VANUATU DENIES IT IS ABOUT TO SIGN A SECURITY DEAL WITH CHINA AS AUSTRALIA WORKS TO INK ITS OWN PACT

“In short:

Vanuatu's prime minister has dismissed reports his country is on the verge of signing a security agreement with China.

Jotham Napat said reports suggesting as such were "untrue" before adding that his country's relationships "were not exclusive".

Australia's Pacific Minister Pat Conroy would not confirm if the federal government had concerns over Vanuatu's potential deal with China.

Vanuatu has furiously denied that it is on the cusp of signing a security pact with China and warned that it will not be "dictated to" by Australia in a row which threatens to disrupt delicately poised negotiations for the landmark Nakamal Agreement.

Multiple sources have confirmed that China and Vanuatu have spent months discussing a comprehensive new pact called the Namele Agreement.

In Vanuatu, the Namele leaf is a sacred symbol of peace and authority used to enforce kastom or customary laws.

On Tuesday morning the Vanuatu newspaper the Daily Post reported that Australian officials in Port Vila were concerned the deal could have security elements, quoting a source who said it might "affect agreements with Australia" and undermine Vanuatu's push to make Canberra ease visa restrictions.

But later that day Vanuatu's Prime Minister Jotham Napat issued a forceful statement calling the report "grossly misguided and inaccurate" and insisting the proposed agreement was a "comprehensive development cooperation agreement" not a security pact.

He also took a thinly veiled swipe at Australia saying that "Vanuatu will decide what is good for Vanuatu. We will not be dictated to."

"Our foreign policy is guided by our national interests, not by external speculation or pressure,"

Mr Napat said.

"Suggestions that our partnerships could affect visa arrangements or other bilateral matters are unhelpful and not a cultural reflection of Nakamal values.

"Vanuatu's relationships are not exclusive."

Airing of concerns 'serious' amid negotiations

The dispute risks poisoning the atmosphere between Australia and Vanuatu just as the two countries prepare to finalise protracted and sometimes difficult negotiations over the Nakamal Agreement — a landmark security and development pact between the two countries.

Last week Vanuatu's Climate Minister Ralph Regenvanu said the government was on the "cusp" of finally signing the deal, almost eight months after it was given initial approval on the summit of Mt Yasur.

One diplomat in Vanuatu from a third country said the fact Australian officials still pressed ahead with raising public concerns about the pact with China, albeit by an anonymous leak to a newspaper, showed they must have "serious" concerns that it would have security implications.

The ABC has been told that Australia is not opposed to Vanuatu building up its economic links with China, but wants to ensure that the Namele pact is not a security agreement which might undermine Nakamal, or threaten Australia's interests.

The Pacific Minister Pat Conroy would not confirm if Australia had concerns, or say whether officials in Vanuatu had tried to use the Namele agreement as leverage to secure a better deal in negotiations on the Nakamal Agreement.

But he said Australia was in a "daily contest" with unnamed other countries throughout the Pacific.

"We've been very honest with the Australian public that we're in a permanent state of contest for influence in the Pacific," Mr Conroy said.

"That's why we've put so much resources and so much ministerial energy into this area."

Chinese influence in region monitored closely

Australia has also been closely monitoring meetings between the Chinese government and Vanuatu government ministers, including Interior Affairs Minister Andrew Napuat, who went to a major summit on digital technology in Hong Kong last week.

Mr Napat said the conference was focused on "addressing challenges in cyber security, digital transformation, and emerging technologies" and a senior government source in Vanuatu denied outright that any agreements had been signed with China during his trip.

The Chinese embassy in Vanuatu also said the claim of a security agreement was "untrue" and that "China–Vanuatu cooperation focuses on infrastructure development and capacity building".

Mr Napat also insisted the discussions around finalising the Nakamal Agreement with Australia were "not at all linked to China".

"Officials are continuing close engagement to ensure any agreement with any partner reflects Vanuatu's interests as high priority in ensuring its longevity," he said.

The agreement hit the rocks just before it was due to be signed in Port Vila by prime ministers Anthony Albanese and Jotham Napat in September, with Vanuatu deciding it could not endorse language aimed at limiting China's security presence in the Pacific.

That included a section emphasising that Pacific nations should have clear responsibility for security matters in this region, and another section which was designed to limit foreign investment in critical infrastructure in Vanuatu.

Even before this dispute there has been evidence of tensions between the two sides.

Multiple sources in Vanuatu have said Australian diplomats had deliberately kept an unusually low profile in recent weeks, a move one official said was "strange" and noticeable".

Mr Conroy would not be drawn on when the Nakamal Agreement was set to be signed.

"We've had very productive conversations but you'll hear about an announcement when we make it," he said.

Shadow Foreign Minister Ted O'Brien said Australia was "deeply invested in its relationship with Vanuatu" and the government needed to make it built a "strong, respectful and enduring partnership".

"The Albanese government has questions to answer here," Mr O'Brien said.

"What is the status of the Nakamal Agreement? And what steps are being taken to encourage its finalisation?

"This is looking like yet another diplomatic blunder on the part of the Albanese government and given the strategic importance of this relationship I expect Labor will exhaust every effort to improve the situation."

SOURCE & IMAGE: ABC News 

DATE OF PUBLICATION: 21/04/2026

#livinginvanuatu #livinginvanuatunews

King Badu Bonsu II Executed by Dutch Colonialists

In 1838, after decapitating two Dutch emissaries and decorating his throne with their heads; King Badu Bonsu II, the ruler of the Ashante tribe in present day Ghana, was himself beheaded by Dutch soldiers. For more than 150 years, King Bonsu’s head was lost until an author found it stored in a jar of formaldehyde in a Dutch museum. Ghana immediately asked for the King’s severed head back and; in July 2009, members of the Ahanta flew to The Hague and staged a mourning ceremony that included pouring gin libations on the floor of the Foreign Ministry before taking the head back to Ghana.

King Badu Bonsu II

Before he was executed by the Dutch in 1838, King Badu Bonsu II, was the overlord of the Ahanta tribe in the Western Region. Badu Bonsu II, is believed to have been decapitated in retaliation for the killing of two Dutch emissaries in 1838. According to the Dutch government, Badu Bonsu II was handed over by his own ”nation” to Dutch colonists; who were then in control of a part of the former Gold Coast (present-day Ghana) that included Ahanta tribal lands. Arthur Japin, a Dutch author who discovered the king’s head when he was working on a historical novel; noted that Badu Bonsu II’s head was taken by Maj. Gen. Jan Verveer in 1838 in retaliation for the king’s killing of two Dutch emissaries; whose heads were displayed as trophies on his throne.

Preserved in a jar of formaldehyde, the head of King Badu Bonsu II was discovered gathering dust; in a laboratory in the Leiden University Medical Centre by Arthur Japin, a best-selling Dutch author.

How it was found

It had been there since its arrival in the late 1830s from what was then called the Dutch Gold Coast and is today Ghana. Japin, the Dutch novelist, explained how he had helped reunite Badu Bonsu II head with his body. ”I was researching my novel about an Ahanta boy brought to Holland in 1838, and in the process I learned about the head of the king, who had been a friend of the boy. I had been looking for the head for more than 10 years,” Japin was quoted to have said. ”Finally, in 2002 I found it locked away in a dark cupboard where it had been for more than 170 years.” After hearing of the head’s location in 2008, Ghana filed a request for its return, saying, ”without burial of the head, the deceased will be haunted in the afterlife.”

Reclaiming the Head

In March 2009, Ghana government officials announced that it would be returned to its homeland for proper burial. The Dutch and Ghanaian governments and a member of Badu Bonsu’s Ahanta tribe signed a pact in The Hague for the handover of the head; which remained out of sight in a room elsewhere in the foreign ministry building for the ceremony. Ahanta tribe leaders held an emotional ritual, pouring alcohol on the floor of the conference room; while invoking the chief’s spirit in the presence of Ghanaian nationals dressed in the country’s red and black mourning colours. Ghana claimed the head of Badu Bonsu II, which had been preserved in formaldehyde; in a bottle among the anatomy collection of the Leiden University Medical Center (LUMC) on July 23, 2009.

https://iloveafrica.com/how-king-badu-bonsu-ii-of-ghana-was-beheaded-and-his-head-taken-to-the-netherlands-by-the-dutch/

#MossiWarriorClan

Fair Use

Copyright Disclaimer under section 107 of the Copyright Act of 1976, allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, education and research.

Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing.

Why Highlands Play Politics Better Than Coastal Leaders

I’m a coastal man, and this picture says everything about politics in Papua New Guinea. Politics is not about friendship or hate. It’s a game. A serious one. And the truth is, some people understand that game better than others.

Highlands leaders know how to play politics better than most coastal leaders. That’s why they stay in power. While coastal leaders are still thinking with emotions, others are making smart moves behind the scenes. In politics, thinking emotionally is the fastest way to lose.

Many people believe that James Marape and Peter O'Neill are enemies. That’s what the public sees. But politics is deeper than that. Leaders can fight today and work together tomorrow. There are no permanent enemies and no permanent friends. Nothing is personal. It’s just politics.

Coastal leaders often get played because they trust too easily or take things personally. Meanwhile, others are calculating every move. They build alliances, break them, and rebuild again when it suits them. That’s how the game is won.

As Rainbo Paita said, Parliament is more complicated than physics. And he’s right. Politics is not simple. It’s a game for strong minds, not soft hearts.

So here’s the hard truth, if you don’t understand the game, don’t enter politics. Because while you’re trying to be honest and emotional, someone else is already ten steps ahead, playing to win.

By The Hardest Pills to Swallow

This is not meant to attack any individual or group, but to share a perspective on how politics works.

The most intelligent highlands politicians are from Simbu when it comes to the real art of the game, like Sir iambake Okuk, Komdom Agaundo, Kerenga Kua James Nomane etc. The upper highlanders are dominant in the power play only with the use of money and nepotism, they are only good in using money and maintaining their wantoks system to find their way out,  but they don't have the brain to play the game on a neutral ground. Simbus don't play money or use their wantoks systems in politics. If a Simbu politician plays money and use wantoks system or if the game is played by all on a neutral ground, Simbu's will be victorious. I'm a coastal man and this is my simple view.