Editorial: Firm hand required in volatile Fiji

The seeds of the mutiny by elite forces of the Fijian Army lie in the wretchedly passive response to the putsch attempt made by George Speight in May. The abrogation of the multiracial constitution and the indulgence granted many rebel soldiers was hardly the punishment normally accorded those who mount failed armed takeovers.

Many of the objectives of Speight's supporters were, in fact, achieved with relatively little recrimination. This laxity was compounded last month when eight rebel soldiers, who had been facing treason charges with Speight, were released into military custody to face a court martial. Astoundingly, the men, members of the Counter Revolutionary Warfare unit, were then released by the Army to resume work at the Queen Elizabeth Barracks.

Most immediately, the mutiny seems to have been a reaction by those soldiers and other members of the unit to an investigation by the military high command into 150 of their number believed to have helped Speight. The military commander, Frank Bainimarama, was apparently finally set upon purging the Army of putsch supporters.

This was not, however, merely an internal battle within the Army, as former Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka insists. To describe it as such perpetuates the air of unreality which pervades the thinking of many indigenous Fijians.

The interim civilian Government was installed by the Army, and power remains at the beck and call of the Army. If the mutiny had succeeded, it would have led inevitably to the release of Speight, the installation of an ultra-nationalist administration and the adoption of a racist constitution.

Another surrender to the force of arms and racism, and a further blow to Fiji's economic recovery, appear to have been averted. But there will be repercussions. The mutiny, and subsequent escape of a number of the rebels, is further evidence of Fiji's continuing volatility. In particular, it is a setback for the country's important tourism industry, just as tourists had started trickling back. There is now also a hollow ring to the soothing words uttered by Fiji's interim Prime Minister at the Pacific Island Forum. Doubts about a return to democracy in Fiji have been rekindled.

At best, the mutiny is a sobering reminder of the difficulty the interim Government faces in promoting harmony in Fiji, let alone upholding its pledge to hold democratic elections within two years. At worst, the mutineers still at large could, with the support of sympathetic indigenous Fijians, sustain an uprising. The Pacific Island Forum's Biketawa Declaration might yet face its first test.

At the moment, that appears unlikely. The mutiny seems more like a final fling by Speight's supporters. The chances of that being the case will be strengthened greatly if the mutineers are treated appropriately. Treason charges are their due. No further thought can be given to lesser sentences or reinstating them in the armed forces. Such passivity would only promote the thinking which prompted the mutiny.

A firm hand, however, would demonstrate the desire of the interim Government and the Army to consign the racist dogma of Speight and his followers to history. There is a glimmer of hope that this time there will be more resolve. Military spokesman Major Howard Politini, for one, now recognises that the Army's release of the eight Counter Revolutionary Warfare soldiers was an "error."

Firmly redressing such mistakes could even accelerate the restoration of a national respect for the rule of law and order. Blood would not have been spilt in vain. Thursday's mutiny, the fourth armed insurrection in Fiji's recent history, suggests a dauntingly long road if decisive action is not taken. Yet that road must be travelled if the country is to return to democracy.