A rich person's security can be guaranteed, the same applies to a wealthy nation in which the economy is prospering and the citizens are enjoying economic prosperity.

Our state sovereignty is undermined when we allow foreigners to enter our country and develop our resources when we ourselves cannot because we do not have the human resources.

We can talk about security in terms of armoury and weapons but what about foreigners coming in and taking our jobs while locals are ignored; I consider that a basic security breach.

Knowledge is power. If we can educate our citizens well and provide better living and working conditions for our people then I do not see a problem in stepping up our security.

The security needs of a store cleaner are not high compared to the CEO of Telikom.

This century's security issues require high tech equipment which costs a lot of money.

If I was in power, I would rather spend money to create jobs for the jobless who are filling up space in their relatives' homes in towns, provide further education opportunities for young men who steal from our sisters and mothers, and protect young women who sell themselves to careless rich guys.

We need people who are more educated and more useful and valuable.

Thanks Bernard. I wish I could be in such position to influence change. I provide strategic directions where it can be pushed through at political level - the new government. Good critique from everyone.

Phil, very interesting comments. This is my understanding of what you and Paul are saying. Being idealistic is good but you can not depend on others to pick up your ideas and use it.

One has to put oneself in a position of authority so that one can put his or her ideas into action.

"The ball is in their court", this statement made by Francis could be interpreted in Pidgin as, "Mi tok tasol ol wokim or nogat em stap lo han blo ol". No wonder you made that last comment about all talk and no action, Phil.

There are many PNG elites who are in the category you are talking about, but the wind of change is blowing.

Elites like Dr Clement Waine is one such Papua New Guinean who wrote a book about Geopolitical realignment published in the USA. He is contesting the Simbu regional seat with the intention of inspiring change at the highest level.

Hope he wins.

Thank you Phil and Paul for the challenge. As the next generation of leaders we have to make sure that we play a fundamental part in influencing change in our country.

To begin that process the path of writing is the path we will walk on.

Francis, continue to write but not with the intention of writing for others to use the information you share. Not many leaders are open to such views because their reasons for going into politics are not centered on changing the nation.

However, write with the intention of improving your knowledge of PNG and where we are going in order to prepare yourself for the future leadership role that you will be playing.

I know when Francis returns, we will all sit together with Patrick and others to share our different point of views and ways of thinking.

Peter I agree with you. I did not mention specifically China, however I did make specific reference to use of soft power in terms of cultural diplomacy, it did use currently.

There are several elements that characterize middle power. I argue that we can adopt each from different countries where it is suitable within our context.

I don't think there is anything new being said in this article. There is nothing 'Chinese' about it. It is just being stated in a more academically eloquent way.

Quite a few PNG Attitude writers have made the same points, notably Martyn Namorong. Martyn also rails against the 'exploitative organizing principle where .... PNG will continue to depend on developed countries' for instance.

Other writers have also made the point that PNG has the wherewithal in terms of resources to do very well economically. People like Reg Renagi have highlighted the need to fix the garden fence. Others have pointed out the need for PNG to develop its human capital in terms of education.

I totally agree that PNG has the capacity to become a middling regional power, maybe even before 2050. I don't think there is any dispute about these things. What seems to be lacking, as Paul Oates has pointed out recently, is the willpower needed to accomplish these things.

I would be very interested in your view on this aspect Francis.

How do you re-direct the greed and avarice of the average corrupt PNG politician into this sort of positive mindset so that the smart people can get on with the job of making what you envision a reality?

I can see the Chinese are also teaching you well, Peter.

Francis says .."LNG disruption..is due to our weak defensive system"

If the economy is the "basic condition for national survival" and it depends on this LNG project being developed in an "uncontrolled area" with many fears for "security", do the Chinese teachers say that this "insecurity", which has the ability to spoil the economy, allows the government to bring in the military to secure the area for the developers?

The fact that PNG has been found to be so rich in minerals and oil and gas is probably going to create many huge problems like this in PNG over the coming years.

The developers from China and the USA and other countries will have their own priorities. Economic policies and strategic policies and military policies will come under great pressure.

How can the military show they "have a heart" for the people who have traditionally owned the land on which the LNG project will be built?

The NSW Government is bringing in ways that the local farm land-holders can be more involved in the process of granting exploration rights to coal-seam gas exploration in NSW.

It has a lot to do with checking that the aquifers are not spoilt by the processes they are using to look for the gas as it could have grave effects on future farming.

The future PNG government will have to work hard at ways of helping these people who live in the areas affected by the LNG development. We certainly don't want a repeat of what happened on Bougainville.

As a person who could possibly have some influence in the future on the Defence Force in PNG I was wondering if you had any good ideas.

I appreciate all your comments. But this is my theory. I respect your opinion.

A healthy economy is the required condition for ensuring national security. Poverty and weakness of the national economy are the biggest security threats, which are directly related to the rise and decline of a country and life and death of a nation. Without economic support, national defense development and buildup are like water without resource and a tree without roots.

Economy is the basic condition for national survival. It is the guarantee condition for social stability, social progress, national strength, national security, international influence and human security.
However, a healthy economy does require guaranteed security. Military (hard power) is that guarantor.

Strength is different from capability in that being strong does not mean having the capability; capability is the application of strength, reflecting the government’s will and art of using strength.

Each and every country will define their respective national interests and the appropriate elements of national power (ie; military, industry, demography, politics, diplomacy, economy, etc) to secure those interests depending on its prevailing and foreseeable national conditions.

If a perceived threat to a nation is considered to be of military nature, then no doubt the military element of national power would be ticked off as a certainty. The prioritizing of the military and economy would then be viewed simultaneously because one would depend on the other.

And, yes Francis, I do agree that our government (past & present) have accorded little attention to the capability and capacity building of the PNGDF in view of our increasing population, growing economy and the diversified nature of threats PNG is faced with and likely to face in future.

There are lessons we could take from China, however, as my former teacher Barbara suggested, perhaps we should look at other smaller countries as well to see how they have managed their situations which could be more applicable and appropriate for our adoption. Botswana would be one such country I would propose.

Whether it’s the application of hard power (military), soft power (diplomacy) or smart Power (recently instituted by Hillary Clinton), it should be the security, survival and prosperity of a state and its subjects that should remain the ultimate end state for any government.