The Yegiora Files

By Bernard Yegiora  Part One of a three-part series on the implications of the West Papua conflict for PNG's national security. Recent developments in West Papua should be treated as early-warning indicators by PNG’s National Security Agency and the other agencies operating within the National Security Sector. Videos circulated on Facebook and other social-media platforms appear to show West Papuan armed fighters displaying high-powered firearms. On 2 July 2026, fighters from the West Papua National Liberation Army, commonly known as the TPNPB, claimed responsibility for killing an American pilot and burning his aircraft in Yahukimo. The armed group subsequently claimed responsibility for killing three Indigenous Papuans whom it accused of supplying intelligence to Indonesian authorities. Viewed individually, these incidents may appear to be separate episodes within a longstanding armed conflict. Viewed collectively, however, they indicate a possible increase in armed capability,...

By Bernard Yegiora PNG’s Foreign Policy White Paper 2025 is more than a statement of diplomatic priorities. It is a strategic document that seeks to explain how PNG should understand its place in the world, define its national interests, organise its foreign-policy institutions and translate policy commitments into practical action. A useful way to analyse the White Paper is through Allan Gyngell and Michael Wesley’s four levels of foreign policy making: the strategic, contextual, organisational and operational levels . Gyngell and Wesley’s four interrelated levels of foreign policy making—strategic, contextual, organisational and operational—which operate simultaneously in shaping foreign policy decisions and implementation. These four levels should not be treated as separate stages in a linear process. Gyngell and Wesley argue that foreign policy making occurs simultaneously across all four levels. Each level performs a different function, but all are interconnected. Focusing on onl...

By Bernard Yegiora Governor Allan Bird's recent comments on PNG's decision to close the Chinese Taipei Economic Office have reignited an important debate about the direction of our foreign policy. He argued that when a country becomes financially dependent on another, it risks compromising its trade relationships in favour of that creditor. Whether one agrees with his assessment or not, his comments raise a more fundamental foreign policy question: How should PNG engage Taiwan while remaining committed to the One China Policy? If I were Governor Allan Bird's foreign policy adviser, my advice would not be to abandon the One China Policy. Nor would it be to force PNG into choosing between Beijing and Taipei. Instead, I would advise him to revisit the foreign policy legacy of PNG's founding Prime Minister, Grand Chief Sir Michael Somare. History Already Provides the Answer The Taiwan question is not new. It has been one of the most sensitive issues in China–PNG relat...

By Bernard Yegiora On Friday, 17 July 2026, students in PG428 Foreign Policy in PNG will participate in Week 3 Q&A Topic 1: Foreign Policy as an Extension of Domestic Policy . The session will examine how PNG’s internal development, governance, security, and institutional challenges shape its external relations under the Foreign Policy White Paper 2025 . The mini-lecture will be delivered by Mr. Lahui Ako , who will introduce the central argument that foreign policy does not operate separately from domestic policy. A country’s external behaviour is influenced by its internal priorities, political institutions, economic needs, security concerns, development challenges, and national ambitions. The main inquiry question for the session is: How does one domestic policy challenge shape PNG’s foreign policy under the Foreign Policy White Paper 2025? Moving Beyond Policy Summary The broader purpose of the Q&A activities is to help students move beyond merely summarising the Foreign Po...

By Bernard Yegiora The Marape-Rosso Government's decision to close the Chinese Taipei Economic and Cultural Office in PNG has attracted considerable attention. Coming only days after Prime Minister James Marape and Foreign Minister Justin Tkatchenko publicly criticised China's recent missile test in the Pacific, some observers may view the decision as contradictory. It is not. If anything, it demonstrates an important principle of diplomacy that is often misunderstood: states rarely allow disagreement in one policy area to define an entire bilateral relationship. Only days earlier, PNG had expressed concern over China's ICBM test in the Pacific. Prime Minister James Marape reiterated his vision of the Pacific as an "Ocean of Peace," while Foreign Minister Justin Tkatchenko questioned the wisdom of conducting missile tests near small Pacific Island states. Those statements reflected PNG's concerns about regional security. The decision to close the Taiwan...

By Bernard Yegiora China’s recent intercontinental ballistic missile test in the Pacific generated considerable regional debate. Political leaders, diplomats, defence officials and commentators focused on the strategic meaning of the launch, the implications for Pacific security and the responsibility of major powers operating in the region. For PNG, the debate also exposed a more fundamental national security question: Does the country possess the scientific and technical expertise required to independently assess complex strategic technologies? This question extends far beyond one missile test. The contemporary security environment is increasingly shaped by ballistic missiles, satellite systems, artificial intelligence, cyber warfare, autonomous weapons, biotechnology, quantum technologies and advanced surveillance systems. These are not issues that can be understood through political analysis alone. They require scientific expertise. PNG’s National Security Policy 2024–2029 alre...

By Bernard Yegiora Prime Minister James Marape’s call for the Pacific to remain an “Ocean of Peace” is morally appealing. It speaks to the region’s painful history of war, nuclear testing, foreign military activity, and great-power competition. But as foreign policy, the phrase is utopian. Major powers will not stop testing weapons because Pacific leaders ask them to. The United States, China, France, Russia, and the United Kingdom all maintain defence strategies that require weapons testing, deterrence signalling, and military readiness. Whether Pacific Island countries like it or not, weapons testing is not disappearing. This is why PNG must move beyond slogans and adopt a realist Pacific security position. The real question is not whether missile testing can be completely stopped. It cannot. The real question is whether PNG can demand transparency, prior notification, environmental safeguards, sovereign respect, and one consistent diplomatic standard from all major powers. This matt...