With the start of the recent national elections in Papua New Guinea, two
new provinces were added to the country: the Hela Province and the Jiwaka
Province. These two provinces were not formed by the addition of new territory
to the country (as one perhaps could say about the addition of Alaska and
Hawaii as States of the USA). They were formed by dividing two existing
provinces: Hela was divided from the Southern Highlands and Jiwaka was divided
from the Western Highlands. Since this is an accomplished fact, I don’t wish to
evaluate the pro’s and con’s of what has already happened. Here in the Diocese
of Mendi, we look forward to working closely with the leaders of the new Hela
Province, and we share in the sense of hope and expectation of the people of
Hela.
Papua New Guinea is a beautifully diverse country that is made
up of hundreds of different cultures. Often it is said that there are almost
800 languages representing almost the same number of cultural groups of people.
One of the greatest challenges over the past years since PNG won its
independence in 1975 is the matter of how to form one country out of the
multitude of tribes, clans and language groups.
One of the first major challenges to this vision was the
terrible crisis in Bougainville. As a result of this bloody conflict,
Bougainville is now an Autonomous Region which some believe may eventually end
up as a country independent of PNG. Apart from such an extreme situation, one
might ask the question, is it good for the country that each year, more and
more provinces would be formed by division?
One could imagine many other groups in the country asking the
question: If it is good for Jiwaka and Hela to become their own provinces, why
not us? Where would such a division begin doing real harm to the country? In a
country of over 700 language groups, (most admittedly too small to be
politically independent), when would the national government have to draw the
line and say, “No more divisions”?
Politics is a part of the reality of human beings as social
creatures. Perhaps we could generalize and say that politics is most-often
motivated by self-interest. What makes politics good or bad from a human point
of view is how broadly or narrowly the “self” is understood. Politics at its
best seeks to serve the common good; that is, it understands “self” in terms of
the entire community. Politics at its worst defines “self” in a very narrow
way, so as to mean, my group, my friends, my interests or, even simply “me” the
politician. It takes courageous leadership to help everyone in the political
community (which includes all of us) to broaden the concept of “self” that we
are interested in. (Of course, we must
always guard the dignity and unalienable rights of every individual and not
just consider them as parts of some overarching collective.)
A country whose people cannot see beyond narrowly conceived
self-interest to the promotion of the common good of all will never gain the
strength and vision required to develop to its full potential. “A house divided
against itself shall not stand” (cf. Mk 3: 25). It is not the place of
leadership to impose a vision of the “self” but rather, in the lively discourse
of pluralistic democracy, to help people freely grasp a wider, more inclusive
view.
I believe the Church has an important role to play in this lively
discourse. In its recent Pastoral Letter on Communion, the Catholic Bishops’
Conference of PNG/SI proposes a movement toward communion as a response to many
of the challenges faced by PNG society today. A commitment to communion can
invite people beyond alienation experienced by so many people today –
especially the young - to a real experience of belonging. The dynamism of the
church, inspired by the example of Jesus and made possible by the Holy Spirit
is toward “com-union”, that is, “being one with” others (and ultimately with
God). This oneness, this solidarity is the foundation of any authentic community.
This dynamism toward unity begins with individual persons but can extend to
wider communities and even nations.
I was walking through a pharmacy in Boroko recently and picked up a rubber
wristband like the ones which many young people are wearing these days. This one
had the flag of Papua New Guinea on it and the words: “One tribe, one kantri”. The
dream of the Founders of PNG was to form one, independent country. They strove
to forge a real unity out of the wonderful diversity in language and culture. The
strength of the people of Papua New Guinea in the future will very much depend on
the unity that all are able to bring about within the wonderful diversity which
exists. The beauty, strength, values of each language group and culture in PNG
can enrich and strengthen the one people, the one tribe, the one nation that is
developing into the one country of Papua New Guinea.
(An article I wrote which was published by The Catholic Reporter in September 2012 in honor of PNG Independence Day - with some minor changes.)
