Skip to main content
Advanced search
The Point - home
DonateSubscribe
HomeWhat's NewOpinionOff the ChartsExplainersFactcheckAbout Us
The Point — home
DonateSubscribe
The Point — home
Advanced search
  • Home
  • What's New
  • Opinion
  • Off the Charts
  • Explainers
  • Factcheck
  • About Us
DonateSubscribe
Subscribe
  • Home
  • What's New
  • Opinion
  • Off the Charts
  • Explainers
  • Factcheck
  • About Us
The Point - home
Privacy PolicySitemapComplaints & CorrectionsNewsletter

The Point recognises the ancestral connections and custodianship of Traditional Owners throughout Australia. We pay respect to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander cultures and to Elders past and present.

©2025–2026 The Point, an initiative of The Australia Institute

OPINION

The Pacific needs more than words from Australia

While Australia itself experiences climate impacts, and says the right words, it is increasingly clear that there is a contradiction between what Australia says about the Pacific and what it does. It is an unavoidable truth that Australia is one of the world's biggest exporters of the very thing that is drowning our islands: fossil fuels.

Vishal Prasad

Vishal Prasad

Tue 23 Jun 2026 11.23 AEST

Climate
The Pacific needs more than words from Australia

Photo: AAP Image/Joel Carrett

‘The Pacific is family’ is a truth we hold close. We are wantok, vuvale, drawn together not just by geography but by culture, and by a shared understanding of a world that is not only interconnected but dependent on the health of the vast oceans and seas that connect us.

When we extend our Pacific family to include Australia, we find a family member that dwarfs the rest of us, with an economy and population many times larger. Our links with Australia matter for our economies, our social services, and for the ongoing connections between the Pasifika diaspora and their home communities.

But there is something that is hitting our family hard, and it is getting harder and harder to excuse the actions of one of our family members. It’s no secret that climate change is already reshaping life in the Pacific. Rising seas are taking our coastlines, saltwater is creeping into our gardens and wells, and stronger cyclones tear through our homes and crops. This is our land, our food and our culture, and we are losing it through no fault of our own.

While Australia itself experiences climate impacts, and says the right words, it is increasingly clear that there is a contradiction between what Australia says about the Pacific and what it does. It is an unavoidable truth that Australia is one of the world’s biggest exporters of the very thing that is drowning our islands: fossil fuels.

Australia can rightly be proud of the work it is doing to move to clean, green, renewable energy, and it is helping the Pacific make that shift too, something we are in greater and greater need of. But electrification and renewables are only half of the equation. Ending fossil fuels is the other, and it is the half the Australian Government seems unwilling to commit to beyond words. Australia attended the talks in Colombia about transitioning away from fossil fuels, but seems to have no plan to end new coal and gas. The words are there, and perhaps even the intent. The action isn’t. Either you are with us in our vaka seeking global climate justice, or you are not.

This one-foot-in-the-canoe approach was on display in the recent UN General Assembly vote to endorse the International Court of Justice opinion on climate change. Australia voted yes, but would not join the extensive list of cosponsors; among Pacific nations, only it and New Zealand stayed off. And while it said it was “pleased to have worked closely and constructively with Pacific countries throughout the negotiation process,” it took care to note that its support “should not be interpreted as our agreement with every element of the advisory opinion.”

It is this picking-and-choosing approach that concerns us, and it needs to change.

This year, Australia holds an important global role. COP31 will be hosted by Turkey in Antalya, but Australia is President of Negotiations, presiding over the talks, with the Pacific hosting a pre-COP in Fiji and Tuvalu to bring the world’s attention to our region. It is a promise to elevate Pacific priorities to stop the climate crisis. That means leading the negotiations with a focus on holding the line on 1.5, unlocking public finance that doesn’t push us into debt for dealing with a crisis we didn’t cause, and guiding the world to a roadmap without fossil fuels.

We are not naive. We know there are competing forces in Australia, in business and even within the Government itself. But if 2026, the year of climate action in which the Pacific has been promised a special role, isn’t the year we turn the corner on the climate crisis, when can it be?

Our position is not unachievable, nor is it unreasonable. It is built on our lived experience and on international law. The world’s highest court has confirmed that states bear responsibility for the harm their emissions cause. That includes Australia. We are not asking for charity, but for consistency, and for Australia to act with leadership and integrity and earn its place in our family with the courage to stop fuelling the crisis that threatens us.

Vishal Prasad is the Director of Pacific Island Students Fighting Climate Change (PISFCC). Vishal is from Fiji and has been part of the International Court of Justice Climate Advisory Opinion campaign for more than 4 years, helping guide it from the classrooms of Vanuatu to the Hague and New York.

Advertisement

Related Articles

OPINION

Who gets to decide what a 'realistic' energy transition is?

By Ray Wills & Peter Newman

There is a difference between what Australia should do and what our most influential businesses would prefer we don’t do. Our energy debate too often blurs the two by insisting on being ‘realistic’.

ClimateEconomy
Who gets to decide what a 'realistic' energy transition is?

WHAT'S NEW

Troubled waters: Woodside’s Scott Reef plans spark fresh fears

By Tegan George

Woodside Energy is pushing ahead with plans for underwater surveys at Scott Reef, more than two years after Western Australia’s environmental watchdog raised serious concerns about irreversible damage from its proposed Browse gas development.

Climate
Troubled waters: Woodside’s Scott Reef plans spark fresh fears

OPINION

ASIC is finally opening Big Oil & Gas’ books. Here’s why that’s a very big deal

By Amanda Holly

For the first time, the corporate regulator is checking whether these companies are telling the truth about what it will cost to remove the wells, pipelines and platforms they have left scattered across Australia’s seafloor. It is the most significant intervention into the sector’s clean-up accounting this country has seen, and it could rewrite the balance sheets of some of our biggest fossil fuel companies.

Climate
ASIC is finally opening Big Oil & Gas’ books. Here’s why that’s a very big deal

OPINION

Browse keeps changing its story

By Alex Hillman

In the past year, the new Browse gas project at Scott Reef has been pitched as the answer to a West Australian gas shortfall and as backfill for the ageing North West Shelf. Yet more than 50 years after discovery, and after $2.5 billion in development costs, it still hasn’t reached a final investment decision or FID, as it’s called. That usually says something about a project’s viability.

Climate
Browse keeps changing its story