WILLIAMS COLLEGE LIBRARIES Your unpublished thesis, submitted for a degree at Williams College and administered by the Williams College Libraries, will be made available for research use. You may, through this form, provide instructions regarding copyright, access, dissemination and reproduction of your thesis. _ The faculty advisor to the student writing the thesis wishes to claim joint authorship in this work. In each section, please check the ONE statement that reflects your wishes. 1. PUBLICATION AND QUOTATION: LITERARY PROPERTY RIGHTS A student author automatically owns the copyright to his/her work, whether or not a copyright symbol and date are placed on the piece. The duration of U.S. copyright on a manuscript--and Williams theses are considered manuscripts--is the life of the author plus 70 years. _ I/we do not choose to retain literary property rights to the thesis, and I wish to assign them immediately to Williams College. ;,de('tlni~ this wili tn the lln~ III 1,0 '.\.n \tudem lunhor from later pUf!lishirig his/her \vorl-;: the studem would, however. need to contact the Archi ves for a form. 'rhe Archi ves wOllk! be li\~e ill this lU abo grant pel'nll\S!On small sections fruln the thesis. would thcr(~ be Hny iTl.hon for tlk /\rchives to gnm1 pe!.·IHI:SS!O!l to another party IU tlh~ thesis in its if sueh a situation amse. the Archive,; would in touch \\ith the mnhor to let them know that such request had heeu madt\ L~we wish to retain literary property rights to the thesis for a period of three years, at which time the literary property rights shall be assigned to Williams College. the mlt]ior a fe'.v ye:lrs to make exclusive use of the thesis in un"CUlTIH!l: _ I/we wish to retain literary property rights to the thesis for a period of __ years, or until my death, whichever is the later, at which time the literary property rights shall be assigned to Williams College. cdectmg chi;; uLuv~,;s the m,H:hnr great In tV thc !:i rne Some students are inten>,ted in thcir thcsis in grlH.luate ;,elmol worl" this it would niilke for then! II) :1 number such . il) in the bhmk, and line out the 'eVonls until Iny delnh. whidie'.'{.T is the later.' In event. It is for dw h.> ddruinist,;r on il if the ,;nc!s with the individual's c!Gm!J·{)ur wun't have t\) scarch fur eSl:lk ,;xeeUlOrs in this C;N'···IYi[ tbis is up to each stuc!ent- II. ACCESS The Williams College Libraries are investigating the posting of theses online, as well as their retention in hardcopy. ·J'williams College is granted permission to maintain and provide access to my thesis in hardcopy and via the Web both on and off campus. Sdcctmg tbis (,-Ilows I\;seardk;rs amund the wOrlcilO ;Iecess !lk; vasion of your \\/ork. _ Williams College is granted permission to maintain and provide access to my thesis in hardcopy and via the Web for on-campus use only. allows the version of your work from 11k Oll·campus _ The thesis is to be maintained and made available in hardcopy form only. ;,electmg this aEows <ICCU,S 10 your ',york frOTH the you submit. Such of your vV\)rL any media that il or includes. III. COPYING AND DISSEMINATION Because theses are listed on FRANCIS, the Libraries receive numerous requests every year for copies of works. If/when a hardcopy thesis is duplicated for a researcher, a copy of the release form always accompanies the copy. Any digital version of your thesis will include the release form. {!,/ ~ Copies of the thesis may be provided to any researcher. Scle,:,n);: ,his ,diows Imy researcher to request u fmlll the Wiliianh e-;ecturnic \!<~r~~1{WL _ Copying of the thesis is restricted for _ years, at which time copies may be provided to any researcher. 'rhis Ibis electronic version of Ihe thesis will be "'1'0.,,"'11""; _ Copying of the thesis or portions thereof, except as needed to maintain an adequate number of research copies available in the Williams College Libraries, is expressly prohibited. The electronic version of the thesis will be protected against duplication. allows no 10 he mnde i\,r researdkT\. 'rhe eleelTonlc v,crsiun does not dis··aHo\') n:st:archers frmn Signed (student author) Signat:ure RerTloved Signed (faculty advisor) Signat:ure RerTloved A.·\~~: ~ -~_ L"V"'~,/ I~"" ~\.~~~.. /",~) -~, 's tl'tle \J ( ,-«...."-_ :. ....' C;)tAl'l/\..{) (.4/- =-.... :,..,-,\ '" - \ "'". ." __""_.- Thesl -------'----'-----,7-)--------=-"---=----1)--'--'-----'---+.,;--''''''- Date __-+-__-;-1_/L_·.·~_/_:71,-1 _ l Accepted for the Libraries Signat:ure RerTloved A Foreign Flower: Democracy in Fiji from 1970 to 2008 by Katie Grace Professor Sam Crane, Advisor A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Bachelor of Arts with Honors in Political Science WILLIAMS COLLEGE Williamstown, Massachusetts 2008-2009 1 A child may ask, "What is the world's story about?" And a grown man or woman may wonder, "What way will the world go? How does it end and, while we're at it, what's the story about?" East ofEden, John Steinbeck To Dad, for education 2 Table of Contents Introduction 4 Chapter One: Divided Society 13 Chapter Two: Coup d'etats 28 Chapter Three: Institutional Instability 47 Chapter Four: Looking Forward 68 Addendum 85 Appendixes Appendix A: 1999 and 2006 Election Results by Seat 86 Appendix B: Constitutional Distribution of Seats by ethnicity, House of Representatives..118 Appendix C: Constitutional Distribution of Seats by appointment nomination, Senate 118 Appendix D: Percentage ofVotes Won/Percentage of Seats Won, 2006 119 Appendix E: Percentage ofVotes Won/Percentage ofSeats Won, 2001 119 Appendix F: Percentage ofVotes Won/Percentage of Seats Won, 1999 119 Appendix G: Registered Voters-Ethnic Breakdown by Constituency 2006, Open Seats 120 Appendix H: Registered Voters-Ethnic Breakdown by Constituency 1999, Open Seats 121 Appendix I: Map of Fiji with Provincial Boundaries 122 Appendix I: Annual GDP Growth Per Capita, 1968-2007 123 AppendixJ: Distribution of Households by Income per Adult Equivalent 124 Bibliography 125 3 Introduction Since the end of the Second World War, the promotion of democracy as the world's preferred mode of national governance has increased in tandem with a rise in international organizations. The promises of liberal democracy, epitomized by the successes of advanced capitalist countries like the United States, Australia, and Great Britain, have provided the foundation for an international push towards democratization in latter half of the 20th century. This effort has met with mixed results; some nations have successfully transitioned to stable democracy while others have been stymied by oppressive authoritarian regimes and instability. Fiji belongs to this latter group of nations. The troubled road that the island nation has traveled since independence provides insight into the difficulties that other nations, particularly those with divided societies, have had in adopting democracy. Aspects of Fiji's history and culture specific to that country have prevented a successful transition to democracy, suggesting that democratization must take into effect counu;-specific factors for a stable transition. Fiji's experience also provokes questions about the prudence and efficacy of overt democracy promotion as a blanket policy for the Western world and international community. Parliamental; democracy has been Fiji's governing structure since independence from Britain in 1970. Plagued by poor governance and political instability, successful operation of democracy in Fiji has been hampered by racial division, elite manipulation, ethnically biased policies, poor civil/military relations, and economic decline. Coups have become the accepted way to deal with unpopular electoral results or government policies. It is common for Fijian nationalists like Sitiveni Rabuka to claim that democracy is a western 4 "foreign flower" ill-suited for governing the Fijian people.1 While Fiji's overt problems are largely of poor governance-lack of regard for the rule of law, ineffective, inequitable policies and implementation-the heart of democratic failure is in the tension between democracy's basic tenet of equality in representation and Fiji's colonial era imperative of Fijian political paramountcy. Fiji's colonial legacy created a hierarchy of racial groups inherently incompatible with democracy, and the incorporation of the principle of indigenous Fijian primacy into Fiji's political institutions has produced a government incapable of good governance. The continued failure of Fijian democracy and its attendant democratic institutions to govern effectively in accordance with democratic principles and in protection of all Fiji Islanders suggests that alterations must be made to the existing system. Elite manipulation, military involvement, and economic decline have also contributed to the failure of good governance in Fiji. In contrast to Fijian political paramountcy, which directly undercuts Fiji's political institutions, these three issues have their roots in poor policy development-elite manipulation in the existence of incentives to appeal on ethnic lines, military involvement in the prestige and power accorded that institution by constitutions and Parliaments, and economic decline in the inability of political institutions to foster a productive policy environment. While these issues contribute to and intensify the tendency for Fijian governments to engage in poor governance practices, the inability ofinstitutions to rein in these issues connects directly and more broadly to the tension between democratic institutions and Fijian political paramountcy. The overriding doctrine of Fijian paramountcy, which has worked its way into every Constitution and ensuing political institution since independence, dictates that the Fijian government must privilege the rights and goals of indigenous Fijians over all other ethnic 1 Elizabeth Feizkhah, "Smash and Grab" TIME Asia.