Pacific on the Brink: Will PNG Prevent a Superpower Showdown?

-

The recent live-fire drills conducted by the Chinese People’s Liberation Army Navy (PLAN) in the Tasman Sea have raised significant geopolitical concerns in the Pacific. Many in the West view these exercises as an aggressive show of force, signaling China’s expanding military reach. However, as a Papua New Guinean, I see this as part of a larger power struggle, one that places PNG in an increasingly difficult position. The world is changing rapidly, and the rate at which China is growing will inevitably make Western powers feel threatened. One miscalculation or misjudgment could spark a serious military confrontation with devastating consequences.

Screenshot of Shen Shiwei's tweet on X.

China’s military activities in the Pacific are, at least in part, a response to recent Western actions. Notably, Australia’s reconnaissance aircraft flew close to Chinese military installations, an act that Beijing perceives as provocation. From China’s perspective, these drills are not just about power projection but also about deterrence. However, a military conflict would be catastrophic for all parties involved. Why would China risk everything? Decades of economic growth, technological advancements, and global investments would be wiped away in the event of a war. For China, maintaining stability is crucial, yet its actions indicate an increasingly assertive stance in the Pacific region.

This situation places PNG in a unique and precarious position. Geographically and diplomatically, we stand between two major geopolitical forces—China and Australia. Our deep ties with Australia and other Western allies provide us with strong security and economic partnerships, but at the same time, we share a growing economic and political relationship with China. This dual alignment presents both a challenge and an opportunity for PNG to play a more proactive role in regional diplomacy.

Prime Minister James Marape has yet to make a clear statement regarding China’s naval exercises in the Tasman Sea. His position on this matter will be crucial in determining PNG’s role in the evolving geopolitical landscape. Rather than passively aligning with one side, PNG should leverage its unique position to act as a mediator. Our nation has always maintained strong relationships with both China and Australia, making us the only country in the Pacific capable of fostering dialogue between these two great powers.

As tensions rise in the Pacific, PNG should take a firm stance in advocating for regional stability. Prime Minister Marape should signal to both Beijing and Canberra that PNG will work with both parties to prevent escalation. Diplomatic engagement should be PNG’s priority, ensuring that our region does not become a battleground for superpower rivalry. The last thing we want is for our waters to become militarized zones, disrupting trade, security, and regional cooperation.

Beyond mediation, PNG must also strengthen its own strategic and security policies. The recent defense negotiations between PNG and Australia highlight the importance of regional security collaboration, but we must ensure that any agreements we enter serve PNG’s national interest first. While deepening ties with Australia, we should also maintain open lines of communication with China, emphasizing the importance of economic cooperation over military competition.

Ultimately, China’s military maneuvers should not be viewed in isolation but as part of a broader geopolitical chess game. The Pacific should not be reduced to a mere playing field for superpowers—it is home to sovereign nations that have a stake in regional peace and security. PNG’s leadership must recognize this and assert its role as a voice of reason in international affairs.

Moving forward, PNG must champion diplomacy and regional dialogue, urging both China and Australia to prioritize peaceful engagement over military brinkmanship. As a Pacific nation with close ties to both sides, we have the potential to shape the region’s future, ensuring that the Pacific remains a zone of peace rather than a theater of conflict.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

FPA: Organizational Process Model

-
This model centers on the fact that different bureaucracies have different standard operating procedures. These procedures are made in order to allow day to day operations to be carried out. Thus, a foreign policy decision is made based on these standard operating procedures. It is hard for a bureaucracy to make a decision or let alone function out of character or contrary to their standard operating procedure. The reading Chapter 4: Foreign policy shares a straight forward explanation of the OPM: "An alternative to the rational model of decision making is the organizational process model. In this model, foreign policy decision makers generally skip the labor-intensive process of identifying goals and alternative actions, relying instead for most decisions on standardized responses or standard operating procedures. For example, the U.S. State Department everyday receives more than a thousand reports or inquiries from its embassies around the world and sends out more than a ...
Read more

Commercial liberalism and the six norms

-
Image
Liberal internationalism is defined by Griffiths, O'Callaghan and Roach (2008, p.190) as a project to transform international relations so that they conform to models of peace, freedom, and prosperity allegedly enjoyed within constitutional liberal democracies. The same scholars go further by dividing liberalism into three distinct groups. They say these are the three ways to implement the project. The way they present liberal internationalism as a project makes their work interesting. Three distinct groups Firstly, commercial liberalism is about free trade between states. States bilaterally or multilaterally via a platform like APEC pursue the goal of trade liberalization. Griffiths, O'Callagahan and Roach (ibid.) argued that economic interdependence would decrease the likelihood of going to war. Republican liberalism is about democratic peace. The scholars argued that the spread of democracy among states so that governments will be accountable to their citizens makes it di...
Read more

Allison's rational actor model

-
There are 3 common models of foreign policy decision making according to Graham Allison: rational actor model organizational process mode government politics model.  We will discuss the 3 models and compare them with the 3 levels of analysis. However, I challenge you to use your own initiative to learn about the other models of decision making. This will help you as future decision makers or analysts to understand how decisions are made and the processes. When one wakes up from bed he or she decides whether or not to brush their teeth, comb their hair and have a shower. These decisions are paramount, they affect and influence how the individual interacts in a social setting. This highlights the fact that as human beings we make decisions every day. Decision making is defined as the thought process of selecting a logical choice from the available options. In the case of the ‘Kibung peles boy’ analogy; the male student had a choice of approaching the girl to ask he...
Read more