Pacific Islands Forum opens amid absentee leaders and China tensions

The Pacific Islands Forum leaders’ meeting has begun in Palau, but the gathering is already mired in controversy. Several heads of government are not attending, and Beijing has voiced strong anger over Taiwan’s separate delegation — a development that has added geopolitical friction to an agenda meant to focus on regional priorities.

Five of the forum’s 18 members — Kiribati, Fiji, Vanuatu, Samoa and the Solomon Islands — are absent. Their non-attendance has prompted speculation about outside influence, with New Zealand’s foreign minister describing the coordinated absences as “highly suspicious.” While some absences are explained by domestic pressures — for example, the Solomon Islands’ prime minister returned home to face a no-confidence motion — the timing has raised questions about whether Beijing’s displeasure over Taiwan’s presence played a role.

The leaders’ meeting is the region’s premier diplomatic forum, designed to advance a collective Pacific agenda and manage shared challenges through the consensus-driven “Pacific way.” That approach emphasizes unity and culturally grounded diplomacy, and the absence of multiple leaders undermines the forum’s authority at a moment when coordinated action is most needed.

Geopolitics lies at the heart of the current tensions. China’s growing activity across the Pacific — from high-profile infrastructure investments to security agreements — has pushed Canberra, Wellington and Pacific capitals into new diplomatic manoeuvres. China has used aid and large-scale projects to cultivate influence, often directly benefitting political elites. Australia responded over the past decade with intensified engagement, aid and standards-driven infrastructure programs aimed at countering that influence while emphasising governance, education and health.

Security concerns have widened the contest. Beijing’s 2022 security arrangement with the Solomon Islands fuelled alarm in Canberra and other capitals. Rumours about a potential Chinese military presence in places like Vanuatu prompted high-profile rebuttals and active diplomacy from Australia. In response to shifting dynamics, Australia has concluded bilateral security agreements with several Pacific states in recent years — Tuvalu (2023), Nauru (2024), Papua New Guinea (2025), and both Vanuatu and Fiji in 2026 — a pattern that some see as moving away from a multilateral Pacific approach.

The competition has not been limited to diplomacy and aid. During a recent regional treaty signing, a Chinese intercontinental ballistic missile test that landed in Pacific waters further unsettled leaders, underscoring how global military developments can ripple into island-state security perceptions.

China’s insistence on contesting recognition of Taiwan is another key driver. Palau remains one of the few Pacific states that formally recognises Taipei, and China’s public warnings about consequences for Taiwan’s delegation have heightened tensions at the Forum.

Yet the substance of the Forum’s agenda — economic resilience, climate adaptation, recovery from Covid disruptions and supply-chain shocks exacerbated by broader conflicts — remains pressing. Pacific economies have faced tightened budgets and ongoing socio-economic strain; coordinated regional responses are essential to address climate change, sea-level rise and the shift to renewables, as well as to deliver basic services and development priorities.

The Forum Secretariat in Suva plays a central role in steadying routine diplomacy, but its influence depends on unified backing from island leaders. Without that cohesion, initiatives such as the Blue Pacific strategy and partnerships like the Ocean of Peace Alliance risk losing momentum.

Engaging major powers can bring benefits to Pacific states, but the current stand-off risks distracting leaders from immediate domestic and regional needs. For the Forum to advance a Pacific-led agenda — rather than becoming a theatre for great-power rivalry — participants will need to rebuild trust, keep the region’s priorities front and centre, and resist having external competitions dictate attendance and outcomes.

By Michael O’Keefe, director, Master of International Relations, Department of Politics, Media and Philosophy, La Trobe University.