IS THE U.S. SERIOUS ABOUT ITS COMPACT PARTNERSHIPS?

PACIFIC ISLANDS REPORT

Pacific Islands Development Program/East-West Center
With Support From Center for Pacific Islands Studies/University of Hawai‘i

Commentary

IS THE U.S. SERIOUS ABOUT ITS COMPACT PARTNERSHIPS?

By Scott Kroeker

HONOLULU (Pacific Islands Report, Oct. 22) - More than 500 people attending a Sept. 8 conference in Washington, D.C., sponsored by Secretary of Interior Gale Norton, heard about investment opportunities in four U.S. territories—Guam, Commonwealth of Northern Marianas, American Samoa and the Virgin Islands. According to a news release from the Office of Insular Affairs, companies from 33 states and territories attended the conference, which was touted as "a truly unique opportunity to meet the Governors of the Territories, high-ranking officials from the Federal government, multilateral financing agencies, and diverse private sector interests from around the world to help get your projects moving."

That same week before the House Committee of the Judiciary, H.J. Resolution 63, the "Compact of Free Associations Amendment Act of 2003," was being considered. The resolution would extend the special relationship between the United States and the Republic of the Marshall Islands (RMI) and the Federated States of Micronesia (FSM) for another 20 years. The compacts—international agreements exchanging certain security privileges and military arrangements for financial/programmatic assistance and immigration rights—were scheduled for renewal prior to their expiration on September 30 for these Pacific Island nations (two of America’s closest friends and unwavering supporters of the U.S. in international arenas) to continue to receive the support necessary to provide basic government services to their people. The U.S. House passed the reauthorization bill recently and the Senate is still considering it but funding has been temporarily extended under a continuing resolution bill passed on September 25. The respective island legislatures are waiting to act until the U.S. approves the reauthorization.

What do these two seemingly unrelated things have in common? Unfortunately, if you look at the participant list of the investment conference, which excluded RMI and FSM representatives, not much. However, this would have been the first good opportunity for the U.S. government to demonstrate its true commitment to making "Compact II" work for these island countries that are actively seeking ways to diversify their economies and increase foreign investment. Section 211 (a) (3) of the compacts with the FSM and the RMI discusses the U.S. desire to support those efforts at private sector development and commits "United States grant assistance . . . to support the efforts of the [freely associated states] to attract foreign investment and increase indigenous business activity by vitalizing the commercial environment."

What better way to indicate that these words mean something than by inviting representatives from these countries (and the Republic of Palau, whose compact won’t be up for renegotiation for another six years but who is currently being pressured by the U.S. to modify terms of their own agreement) to participate in the investment conference? After all, the Office of Insular Affairs, which organized the conference, is "responsible for oversight of federal programs and funds in the freely associated states."

It is not as if the appropriateness of including the freely associated states simply slipped the mind of conference organizers as a live webcast of the event was conducted in each of the countries. If the FSM and the RMI had been invited to actively participated in "one of the premier events of the year," this not only would have shown that the United States is serious about its desire to help promote more self-reliance, but also would have indicated a maturing appreciation of the potential for these Micronesia nations to move away from dependency.

The explicitly stated goal of the new compacts is to encourage positive economic development in the freely associated states with the view to eventually reducing the need for U.S. government support. Putting aside whether the goal of self-sufficiency is remotely realistic or not, if the U.S. government is serious about encouraging long-term development it behooves them to seek every opportunity to maximize its own investment and leverage its funds and activities to support those stated efforts. If it continually fails to do so, it begs the question about its true commitment to a partnership with the freely associated states and seems like empty rhetoric.

As David Cohen, deputy assistant secretary for Interior’s Insular Affairs, rightly said in his testimony before the House Committee on Resources regarding renewal of the compacts, "there is clearly a heartfelt bond between Americans and the people of these islands."

But this should not be taken for granted by the United States and must be demonstrated at every opportunity, otherwise the islands will continue to look on the U.S. as an authoritative parent or ineffective Irooj (Marshallese chief)—resenting the controlling nature of the U.S. and their own dependency but willing to manipulate it for their own financial needs. When will a true partnership of equals be achieved?

October 22, 2003

Scott Kroeker is Joint Commercial Commission Project Officer in the Pacific Islands Development Program at the East-West Center in Honolulu.

Pacific Islands Report: www.pireport.org

Go back to Pacific Islands Report: Graphics or Text Only.