Independence for a nuclear-free Pacific

The major mobilisations in Tahiti in recent months have repeatedly stressed the links between the Maohi people's struggle for independence and the struggle for a nuclear-free world. It's obvious that if the Chirac government didn't have the option of testing its nuclear warheads in the Pacific, the anti-nuclear movement would be in a much stronger position worldwide.
Neither the Keating nor the Howard "Laborials" support the independence struggles. Both parties have bent over backwards in recent months to reassure Chirac that they will continue to support France's occupation of its colonies in Polynesia and Melanesia.
Their position stems from the fact that Australia, like France, the US and New Zealand, has military and economic interests in maintaining the region's status quo. A win for the independence movement in Tahiti or Kanaky would upset the colonial and neo-colonial powers' relatively cosy arrangement to divide up the spoils between them.
An independent Kanaky, with almost a third of the world's known nickel reserves, would be a big loss for France. And while Tahiti's main industries are nuclear- and tourism-related, the French government's 7 million square kilometres exclusive economic zone in the Pacific Ocean promises boundless riches.
Contrary to the tourist brochures, Papeete today is overcrowded and surrounded by slums. One third of the population is without work. This, and the poisoning of the environment and people from radionuclides, is the real legacy of French colonialism.
Contrary to some reports, the Tahitian independence movement was born in the last century. While it has gained momentum over the last two decades with new, more militant independence groups such as Oscar Temaru's Tavini Huiraatira (Polynesian Liberation Front) playing a leading role, the struggle for independence has always been a central political question for the majority of Tahitians who have not benefited from the French occupation.
Why doesn't the Australian government take a clear stand in support of independence for Tahiti and Kanaky? Because, as a neo-colonial power, it wants to protect the profits of Australian capitalists, who now have significant investments in the region.

A half of all the profits generated from Australian companies overseas in 1994 — $1.2 billion — came from Oceania. Australia exports five times more — mainly manufactured and processed foodstuffs — to the region than it imports — primarily minerals and raw materials. In 1994, approximately $500 million in profits came from Fiji and PNG alone.
To ensure this type of profit flow continues, the Australian government is keen to maintain its ANZUS military partnership with the US, the other major colonial power in the Pacific. Hosting US military bases and allowing nuclear-powered warships to dock in our ports make Australia a strategic part of the colonial domination of the region.
The Chirac government has made it clear it will not leave Tahiti voluntarily. The anti-nuclear movement must therefore keep the pressure on the Australian government to support the demand that the French government hand over political and economic power to the Maohi people.
This, in the end, is the only way to achieve a nuclear-free Pacific.