Vanuatu’s Internal Affairs Minister, Andrew Napuat, recently emphasized the need for Australia to respect Vanuatu’s decision to engage in a new policing agreement with China. This announcement comes after months of negotiations between Vanuatu and China on police assistance programs. Napuat’s statements came on the heels of his recent trip to Beijing, where he met with China’s Minister of Public Security, Wang Xiaohong.
Napuat vehemently rebutted any criticism of the partnership with China. He pointed to its promise to better facilitate coordination between the countries that supply police assistance to Vanuatu. It has never been a decision taken by one minister—and that’s the beauty of it—it’s a deliberate decision and choice that we’re making as a government. “As a government, we are all making this decision together,” McNaughton said. He spoke of his need to maintain Vanuatu’s sovereignty in its foreign affairs.
Since signing the communique in 2014, Vanuatu has closely aligned itself with China on regional policing issues. Last year, they deepened this relationship by signing a police equipment agreement. So far this year Chinese training teams have made multiple visits to Vanuatu, a strong sign of a deepening collaboration on law enforcement or possibly security, warehousing, and piracy extermination efforts. Napuat assured those gathered that the two countries are very close to signing a new MoU. Such arrangements will make formal China’s police assistance programs in Vanuatu.
“The MoU is reaching final status on our side, and it will be signed whenever the two governments are ready,” he noted. He emphasized that this bilateral agreement does not set a long-term Chinese police base in Vanuatu. Rather, it largely writes into law the status quo of collaboration between the two countries.
Despite Vanuatu’s assurances, Australia has expressed significant concern regarding China’s expanding influence in the Pacific region. Australian Federal Government Ministers have referred to the 2022 Pacific Islands Forum (PIF) leaders’ communiqué, which advocated for a “Pacific family first approach to peace and security.” They see the possible MoU as a precedent detrimental to regional stability.
“The comments by that particular minister about wishing to explore a possible MoU with that country didn’t come as a surprise,” said Pat Conroy, an Australian minister. Most significantly, he acknowledged the competitive space in the Pacific. As Australia undoubtedly aspires to be the partner of choice for regional security.
Napuat countered these Australian criticisms point by point, arguing that these types of comments demonstrate an “arrogance and ignorance” about Vanuatu’s sovereign decision-making ability. “I respectfully understand his freedom and his right to make those kind comments, but he needs to respect the internal processes happening here, and then he needs to get his facts correct,” he asserted.
Vanuatu’s Prime Minister, Jotham Napat, expressed confidence that an agreement could be reached despite some ministers voicing concerns over clauses potentially limiting investments from other countries in Vanuatu’s critical infrastructure. We don’t perceive a conflict to that,” Napuat said on these talks, claiming that Vanuatu is still true to its development partners.
Napuat emphasized the importance of open dialogue with development partners, stating, “Our development partners need to come and sit with us and talk with us so they can fully understand what our needs are.”
Vanuatu has taken steps to keep Australian officials informed about the ongoing negotiations regarding the policing MoU. Napuat underscored that discussions with China regarding police support are separate from Vanuatu’s discussions with Australia. He cited the Nakamal process meetings as a model of these different and parallel movements.
When we are missing an MOU it muddies the waters on what our lines of engagement should be. This will set the tone for our rules of engagement, Napuat said. He reiterated the need to put pen to paper on agreements with our collaborative partners.
