My Take | What independence really means for two tiny Pacific island states
- Self-governing Cook Islands and Niue have exchanged their freedom in political association with New Zealand for dominated status under the United States
As US President Joe Biden hosted leaders of the Pacific island states at the White House on Monday, CNN ran this little news item: “The US is formally establishing diplomatic relations with a pair of Pacific Island nations Monday, recognising the Cook Islands and Niue for the first time.”
The 770-word story raises all sorts of questions: Did the two island states fight for independence? Since both have long been constituent parts of “the Realm of New Zealand”, did Wellington agree with their new-found status or object to it? Was Wellington too intimidated by Uncle Sam to say anything in public? How does their newly independent status fit with the US militarisation of their region?
Has “the Realm of New Zealand” been dissolved or reduced? On these issues and more, I learn much from two erudite readers, Richard and John. All of the technical facts in the following are from both legal scholars, but the responsibility for the dubious or duplicitous interpretation is mine only.
This “Realm” model, incidentally, offers a pretty good example of political association; perhaps Taiwan and mainland China can learn something. Interestingly, Niue has long taken the stance of “one China” as understood in its conventional sense, rather than the revisionist “I say what I feel like about it” version of Washington.
Cook Islands (population: 17,000-plus) and Niue (population: 1,700-plus) are self-governing political entities, which are in “free association” with New Zealand. Their people are citizens of New Zealand where most of them actually live.
Now never trust Wikipedia; one entry says while “self-governing”, New Zealand ran their defence and foreign affairs. That’s not quite right.
