DEAR EDITOR, it was reported in the Island Sun newspaper last week that Prime Minister Hou met in Honiara with the visiting Head of Australia’s Intelligence Organization, ASIS, Mr. Paul Symon, when the PM was briefed on the proposed South Pacific Intelligence Dialogue (SPID) to be held in June this year.

The planned SPID meeting will follow a previous one held in Fiji last year.

During the course of his meeting with Mr. Symon, Prime Minister Hou was reported as having informed the ASIS head of the challenges faced with national security in the country, mentioning the Solomon Islands border with Papua New Guinea, confidentiality of information, cyber security and financial intelligence.

Rather surprisingly the PM was quoted in the paper as having said to Mr. Symon, “I believe we do have a national intelligence committee in the country but it has been operating on an ad hoc basis. Therefore, there is a need to establish a proper institution to address these issues.”

Taking the meaning of ad hoc for “a special or an immediate purpose without previous planning”, it was perhaps not untimely for the PM to add there was the need for a proper institution to address these (security) issues.

Twenty years ago there was a body in the Solomon Islands known as the National Security Council but that too seemed to have functioned on an ad hoc basis.

Just as PM Hou said the incumbent police commissioner briefed him and his Cabinet on the most recent incident regarding the much reported apprehension in February of 29 Boungainvilleans for allegedly entering the country’s border illegally, I too, as a former Commissioner of Police, reported security matters weekly to the Prime Minister and his Cabinet during the Solomon Alliance for Change (SIAC) administration.

My weekly reports were presented on information that had been provided to me by the RSIP Special Branch which was a valuable and much needed security intelligence branch that had been instituted during the Colonial era and its most senior personnel, including the Director of Special Branch and his Deputy, trained in security intelligence matters in the United Kingdom.

The Special Branch’s function and mandate was to identify any threat or potential threat to the security of the Solomon Islands and to develop intelligence of a political or sensitive nature and conduct investigations to protect the country from perceived threats of subversion, terrorism and other extremist political activity.

The Special Branch reports provided me with the means of giving the SIAC government the very early warnings of the serious threat posed by the activities of the GRA in November 1998 and subsequent reports provided by the Special Branch, aided by a British intelligence specialist I recruited to the Special Branch, provided the accurate ongoing security assessments which were disregarded by SIAC and by regional governments during my time in office from 1997 to mid 1999.

When the Regional Assistance Mission (RAMSI) arrived in the country the RSIP Special Branch was disbanded.

A Strategic Review of the Solomon Islands Security was conducted in 1998 by Australia at the request of the Solomon Islands (SIAC) Government and at my urging.

The concluding report of the Strategic Review which was handed to Prime Minister Bartholomew Ulufa’ala in April 1999 set out some specific recommendations on barrier control measures needed and I will quote some of the measures that were publically released at the time.

It has to be said that the Strategic Review did not spell out any financial support for any of the recommendations and in 1999 the SIAC government was faced with a dire financial crisis (a staggering USD 200 million debt) and soon became overwhelmed by the onset of militant activities (although predicted by the regular Special Branch reports). As a consequence none of the recommendations made in the Strategic Review were implemented. As I left in July 1999, I cannot say what happened to implementing anything in my absence from the Solomon Islands.

Quoting from the Strategic Review on Barrier Control and generally here is a précis.

“The key to effective barrier control operations lies in the implementation of a comprehensive surveillance regime to provide early and a reliably high probability of detection together with the effective coordination of response operations among relevant control agencies.”

“The situation will be significantly improved with the introduction of a new layered strategy. The first layer will be the information provided by regional intelligence sharing.” (Then there was little or none taking place but occasional drop-in visits from liaison officials from security agencies in Australia and New Zealand).

“Cooperation with neighbours in this regard is not well developed at present and it will be the task of the National Security Operations Centre (through the Intelligence and Communications Cell) to promote such exchanges.”

“The maintenance of a comprehensive national picture of sightings and movements is essential to developing this cooperation.”

“Some wide area surveillance will also be provided by patrols of the two Pacific Patrol Boats and aerial surveillance reports from flights by cooperating security partners.” (In 1997-1999 I received no such aerial surveillance reports).

“All government agencies must work together to manage current problems and to tackle the underlying causes of any future instability.” ( A remarkable sentence given that when the Strategic Review was given to Prime Minister Ulufa’ala in April 1999, GRA militancy was then intense and thousands of Malaitan plantation workers and their families coming under attack and being forced out of Guadalcanal)

It went on – “The contribution of areas such as education, youth affairs, and national development plans play a valuable part in avoiding tensions and dislocation within society and promoting realistic expectations and support networks, especially for the nation’s youth. Similarly, the effective administration of justice is essential to giving credibility to enforcement operations.”

“The National Security Council is being revived as a focus for this new approach.”

I do not believe the National Security Council got off the ground.

There was much more in the Strategic Review, including the suggested composition and make-up of the National Security Operations Centre, but hardly worth going into more details since the many recommendations were all ‘pie in the sky’ given what I have already had to say about the SIAC government’s finances, no support for the implementation phases of the Review from Australia and the onset of armed militancy.

In conclusion, I would like to endorse the words of Prime Minister Hou in saying that the Solomon Islands does, indeed, need to have a proper functioning institution to address the nation’s security situation if all that exists is a ad hoc Committee in 2018.

Yours sincerely

FRANK SHORT

DEAR EDITOR, may I contribute to this paper concerning the late payment of USP Student’s Allowances studying in Fiji this year 2018.

As an affected student, it has come to my attention of concern that late payment of Allowance is a human threat for many of us (Solomon Islands students) who are studying in various universities here in Fiji this year 2018.

As a victim, I am therefore writing this letter to urge the responsible ministry, Ministry of Education and Human Resource Development (MEHRD) to seriously looking into this matter and address this ongoing problem that has been faced many years.

I knew Solomon Islands Government sent us here for a purpose of acquiring and enhancing higher level of education so that in return, each one helps in rebuilding our beloved country Solomon Islands.

Therefore I asked the Solomon Islands government to treat each citizen with respect and fairness as what it did for other students in other universities around the globe.

Further, I particularly welcome the support being offered to us since day one, in the manner of facilitating us to this far but our wellbeing has to be a concern as we are in a foreign land.

I wholeheartedly wish the Prime Minister and his Government in cooperation with Ministry of Education and Human Resource Development (MEHRD) to work in hand to hand to resolve and move things forward so that we students receive our allowances in time and heads-down with our study.

Thank you,

Basil Naoka

USP Student

Laucala Fiji

DEAR EDITOR, I read with interest the letter to the Editor published in the Sunday edition of your newspaper under the title “Short vs Laore.”

I would like, if I may, to add a few comments to the views expressed by Ms Galo.

Firstly, it was perhaps an unfortunate editorial choice of wording to have titled Cherry’s letter as “Short vs Laore” since in my originating piece I did fully acknowledge Ms Laore’s call on the government to act on the recommendations of the TRC.

I met with Ms Laore when I presented my testimony to the TRC Commission in 2010 and I quite understand and respect her desire to see the release of the TRC Report and a resolution to the ongoing concerns of all those still awaiting personal healing and justice after the unjustified and tragic years of civil conflict provoked by a few but who yet escape the law for their criminal conduct.

My real concern was whether what Ms Laore was quoted as having said to a reporter of Radio New Zealand International relating to the final report of the TRC was, indeed, the official finding of the Commission or her own words.

Ms Laore is claimed to have said to the reporter, “The conclusion was that government had a responsibility to protect its citizens but it failed because we all know the police force was divided so the citizens were left on their own.”

I had said if indeed that was an accurate record of the conclusion of the TRC report, which I would need to see verified, then there are several matters that need to be clarified in order to set the record straight.

My references to what I wrote in my book ‘Policing a Clash of Cultures’ were not aimed at “defending police territorial ground,” as Cherry put it, but merely illustrating the truthful broken state of the RSIP in terms of manpower, resources, equipment and resources, after years of neglect by successive governments which essentially rendered the police service impotent in properly combating armed militancy without some support – and the kind of support that was rejected when Australia was requested to help.

In early 1999 until the eve of my departure in July that year, there was some division in the senior ranks of the RSIP who were split along ethnic lines but those differences would have been resolved, I was confident, if the kind of help I mentioned in my originating letter could had been forthcoming in March 1999 after Harold Keke and Joseph Sangu were unexpectedly and unwarrantedly released on bail only to evade capture and continue their armed rebellion from the distant safety of the Weathercoast.

The real “division” in the police ranks occurred after my departure when members of the police service united with armed members of the wider ethnic community and there was clearly at that time cause for concern over a “divided” police if that was the period Ms Laore was intending to refer to.

Cherry in her letter said, “However, just reading between the lines of their respective reflections, I somewhat concluded that Ms Laore might be miscalculated of her intended focus – delay for officially disclosing TRC report.”

I am inclined to agree that Ms Laore’s quest for the release and action on the long awaited TRC’s Report is a separate issue to what she reportedly said about the RSIP.

For the sake of the record, it would be helpful, however, to eventually learn if what Ms Laore said to the Radio New Zealand reporter was her own opinion or the official wording of the TRC Report.

Yours sincerely

FRANK SHORT