The Search for Democracy in Fiji Scott MacWilliam Discussion Paper 2019/3 The whole liberal world order appears to be falling apart a nearly forgotten exception, see Knapman 1987), — nothing is as it once was. it is undergoing a major revival internationally. A prominent billionaire in the United States of America –Wolfgang Ischinger, Food for Thought: “Who acknowledges the existence of class warfare (Stein 2006; Will Pick Up the Pieces?” Sargent 2011). There are accounts of ‘ruling the void’ in hollowed Western capitalist democracies, where Introduction reductions in electoral participation have given way This Discussion Paper is the third of a trilogy written to an increasing importance of non-representative after the November 2018 election in Fiji. The first, In institutions, including the European Union polity (Mair Brief 2018/28, considered the consequences of how 2013). Others go further, emphasising ‘democracy reporting the results using competing media outlets against capitalism’ (Meiksins Wood 2016). This affected popular understandings of the election. Discussion Paper inserts the important international The second, Discussion Paper 2019/2, examined the arguments about the relationship between democracy continuing importance of land for elections, even as the and capitalism into considerations of the search for conditions under which the indigenous population, the democracy in Fiji. In doing so, the conclusion is majority Taukei, live are commercialised and urbanised. reached that liberal democracy, as ‘thin’ as it has been Finally, this essay locates the search for democracy in in Fiji (MacWilliam 2001), is unlikely to be extended Fiji, which is expressed in domestic and international when faced with the changes capitalism is undergoing objections to existing political circumstances. globally. The militarisation of politics in Fiji is a powerful The evaluations concern two main themes covered local expression of the challenges liberal democracy faces. in this paper. The first is whether there is room for As the 2018 election was being held in Fiji, disputes any further advance in liberal democracy. The second continued regarding whether the event represented a relates the condition of liberal democracy to the step forward for democracy in the country. While an development of capitalism. Fiji provides an important observer group pronounced the election as free and location to assess the prospects for this democratic fair, with only minor reservations, other international form, as the tussle between authoritarian, conservative and liberal democracy has been constant in the assessments were less sanguine about the country as country. The conclusion developed here is that, as with a democracy. The UK-based Economist Intelligence liberal democracy’s condition in many other parts of Unit’s Democracy Index 2018 rated Fiji as a flawed the world, its prospects in Fiji are not favourable. democracy (The Economist Intelligence Unit 2018), To an important degree, the decline of liberal while the Washington, DC-headquartered Freedom democracy globally is associated with the terms House’s Freedom in the World 2018 index classified of the continuing advance of capitalism. While the country as one of 58 partly free countries, with the connection in Fiji between capitalism and the a rating of 59 out of 100 (Freedom House 2018; see dominant political forms is rarely considered (for also University of Gothenburg 2018). For Freedom dpa.bellschool.anu.edu.au Scott MacWilliam House’s index, Fiji scored less than maximum on both the chairman of the 2019 Munich Security Conference political rights and civil liberties. which commences this essay suggests, there is Criticisms continue to arise over both the conduct considerable doubt if liberalism can any longer contain of the elections and longer-term conditions in the global changes where accumulation reigns. There is country (Ravuwai 2019; Geraghty 2019). Most of these also increased questioning regarding the future of the complaints repeat objections made about the 2014 broader relationship between democracy and capitalism elections, the first since the 2006 military takeover, (Keane 2009; Mair 2013; Meiksins Wood 2016; Streeck and regard the importance of the military and other 2014, 2016). Given that both capitalism and democracy government institutions in limiting political and remain integral components of Fiji’s post-colonial other freedoms. The general thrust of the criticisms political economy, there is good reason to assume that remains that democracy in Fiji is not merely fragile, uncertainty about future possibilities should extend to but also still limited (Carnegie and Tarte 2018). The this country as well. If there is a ‘hollowing of Western search for democracy, it is claimed, remains a work democracy’ (Mair 2013), including the decline of in progress. Further, the critics of what exists in Fiji representative institutions (Williams 2003) is there any by way of constitutional arrangements and electoral good reason why this should not apply also to Fiji? laws still do so by reference, implicit and explicit, to Part 1: Internationalising Democracy and the other international conditions (Carnegie 2017). The Creation of Fiji protracted debates about the ‘best’ election system for Fiji are invariably conducted by comparison with While there is no shortage of comparisons between the arrangements in other countries (Narsey 2018). condition of democracy in Fiji and elsewhere, what is This essay argues that any consideration of often missing is to what extent democratisation in this democracy’s prospects in Fiji must first recognise South Pacific country depends upon, and is driven by, what exists. Fiji remains a capitalist state,1 subject to the character of democracy internationally. Perhaps international as well as local determinations. This the best-known instance of denying the international overriding condition, of a nation–state among a determinations of what exists as democracy in Fiji was world of nation–states where accumulation reigns, the view expressed by Taukei nationalists in early 1987. is rarely acknowledged in calls by critics for further Coup leader Colonel Sitiveni Rabuka even declared democratisation in Fiji. In such states, rights, including that democracy was ‘a foreign flower unsuited to Fijian the distinct property rights of capital and labour, are soil’ (Lal 2001:84; see also Lal 1992:272). Just 17 years determined by accumulation, yet this determination previously, Fiji as a state expressing national sovereignty continues to be ignored. Secondly, it is vital to had come into being, passing from a colonial state into understand how the country’s existing political form a nation–state. That this occurred was in part a product sets limits to what can occur in Fiji now and in the of two ideas with foreign, primarily European roots: foreseeable future. In Fiji, there is a compressed anti-colonialism and development. relationship in terms of institutions and personnel The recognition of Fiji as a nation–state among between military and civilian authority.2 It remains a many was an expression of how these two ideas met militarised democracy. Thirdly, once it is recognised in a series of international institutions, including that the search for democracy in Fiji involves a the United Nations. As Brij Lal noted (1992:186), a continuing tussle between capitalist democratic 1959 debate in the House of Commons resolved ‘that forms, the confined character of the search is better Britain should “evolve a positive policy for those small understood and the limited possibilities for the future territories where difficulties might arise in regard to acknowledged. Central to this acknowledgment is the the achievement of complete independence within recognition that democracy is not reducible to liberal the Commonwealth”’. Positive policy is central to the democracy (Riley 2019:xxi; Keane 2009). modern idea of development (Cowen and Shenton Edmund Fawcett (2014) noted that liberalism, 1996) and had an important place in late 19th and early conservatism and socialism were, from the outset, to mid-20th century liberalism (MacWilliam 2019a). distinct, different responses to the uncertainties for Fiji was one such territory. social order capitalism brought. As the quotation by 2SSGM Discussion Paper 2012/1 http://ips.cap.anu.edu.au/ssgm Department of Pacific Affairs DPA Discussion Paper 2019/3 Capitalist democracy through national sovereignty together capitalist democracies. This became the case for liberal and conservative democracies, as After World War II, national sovereignty was placed at well as in some authoritarian democratic regimes. the centre of both conservative and liberal democracy, A contemporary instance of another militarised which contrasted sharply with the previously dominant authoritarian democracy that now also holds elections form of liberalism, liberal imperialism (Sullivan 1983). is Myanmar. As Joseph Schumpeter noted writing As it is constructed, ‘no democracy, no Fiji’ is a useful of the destructiveness of the 1930s depression and summation. The principal form the ‘foreign flower’ during the hostilities of World War II, what he termed took during the post-war years in Fiji was of a nation– the ‘civilisation of capitalism’ was being ‘surrounded state bearing many of the same characteristics as others, by crumbling walls’. Both the ‘protecting strata’ and which Rabuka’s polemical pronouncement ignored. ‘the institutional framework of capitalist society’