Why PNG Must Invest in Intelligence and Research to Drive Foreign Policy

-

PNG’s foreign policy since 1982 has been anchored on Active and Selective Engagement. The principle is sound: be open to the world, but engage in ways that protect and advance national interests. Yet this approach cannot succeed in today’s strategic environment without one critical foundation—intelligence. 

Without strong intelligence and rigorous research capacity, the government is operating blind in an increasingly complex geopolitical arena.

The reality is stark. From great power competition in the Pacific to transnational crime, cyber threats, and shifting trade routes, PNG’s security and prosperity depend on decisions informed by evidence, not guesswork. But evidence requires investment. The National Intelligence Organization (NIO), police intelligence, defence intelligence, customs intelligence, and even private security firms are operating with limited budgets and outdated capabilities. This leaves policymakers without the high-quality, real-time intelligence products needed to anticipate risks or seize opportunities.

Intelligence, however, is not confined to the security sector. Universities and research institutions are just as vital. They generate the social, political, economic, and cultural analysis that helps situate foreign policy within the lived realities of our people and region. Research output from institutions like the National Research Institute, Divine Word University, and the University of PNG should feed directly into foreign policy and national security planning. This requires targeted funding for research grants, data collection, and analytical training.

Emblem of the National Intelligence Organization (NIO), with its mandate to ‘Secure PNG Through Intelligence.’  

At present, PNG’s budget allocations tell the opposite story. Security institutions receive piecemeal support, while universities struggle to maintain basic operations. As a result, intelligence products are reactive and fragmented, and research is often descriptive rather than predictive. This creates a dangerous gap: policymakers end up relying on external advice—often from foreign powers whose agendas do not always align with PNG’s interests. An independent foreign policy requires independent analysis.

Investing in intelligence and research is not a luxury; it is the cost of sovereignty. Boosting NIO’s analytic capability, strengthening police and defence intelligence, modernizing customs intelligence, and integrating private sector insights are all essential steps. Similarly, building research fellowships, strengthening university think tanks, and expanding government–academic partnerships will create a pipeline of PNG-based expertise that supports evidence-based policy-making.

Critics may argue that PNG faces pressing socioeconomic needs—health, education, infrastructure—that should come first. Yet this is a false dichotomy. Intelligence and research underpin the success of those very sectors. Effective policy in education, health, or infrastructure depends on accurate data and security foresight. Neglecting intelligence only guarantees waste, inefficiency, and vulnerability to external manipulation.

If PNG is to truly practice Active and Selective Engagement, it must stop treating intelligence as a backroom activity and research as an academic exercise. They are the operational backbone of sovereignty. A state without its own intelligence networks and research capacity will always be selective only in name, but never in practice. Selectivity requires choice, and choice requires knowledge.

The path forward is clear. PNG must increase budgetary allocations for intelligence and research across the NIO, security agencies, universities, and think tanks. Only then will foreign policy decisions be grounded in evidence and driven by national priorities rather than foreign influence. In the 21st century, intelligence is not about secrecy—it is about strategy. PNG must invest now, or risk drifting blind into an uncertain future.

PNG National Intelligence Organization (NIO) Act Review Symposium, held at APEC Haus on 4–5 December 2024, highlighting efforts to modernize the country’s intelligence framework.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

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

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

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