’etat of 2006 – probably an unintended consequence – but regardless, its now given a conceptual foundation to the regional and international powers for the implementation and ongoing build up of that millitary sanctions policy which has been in place since 2006 and which is now having effect.

thats whats unfolding now - the RFMF is being phased out – not by a Parliamentary vote in Fiji, but by the millitary sanctions being imposed on upgrades of equipment and training – not only through ANZUS, but also by the preassure being placed from ANZUS onto the other countries in the region and throughout south east asia.

Comments