Papua New Guinea Prime Minister James Marape on 22 August said his cabinet has approved a new treaty with Australia. This accord is primarily oriented towards strengthening their bilateral security relations. Marape proclaims that this first-of-its-kind treaty will lift the security relationship between the two countries to its highest level ever. We will witness the deployment of as many as 10,000 Papua New Guineans working side-by-side with the Australian Defence Force in dual arrangements.
The recently signed agreement, controversial at home but boosting hopes outside the country, has raised eyebrows across the region. While Marape emphasizes that the treaty will ensure Papua New Guinea is “safe, secure, and prepared to protect its people and borders,” concerns have emerged regarding its long-term implications for national sovereignty.
Domestic Reactions and Criticisms
Former commander of Papua New Guinea’s defence force, Jerry Singirok, has spoken out vehemently against the treaty. He cautions that agreeing to something like this can potentially be dangerous. Without careful consideration of its long-term constitutional ramifications, we may be heading towards catastrophic effects for the nation. Singirok stated, “It’s a disaster if we enter into this without understanding the long-term implications on our constitution.”
Advocates for the treaty argue that it will enhance military interoperability between Papua New Guinea and Australia. They further claim that it will greatly improve collaboration between the two countries. An Australian Government spokesperson noted, “It puts our relationship with PNG on the same level as we have with the United States and New Zealand and builds on the already strong bonds between our defence forces, our economies and our people.”
Despite this support from many quarters, the treaty has been roundly criticized by many commentators and political players. Worries over Papua New Guinea’s autonomy are very much alive. The sudden uproar around this issue has increased, with perhaps dramatic fire-fueling statements from the Chinese embassy in the country. The embassy urged the country to “properly handle issues bearing on its sovereignty and long-term interests.”
Strategic Implications
Marape sought to communicate that the treaty includes much more than logistical arrangements about barracks and boats. He stressed that it is meant to encourage closer military and defense cooperation, including strengthening operational synergies between the two countries.
“This treaty is not just about maintaining barracks and boats,” Marape remarked, highlighting a broader vision for collaborative defense strategies. The Prime Minister’s comments signal an impetus on the Government’s part to further bolster our security architecture, resiliency, and readiness to counter these growing regional adversities.
Various treaty monitors report that some analysts believe foreign entities, especially China, will attempt to weaken the treaty’s implementation. These geopolitical dynamics are certainly in play. They could influence future engagements and partnerships between the governments of Papua New Guinea and Australia.
A Historic Moment
The treaty arrives at a remarkable moment for the two countries. During his recent visit to Papua New Guinea for its 50th anniversary celebrations, Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese faced criticism for not signing the agreement sooner. Both leaders expressed confidence in its potential to reshape defense relations for years to come.
Richard Marles, Australia’s Defence Minister, recently highlighted the goodwill that is pervasive between the two cultures. “There’s a huge appetite for goodwill from both sides,” he said, emphasizing the desire on both sides to work together.
