Talk:2006 Fijian coup d'état

2006 Fijian coup d'état was a Social sciences and society good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
December 7, 2006	Good article nominee	Not listed

This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.

If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.

Untitled[edit]

Im okay with the renaming of the article. But the situation is far too fluid to say that the coup HAS in fact taken place. The government still claims to be in control, and most of the country's powerful chiefs are still supporting it, at least publicly. I'd say there's a 99 percent chance that the coup WILL occur, but to say that it HAS occurred is premature. David Cannon 11:21, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I wont make a fuss about it, but moving an article from somebody's user space without consulting the user seems very presumptuous to me. In this case, i DO approve of the move, but i would have appreciated being asked first. David Cannon 11:25, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, sorry; I assumed you would be okay with it, but should have asked you first, my mistake. —Nightst a llion (?) 15:08, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That's okay - we all make rash judgements sometimes - I know I do:-) BTW, Fiji's civil service said this morning that they are still following orders from the civilian government, and anticipate no change to that. The country's two highest-ranked chiefs are also supporting the civilian government - and if I know anything about Fiji, governing the country without the cooperation of the chiefs would be easier said than done. Therefore, it's still a coup plot at this stage, not a coup d'état. I'll wait a few hours to see what happens. If necessary, we'll have to rename the article again to "... Coup plot" - but that may or may not be needed. For now, I'll correct a couple of details in the article. Right now, the situation is extremely fluid. BTW, I've also got a huge number of "clips" from online news sources going back two months, which I will slowly go to and put into the article. David Cannon 21:10, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I would argue a coup is in process so it's not really just a plot anymore. If it fails, it will be a failed coup Nil Einne 04:04, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've brought the article up to date with a blow-by-blow account of what's happened. It needs someone with a better understanding of the dynamics to go through and add more background and improve the flow of the article.-gadfium 23:05, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for doing that! I've been so overloaded with other commitments of late that I've been unable to do much about Wikipedia, apart from a few very superficial tasks, and I'm so pleased that you've put in the hard work. As I said, I'll add extra details as and when I have the time - but you've made it so much easier for me now, as the framework is already there, thanks to you. David Cannon 00:44, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Coup?[edit]

2006 Fijian coup d'état plot is precipitous indeed, no coup has happened as far as i know. Perhaps if you removed the last section and merged it with Escalation, and moved the entire article to something like "December 2006 Crisis" or something it would make a worthwile article. --Xorkl000 20:22, 4 December 2006 (UTC) Copied from User talk:Davidcannon[reply]

I added the last section calling it a coup. I did so because the New Zealand Herald and several other news sources started calling it a coup or coup attempt, and because it appeared that the military had tried to arrest the Prime Minister. Since then many more checkpoints have been created by the military, but there has been no explicit attempt to seize power. I think it is a coup in slow motion, as many media sources have called it. If the situation continues to escalate, then I think most will agree that the events of the last 24 hours mark the beginning of the coup. If nothing much happens for a few days, then the section should be retitled. If you feel strongly about it, rename the last section yourself and I won't object.-gadfium 20:41, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Guys, while appreciating what you are doing, I would like to ask you to be kinda careful with what you are saying or where you take your information from. NineMSN is surely not a very reliable source. Please have a look at sites like fijilive.com or even The Fiji Times, both which run constant updates on the situation and tend to be quite neutral about it. Laisenia Quarase has most definetely not escaped a attempt to arrest him out at Sawani. I am living in Fiji right in the middle of things and it feels and reads very dramatized what I read in Wiki. Just a suggestion, but please think about it, as many people by now take a lot of information from Wiki as well and it is quite a touchy subject that would be easily mis- represented 210.7.21.38 21:28, 4 December 2006 (UTC) Denis Nadi Fiji[reply]

Good call. I've been getting most of my information from the Radio New Zealand website, which appears pretty neutral, but we need to try and keep it encyclopedic (even as things happen). I've also added a little more to the background, but would appreciate others having a look at it and expanding or correcting as you see fit Mostlyharmless 23:46, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fiji Live seems to be offering very comprehensive news at the moment, and not so much reflecting the NZ and Aus. Government positions, which is something we need to be aware of... Mostlyharmless 00:44, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the military is right now (12.15 pm FT) trying to arrest Quarase in his house where he is bunkering with some of his ministers. I guess it's safe to call it a coup now. Maybe a source of info would the "your say" site of The Fiji Times, where people can air their view on the whole situation. Over a hundred letters and mostly in favour of the commander. But a lot of background info as well from a peoples point of view. Fiji350 00:22, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'd also support moving this to 2006 Fijian constitutional crisis for the meantime, as the president has dissolved the parliament, making it unclear that a coup is or will take place, although it is the strong view of a number of parties that this is in fact what is taking place. Mostlyharmless 00:46, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please establish consensus before taking bold action... To do otherwise is not good practice, and the kind of thing likely to start edit wars. Mostlyharmless 01:01, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I do not support this as its obviously a coup, and every WP:RS source reports it as such. --Nuclear~~Zer0~~ 13:21, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

mostlyharmless, please don't mind talking to you directly on the page, but where are you? And I agree with you about taking bold action. Fiji350 01:38, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. I'm in Wellington, New Zealand. My understanding of the current situation is limited to the reports I've read in the NZ media, discussions with a Fijian friend (mainly about context to the crisis) and as of today, Fiji Live. Mostlyharmless 02:12, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Things are really heating up now... like right now[edit]

I recently dramatically updated the introductory paragraph of the page (and bits of the rest).

Really, I don't think I have any authority to do this, as I am only a person in an office in Australia who happens to have been following as much news of this "political situation" as possible for the last few weeks. I've been getting most of my information during these few weeks (as my home page) from Fiji Live (as a digression I really want to include a piece on how the Fiji Live web-servers were over-run and effectively "down" on Monday morning and had to move partially to a mirror), Fiji Post and any academic journals I have access to. The odd bit of Australian ~~trash~~ mainstream media on the side also.

On reading this article on Tuesday 5th I had been disturbed by the direction the article was going, as discussed above with gratuitous use of the word "coup", etc, particularly seeing as I happen to agree with Fiji350 and Denis Nadi Fiji in that much of the media coming particularly from Australia and NZ has tended to be politically biased, and therefore less valuable as fact (even as stated by CNN for anyone looking for a reference to validate this statement - there is other evidence which I'm happy to provide on enquiry).

I'm an extremely fresh-faced (figuratively) bubby-wiki-user and at the moment am gripped by the fear of being horribly slammed. But I really would like to get more opinions on the situation. Elena the Quiet 02:31, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You're doing pretty well actually, and an article like this, where things are changing constantly is often a good place to start - if you get things wrong someone will correct them pretty constantly. I agree that this article should better reflect the fact that Bainimarama enjoys the support of a large part of the population, the controversy surrounding Qarase's actions leading up to this, and the fact that NZ and Australia have had high levels of involvement in this, and strongly support Qarase. Unfortunately for the purposes of balance, the pro-Bainimarama side doesn't seem to have said as much (he didn't say all that much in his press conference last night), or don't seem to have the same access to the media. I've started to address some these, but have to go and do some other things and might come back tonight. Mostlyharmless 02:57, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'd agree that it's a coup by now, even though the news sources mentioned above are politically biased - after all, even the Fiji Internet media appears to be calling it a coup right now, and media suspensions also make that rather clear. — Rickyrab | Talk 18:51, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

thanks Elaine, whereby Fiji350 and Denis Nadi Fiji is one person, that being me. I wrote first then made an account, sorry for that. As mentioned before, another good source is http://www.fijitimes.com/yourSay.aspx , as it gives a nice broad overview of a real public poll or opinion. And yes, I and my family think as well that the Commodore has large support in the population. In Fiji is a small and upcoming minority of lateral thinking people, and even though they do not support the ways the military goes about what is happening today, they fully know and understand the reason behind it. Fiji350 03:17, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am so sorry, Elena, that I called you Elaine. Won't happen again

Thank you for the kind words! I'm not at all precious about my the pronunciation of my name no hard feelings at all. I guess we'll all keep our eyes on the situation. Elena the Quiet 05:13, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

title - remove "attempt"[edit]

I believe that given the recent events (BBC) that the word "attempt" should go from the title. So I will remove it, if you have a problem with that, please revert it then place your reasoning here. --Midnighttonight yell at me to go do some uni work! 03:39, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hit a problem. The page is currently a redirect and only an admin can move a page to one that already exists. So if an admin could please do so. Thanks. --Midnighttonight yell at me to go do some uni work! 03:43, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am reluctant to see so many name changes in a short period of time. Also, the coup is not yet complete. Let's leave it until tomorrow.-gadfium 05:25, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It has happened, I know, I am here in Fiji. The commander has claimed that he is the acting President and Dr. Jona Senilagakali is the appointed interim PM (Fiji Times) 210.7.4.101 06:48, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It clearly is no longer an attempt, with former PM Qarase now under house arrest. – Ch acor 10:10, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ayup, it's a coup. — Rickyrab | Talk 18:52, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Removed {npov-section} tag[edit]

I consider such tags to be "scare-quotes" on articles/sections so I'd prefer that they were removed ASAP. I don't see any ongoing POV concerns here so I've removed the tag. If there are, let's discuss and fix them. <<-armon->> 21:21, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Demands and statements by the coup leaders[edit]

Have there been any? What I mean is information along the lines of:

how long will they stay in power;
what precisely they wish to accomplish with their coup;
when the next elections can be expected to be held;

and so on. —Nightst a llion (?) 21:35, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

a) as short as possible, according to Cmdr. Bainaimarama b) to rid the country of our present completely corrupt government, that provides nothing but lip service in the name of "democracy", to weed out perpretrators of the 2000 coup, to bring in a system that provides equally for all ethnicities, basically make Fiji "livable" for all. Could write much more but I think you get my drift c) it'll be a long time until they will even have the civil service under control, so maybe 2- 3 years in my point of view. Aggrevating to this is the reluctance of the Elections Office to work together with the military. Fiji350 22:43, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Any official statements we could include in the article? That's what I'd like to know first when I'm reading up a coup -- why, how long, and when are the next elections. —Nightst a llion (?) 17:42, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Found some news on planned elections and used it to create Next Fijian general election. —Nightst a llion (?) 18:50, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Great Council of Chiefs has refused to meet to appoint back the old PM. Probably pushed back the military's schedule abit since they have no intention of asking them to meet until things have cooled down more. Updated the main page to reflect it, though the section will need some streamlining. Should we create sub-sections for the military's plans and the actions of the interine government?User:TSim 18:23, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Censorship[edit]

The military has not occupied the premises of any media outlet. They have asked for "assistance" not to publish any utterances by former PM Quarase. In reaction to that the editor of The Fiji Times has decided to close shop, same goes for the News Room of Fiji One TV. I agree that this move is questionable, since it impedes on freedom of speech. Although one could see it as necessity in the moment for the country to keep its calm. Quarase is clinging to power no matter what and would use any path open to him to return, if it good or not. The rest is about right. No radio station has shut down, all are broadcasting a joint program on news. Apart from that it is business as usual. Please change the article in that respect. Fiji350 23:31, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently sources say otherwise. --Nuclear~~Zer0~~ 13:18, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fiji Times allowed to resume publication 1135 FJT Wednesday, December 06, 2006 Update: 11.35AM The Republic of Fiji Military Forces has allowed Fiji Times Limited to resume publication without any interference from soldiers. The newspaper suspended publication on Tuesday night after the military ordered the paper not to publish any propaganda against the new political leadership. The newspaper will publish an afternoon edition today. Normal daily publications resume from tomorrow. Fiji350 23:37, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

NuclearZero: that depends on your sources, which you have not specified, and which ones you tend to belive. I personally do not trust any foreign media, but only interviews with the respective people, although not conducted by myself. Fiji350 00:23, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You should try reading the content, its fully sourced. Thank you. --Nuclear~~Zer0~~ 17:12, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

NuclearZero: Thank You for stating the obvious. Whilst "sources" can say what they like to, I am living here in Fiji, and no radio broadcaster has or had shut down, simple as that. It's the same as the constant emphasizing on "Fully Armed Soldiers", instead they might as well write "Soldiers with big sticks" since I have yet to see one soldier that has ammunition ready or loaded. It's all nice and good, but still, I say that the international media is doing a disgraceful job, pure sensationalism and not much merit or truth, as far as I have seen, literally. The only two sources that are half- way reliable are The Fiji Times and FijiLive, both of which run constant updates. No matter what is said in any foreign media outlet/ publication/ broadcast about the coup and its implications or the "Act of Terrorism", I have yet to speak to anybody that is wholeheartedly against the actions of the military. And TV broadcasters so far have only shown known SDL party members or supporters, so much for responsible reporting. I understand that the story sells better if you spice it up but it is going to far! The way the ongoings here are pictured are downright wrong. I've gotten phone calls from as far as Germany to ask about the situation and to express their worry. And here we sit, laughing. My view IS obviously biased, as I support the Commander, but I still support a neutral point of view, since that is the only way to make people understand what is happening. We are being shown up as if we would be the Solomon Islands.

If anybody has a direct question or is looking for a different opinion, you may mail me directly to deerasch@connect.com.fj . Fiji350 23:29, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Background[edit]

Somewhat related to the points NightStallion raised above, a few issues regarding the background aren't clear. (I thought I'd asked this but must have forgotten).

What were the precise demands that the government was supposed to meet
Qarase made some attempts to meet the demands, what didn't he do?
How many demands were the? The article says 19 in the intro and later on. But this source says 9 non negotiable http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200611/s1801433.htm The FijiLive source which is linked to from the second 19 demands sentence doesn't mention a number. Nil Einne 20:52, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

One of the demands was for investigations into the Commander be dropped. One of the investigations centred on allegations that he executed mutineers after they surrendered in the Queen Elizabeth Barracks mutiny back in 2000. David Cannon 21:02, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The 9 (and it was always only nine demands and they did not change) demands and the reaction by Quarase for government can be read here: http://www.fijilive.com/archive/showpdf.php?pdf=2006/12/govt/points_agreement.pdf . These are the official minutes of the meeting in Wellington. The Commander says that Quarase behaved like a politician and not like a honest man when responding. Fiji350 00:21, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just did a thorough read through and addition regarding the three bills and nine demands, though imho it doesn't read nor flow as well as it could, but given the complexity of the situation it's difficult to keep it simple -- Elena the Quiet 04:44, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Suggest shortening intro section[edit]

The 2nd paragraph of the intro section details the historical context for the coup. It is too long, in my opinion, and should be shortened down by about half. Patiwat 01:00, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not just now. The article will soon need splitting up into a family of articles (like the 2000 coup) and things can be shortened then. David Cannon 01:44, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Legality of coup[edit]

There were a few {{fact}} tags placed on statements regarding the illegality of the coup. But the junta-installed leader, Jona Senilagakali, has himself admitted that the coup was an illegal act. He told ABC radio that, "There's no doubt about it. That was correct. It is an illegal takeover... It's an illegal takeover to clean up the mess of a much bigger illegal activity of the previous government... So what choice do you have? To me, it's better that you do this illegal activity to clean up a much bigger, illegal mess so that we can bring peace ... to the people of Fiji." Source: http://www.theage.com.au/news/world/back-off-australia-warns-new-pm/2006/12/07/1165081053486.html Justified, maybe. But illegal, yes. Patiwat 01:07, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please bear in mind that the Australian media, and the international community in general cannot be seen to support the coup in any way and that will bias the way they present this story. The legality of this coup can only be decided by the Fijian court's interpretation of their constitution, which will only happen in years to come.

To my eye/mind any definitive comment on the legality of this action in this Wiki article expresses opinion. I don't believe either our, or even Senilagakali's interpretation of the Fijian constitution is good enough for the purpose of this article. I might also add that in my interpretation of Senilagakali's comments to paraphrase (in a inversely-biased way) he says the the previous government's action were so illegal that this coup is less illegal. If we were to correctly document this perhaps we would could state that he mentions both, in fact I just put this in.

It is biased of us to use what is clearly and emotional and subjective statement as a justification for using such a powerful suggestion as the coup being illegal in this objective record. -- Elena the Quiet 02:11, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In brief: for similar reasons I've taken out the sentence from the christian science monitor accusing the coup of being treason. I am happy to continue to discuss this on inquiry. -- Elena the Quiet 02:28, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I was not previously aware that there was such a thing as a “legal” coup d'état. I agree with Elena that the article should not discuss the “legality” of the Commander’s actions at this point; there is simply too much flux in the situation. However, I think that Senilagakali was simply stating the obvious: They did something illegal but (in their minds) right and justified and required. History will judge their rationalizations/justifications, and we're not there yet. {Kevin/Last1in without cookies}12.96.58.22 15:03, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Failed GA Nomination[edit]

I failed this article as a good article candidate because it is definitely not a stable article. One of the criteria for GA status is stability, and seeing as this article details a current event, it is by no means stable. People have done some good work on this article, so maybe in a few months or after things have settled down we can review this again for GA status. Patiwat 01:20, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral Point Of View[edit]

Any neutrality in this article has disappeared with the inclusion of the part about "Middle Eastern Advisor"! I would like to dispute this part as it is even un-sourced! I have no idea how to put tags, but please take this as a formal complaint about the direction this, until now, very good article has taken. Fiji350 00:04, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Those passages have been removed. Rmhermen 00:33, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies for the "Middle Eastern Advisor" inclusion - I fear I was responding a bit too earnestly to the rumor mill in Fiji at work - soon we will be getting reports of 'submarines' off the southern coast as in the 2000 coup. I should have been far more cautious in posting that particular gem --Mesa248 03:40, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Picture request[edit]

Can any Wikipedians in Fiji provide pictures for this article? I'm thinking of pictures of checkpoints, placards both pro and anti, and buildings such as the Police Tactical Response unit headquarters. Getting pictures of the people at the centre of events would be even better, but probably a lot more difficult. Don't put yourself at risk in trying to get a picture.-gadfium 01:34, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I completly support Frank Bainimarama[edit]

Frank Bainimarama is a brilliamnt man who is all but trying to create distabilty for Fiji(the Australian biased media says so), and is merely, as he says,"trying to clean up Fiji".He is trying to diminish all corruptuion in Fijian Politics, and an important move was to remove Laisenia Qarase who had been involved with George Speight, and had only been elected due to the vunrebility of the Fijian people following the 2000 coup, in which Mahendra Chaudry was illegally removed(under duress.)Bainmarama is attempting to remake Fiji into a better country, a fairer country.And if something illegal has to be done to create democracy and fairness of all races in Fiji-then so be it!! Kumarnator 02:35, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It is my understanding that Qarase was, in fact, installed as PM by Bainimarama and his Interim Military Government in 2000 - not being involved with the Speight side of the 2000 conflict. Rmhermen 02:45, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This talk page is for discussion of the article and how it can be improved. It is not a place to comment on the coup itself. Please see Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines.-gadfium 03:49, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Genocide Potential[edit]

The following was removed from the main page by a person who does not understand the situation personally and with out wanted to get into to a rvt war I am happy for this to be a point of discussion here until that person gains a better perspective on the UN obligations.

With Fiji's Armed forces made up of 99% Native Fijians, in a population divided approximately equally between Fijian Indian and Native Fijian, the international concern and the United Nations interest is firmly on the prevention of genocide as defined by Article 2 of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (CPPCG) adopted by the UN General Assembly in December 1948 and came into effect in January 1951. RoddyYoung 22:18, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

And your sources for the genocide danger are? You should read the policy on Original research before trying to insert such material into articles.-gadfium 22:53, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed essentially the same point from Talk:Fiji and Talk:Frank Bainimarama. User:RoddyYoung also said at the former:

A large body of reputable work around genocide can be google searched for under Fiji + genocide. The present circumstances rise the international temperture and it is right that wikipedia page on Fiji notes this historic concern. A person has removed this before and placing it in the discussion page lets this most serious matter in international concern not be lost sight of due to one person delete.

and:

Fiji has enacted laws that address the matter of genocide in Fiji in the 1960's and 1970's and are contained in Chapter VIII of the Fiji Islands Penal Code.

I await more specific links than just a suggestion that I search on google.-gadfium 23:13, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes read gadfium discussion page to understand that with out any evidence one individual has deleted work that has large amounts of literiture on the subject to back it up. You will be aware that your actions will attract the international intelegence community to fully scrutinize your work to understand your motives for removing the links to genercide. This will go for anyperson who makes comment on genocide as it is such a delecate emerging subject with horrible examples in the past. Again I say that no amount of referencing will change the mind of gadfium or any other person who nominates themselves as deleters on behalf of the community of wikipedia. Try the following links anyone else who has different ideas from gadfium.

Genocide in the Fiji Islands Penal Code -- Prevent Genocide ... - 2:24pmThe crime of Genocide in Chapter VIII of the Fiji Islands Penal Code -- Prevent Genocide International. www.preventgenocide.org/law/domestic/fiji.htm - 11k - Cached - Similar pages

Domestic Laws Against Genocide - Prevent Genocide InternationalCambodian Law for prosecuting crimes committed from 1975 to 1979, China (see Hong Kong and Macau), Chapter 34 (Genocide) of the Fiji Islands Penal Code ... www.preventgenocide.org/law/domestic - 75k - Cached - Similar pages [ More results from www.preventgenocide.org ]

Fiji: Amnesty International's Comments on the ICC Working Group's ...Fiji should ensure that its national law incorporates the more comprehensive definition of the ancillary crimes of Genocide as defined in the Genocide ... web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGASA180012006?open&of=ENG-2M4 - 57k - Cached - Similar pages

Fiji based NGO calls on Fiji's President to become visible and ...Low population in Papua an indication of genocide according to a church leader ... Fiji's Prime Minister in hiding to avoid arrest by military. ... www.rnzi.com/pages/news.php?op=read&id=26186 - 7k - Cached - Similar pages

The test and remedy applied to any situation that genocide may be a potential factor RoddyYoung 23:59, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Most of your links merely indicate that Fiji has a law against genocide. The last link, to Radio New Zealand, is not about Fiji at all. None come remotely close to backing up your paragraph suggesting potential for genocide in Fiji.-gadfium 00:01, 10 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If the United Nations, or diplomats from other countries, have actually issued statements or given interviews suggesting that genocide is a possibility in Fiji as a result of the coup, then by all means we can include a paragraph saying that they have said so. What we cannot do is engage in original research. If there are some sources out there, then by all means point them out to us. --bainer (talk) 06:10, 10 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly. I should add that the suggestion is not only unsupported by any references so far but seems exceedingly unlikely based on our current references and article. The coup occured primarily in opposition to movements regarded as unfair by the coup leader to Indian Fijians, such as the pardoning of the previous coup leaders (who were opposed to the perceived dominance of Indian Fijians). The coup leader himself has expressed concern about the way Indian Fijians are being treated and is seen to be in opposition to the Methodist Church. This and other cirumstances surrounding the coup make the suggestion that Indian Fijians are at risk of genocide 'odd' to say the least and definitely should not be included without any good supporting references 203.109.240.93 12:43, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm half with you. You say that "the coup occured primarily in opposition to movements regarded as unfair by the coup leader to Indian Fijians" - that's one of several reasons given by the Commander, but only God knows whether that's his real reason or just a ploy to get the Indian community onto his side. The Commander himself is a native Fijian; he is technically a chief, in fact, though he chooses not to use his title. He's also a committed churchgoer who has a good reputation with foreign missionaries (my personal knowledge) but has a strained relationship with the hierarchy of the Methodist Church. I suspect there is more to that than meets the eye - but I'm not putting any of that in the article, as original research is not allowed in wikipedia. Having said that, I don't believe there is any realistic chance of genocide. The military claimed to have foiled a purported threat from "traditional warriors" to assassinate the Commander - but that threat, if real, was aimed against one individual, not the Indian community. David Cannon 00:22, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The only allusion to a possible armed conflict is from Victor Lal, a lawyer/academic of Indian descent, who no longer lives in Fiji. He is a well-known stirrer who has made enemies of just about everybody on ALL sides of the racial/political divide. But even he has not hinted of a racial conflict as such: in letters to the editor of the Fiji Sun, he speaks more of Fijian commoners - with or without the permission of their chiefs - rebelling against the military regime, with Indians who are dissatisfied with their own leaders (Mahendra Chaudhry, etc) joining them. So it's more of a struggle, in his view, between leaders and disgruntled followers, than between Fijians and Indians as such. As for me, as an outsider looking in, I consider such a scenario highly unlikely - but I've been wrong before and could be again. Hope not. David Cannon 00:22, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, Bainimarama also has more support among native Fijians than you might think. I don't believe it's the majority, but their numbers are not insignificant. Many of them (but not all) are related by blood or marriage to dynastic families (Ganilau, Mara, etc.) which were once powerful but lost influence during the Qarase administration. Whether that is their motive for siding with Bainimarama or whether there is some other reason, I don't presume to know. Time will tell. David Cannon 00:22, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Genocide Potential? I'm trying hard to type while laughing! You slay me wikipedia editors!! I'm gonna email all my friends the link to this discussion page (several of them Fijian and Indian or Ethnic Fijian and Indo Fijian as the BBC likes to say...), so we can all have a good laugh!! Maybe we can go down to Sonaisali Resort one weekend and have a a paintball genocide!!! LMAO LMAO... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Samoanbiscuit (talk • contribs) 06:05, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Finishing of Article[edit]

Maybe somebody should finish the article preliminary. Much has happened since the last entry. It would be great if the article could be kept up to date, in view of fairness to Fiji. Fiji350 21:10, 1 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've got a huge clipbook of info. about this coup and will expand the article accordingly. I don't think we'll be able to say that the article is "finished", however, until the military hands power back to a civilian government. David Cannon 00:22, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, i guess you are right there. But it wasn't actually meant that way, but I think you know that. The whole issue is getting more and more intriguing with every day. Now it is being found that the deposed Quarase- led govt was in fact illegal itself, and some hard evidence seems to be coming up. Albeit it is too early to include any of this in the article. I think I missed to say Thank You for a job well done so far, David. It is about time that you get over here and have alook for yourself. Fiji350 01:56, 4 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, too! Yes, I'm longing to come to Fiji as soon as I can get the chance! David Cannon 10:21, 4 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why I reverted John C.[edit]

It was with very mixed feelings that I reverted John C.'s edits today, as I personally agreed wholeheartedly with the views he expressed. However, our Neutral Point of View policy, as well as our Verifiability policy, forbid speculation, however "obvious" it may be. To me, as well as to John C., it is glaringly obvious that the President was manipulated into endorsing the coup - but that cannot be empirically verified, as I've seen the video (via the Fiji Television website) of the President's address, loudly declaring that the coup was "necessary" and that he would have done the same thing had his fellow-chiefs not prevented him. Wikipedia is not a crystal ball or a place for speculation, however well-founded it may appear.

One thing does need correcting. Fiji has had four coups - but only three of them were military. The 2000 coup was a civilian coup - the military action was a counter-coup.

I assure all that I did not revert these edits lightly - I hesitated for a day, knowing that the author is a lawyer and I'm not. David Cannon 11:51, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Fijitimes-120706.jpg[edit]

The image Image:Fijitimes-120706.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --05:23, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

List of people who are part of the interim govermnent of Bainimarama[edit]

Could someone make a list of all the people and what positions they hold in the 2008 Interim Government of Fiji? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Knowledgecreator (talk • contribs) 04:53, 20 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

See: Cabinet (Fiji). It's not up to date, though. Chaudhry has resigned, and I seem to recall others being removed in a reshuffle quite a while ago. This page on the Fiji government website should be more up to date. Aridd (talk) 08:38, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Edit: I missed this page. Definitely up to date: September 24, 2008. Aridd (talk) 08:40, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

i hope that Indians will particpate in elections again but more than this education pour tous should ensure it. QazimA (talk) 21:45, 4 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]