Security cooperation in the Pacific Islands: architecture, complex, community, or something else?

Abstract

In the 2018 Boe Declaration, Pacific Islands Forum leaders recognized that the region is facing ‘an increasingly complex regional security environment’ and committed to ‘strengthening the existing regional security architecture’. Given uncertainty about the existence and nature of this architecture, we address the question: is there a security architecture in the region, or does security cooperation take a different shape? We find that security cooperation in the Pacific Islands does not constitute a security architecture, as there is no ‘overarching, coherent and comprehensive security structure for a geographically-defined area’. We also find that the region is neither a security complex nor a community, due to the extensive involvement of metropolitan powers and external partners. Instead, we argue that security cooperation in the Pacific Islands is best described as a patchwork of bilateral, minilateral, and multilateral, formal and informal agencies, agreements, and arrangements, across local, national, regional, and international levels

The Blue Pacific in Search of a Collective Identity: Towards Success in Regional Security amid US–China Rivalry

“…However, the Pacific region does not see institutional integration in the process of regionalism; rather, it has developed multiple regional institutions or alternative governance systems depending on its purpose and necessity (Fry, 2019). Security cooperation in the Pacific takes the form of a 'patchwork', comprising agreements and arrangements across different levels, from bilateral to multilateral and from local to global (Wallis et al, 2021(Wallis et al, , 2023.…”

“…According to him, ‘climate change is winning, and climate change exerts the most influence on countries in our part of the world’ (cited in Morgan, 2022). Former Deputy Secretary General of the PIF, Cristelle Pratt argued that ‘the Blue Pacific cannot and will not become an aside in this new Indo-Pacific’ (cited in Wallis et al, 2023, p. 272).…”

“…Furthermore, Wesley-Smith and Smith (2021) also argued that ‘it seems unlikely that PICs governments could easily resist, manage, or leverage competing pressures’ from external powers, despite ‘the powerful symbolism of the Blue Pacific narrative’ (p. 25). Wallis and her colleagues (2023) stated that it is unclear how external powers fit within the Blue Pacific narrative (pp. 276–277).…”

Plural Policing in Papua New Guinea: More Than the Sum of Its Parts?

“…Against the backdrop of serious insecurity and the manifest limitations of the RPNGC, PNG has, over the years, received substantial policing assistance from Australia, its leading bilateral donor and international security partner. The level and character of this support has meant that transnational policing actors have become an important part of PNG’s pluralistic policing landscape, as in other parts of the Pacific Islands (Wallis et al, 2021). In Loader’s formulation (Loader, 2000), this is the layer of policing taking place above the state.…”

Small Island Developing States and climate securitisation in international politics: Towards a comprehensive conception

“…It aims to show how SIDS' engagement in the Security Council debate can provide an innovative approach to explain and overcome some of the conceptual and policy challenges for climate securitisation at the international level. In line with the widened agenda of security studies (Buzan et al, 1998;McDonald, 2021;Wallis et al, 2022), this article asserts that there is a need for international security speakers to adopt non-traditional approaches in order to frame threats and security provisions regarding climate change. This is particularly important for SIDS as they have promoted multidimensional and holistic approaches to explain climate threats and security (van Schaik et al, 2018;Security Council, 2007.…”