First they didn’t, now they do. Howard has explained why, so there was no need for the author to say anything about that aspect of Australia’s interest in the Pacific. Now, the moan goes, Australia requires these backward little countries to demonstrate good governance and overcome corruption. Hardly an onerous task if it means receiving aid and protection. However, the author is not satisfied (surprise, surprise) with this: he has to accuse Australia of not taking responsibility for the “fate of these countries”.

Hameriri, like most amateur meddlers in political policy, doesn’t like the aid-giving country putting conditions on their largesse, but expects them to take responsibilities as well as handing out money and risking police and troops in dots on the map where the people who are supposed to be taking responsibility for their own countries are acting like Neanderthals.

Let the locals sort things out for themselves. People who, rightly, object to the King of Tonga’s financial activities and their own lack of advancement, but who burn down 80% of the businesses district in rage, are not ready for the modern world. There is little point wasting money and risking Australian lives to help savages.

Australia is damned if it doesn’t “help” unviable and unworldly (they are not ready for a market economy, as the author says) backward countries, and damned if it does. Most of the criticism comes from Australians themselves: nothing new about that, unfortunately.

Australia should keep an eye on the Pacific region only in the interests of its own security and let Third World countries drag themselves up the way every civilization has had to in the past

Shahar, ok so you do not like the policies...What should the government be doing then? Do you think the public has a right to ensure their money is well spent? Do you think that non-market orientated policies actually work? I'm interested in your solutions more than your critique given that I have never met an aid activist anywhere on planet earth that is happy with their government's policies.

So many compassionate people in Australia these days, or is that selfish, greedy rodents?

Gee Leigh, you sure hate lots of people, cultures, nation states, clothing, food, shoes, insects, fish, trees, even grains of sand.
Have I left anything out?

To Mr Howard

Considering that us Aussies and Kiwis are only now remnants of a colonial protective past we should be very careful how we much we present a type of 19th century gunboat diplomacy in the shape of warships accompanying aid delegations?

Ultra-modern terms like corporatism and marketing could easily cause panic among the progeny of the original inhabitants with more reminders of a subjective colonial past, when office-workers and their families were brought in by the British permanently from India?. Chinese shopkeepers could bring such reminders also, especially if they also have families with them.

As most of the islands with their attractive shores and coves have become extra-pleasant places to make money for the tourist industry, how much are the original owners getting out of this?

There has been some publicity about some of our more crafty Aussie real-estators purchasing land over-cheaply from native families who had been lucky enough to have had titles. If us Aussies have really been doing the dirty on what is left of the original families, we could be sowing the seeds of more world terrorism, Mr Howard. It is not only the Islamists who give their lives, remember. Take note about the persecuted Tamils in Sri-Lanka, right now they easily hold the record, over 500 have contributed, in fact.

Maybe your retinue needs do more study, Mr Howard. Oh, forgot, you are all working on that exciting new agenda - ultra-modern marketing

Mr Howard must be absolutely flattered with the amount of power accredited to him by his detractors. Has he done anything right in his life?