(Image: Mitchell Squire/Private Media)

The 51st Pacific Islands Forum leaders’ meeting in Fiji has no shortage of agenda items.

The three Cs — climate change, COVID-19, and (unofficially) China — are set to dominate discussion, as will the internal politics threatening to derail it. But while Pacific leaders attempt to mollify Micronesian countries, settle scores with the Solomon Islands on security, and keep the focus on the Pacific rather than US announceables, ocean rights remain a key issue.

Against the backdrop of rising sea levels, island nations are fighting to hold on to their ocean rights and preserve their status as nation states. They have two options: international recognition of maritime zones which was a fixture of last year’s forum, or land reclamation in the form of island raising. This possibility was raised by a number of island nations, including notable absentees from this year’s forum, Kiribati and Marshall Islands. At present there are no Pacific Islands actively pursuing land reclamation.

A key outcome of the 2021 forum was a declaration by all 18 member nations that should Pacific Islanders lose their homes to rising sea levels, they would not lose their livelihoods as well. Although the declaration echoed earlier regional pronouncements such as the Pacific Oceanscape 2010 and subsequent declarations including the Taputapuatea Declaration, Delap Commitment and Boe Declaration, it went further.

As Professor Clive Schofield, head of research at the WMU-Sasakawa Global Ocean Institute of the World Maritime University, told Crikey: “In essence it establishes that the Pacific Island states are intent on retaining the limits of their existing maritime claims and outlined how they are going about this.”

The 2021 leaders’ statement declared that ocean rights should remain intact irrespective of sea level rise and the real risk of Pacific Islands going under water. It was agreed that members would submit their respective maritime zones to the secretary-general of the United Nations, so that regardless of how the islands shape-shifted on account of climate change, ocean territory would be upheld in accordance with 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS).

Despite consensus, ocean rights have never been tested in international court: it’s one thing to make a declaration, but it’s another to get other countries to accept it. Schofield said the big question was “how to make this regional custom ‘stick’ internationally. In my view a regional custom or norm for the Pacific Island states is not enough.”

Heading into Suva, Australia’s Minister for International Development and the Pacific Pat Conroy was keen to promote Australia’s support for amendments to international maritime laws.

“I’ve been very vocal at both the [Pacific Islands Forum] and at recent multilateral meetings at CHOGM in supporting the efforts of the foreign minister of Tuvalu to change maritime law so that if a Pacific nation or any nation loses an island because of climate change they don’t lose the economic exclusive zone around that island, that has a huge economic benefit for them,” he said in an interview on ABC RN.

Why is this so important?

The combined maritime zones of Pacific Island nations are 55 times larger than landmass. Tuvalu, for example, measures only 26 square kilometres by land, but by ocean its territory spans more than 900,000 square kilometres. The Cook Island’s land to sea ratio is just shy of 1:3500, with 600 square kilometres of land to approximately 2 million square kilometres of sea. These boundaries reserve the right of a nation to access resources in the seabed and water column. For Pacific Island nations, sustained access to these zones is paramount for economic security and cultural identity.

The question remains whether they are willing to wait and take a gamble on international recognition or seek alternative avenues to safeguard their ocean and land rights. With the world leader in land reclamation featuring in all but name as a dominant player in this year’s forum, it remains to be seen whether China can arouse an appetite for its own style of island building in the Pacific.