Federated States of Micronesia Clement Yow Mulalap (bio) The period covered by this review was one of reckoning for the long-term sustainability of the Federated States of Micronesia (FSM) as a political and economic entity. The FSM engaged in a renewed effort to stimulate economic development, appreciate the fragile natural ecosystems long enjoyed and safeguarded by the people of the FSM, and reexamine the desirability of what is perhaps the country’s most consequential bilateral relationship. As the scheduled termination of the major financial provisions of the amended Compact of Free Association (cofa) between the FSM and the United States nears, the FSM’s national and state governments—as well as the general populaces they serve—grappled with the purpose, promise, and predicaments of the federation and strove, in various ways, to establish a solid foundation for a federation that would be independent in truth as well as in law. From the outset of his administration, FSM President Peter M Christian exhibited a clear-eyed appreciation of the federation’s challenges and shortcomings. During the joint inauguration ceremony on 10 July 2015 for President Christian, Vice President Yosiwo P George, and the members of the Nineteenth Congress of the Federated States of Micronesia, the president delivered an inaugural address that blamed many of the federation’s problems on “the intricacies of tiered governments where there are Municipal, State, and National jurisdictions all vying to serve the same constituents, but often tripping over each other because of unclear delineation of powers, coupled with political ambitions of three levels of legislative bodies.” He also noted that the FSM was beset by difficulties stemming from “levels of disagreement between our country and other countries and international organizations whose interests in our affairs are not always compatible with our own.” Christian warned his audience that, in the federation’s long march toward self-government, “one significant road block that stands out for us is our inability to yet wean ourselves from paternal relationships” (fsmpio 2015). President Christian’s remarks carried particular resonance in light of the attendees at the joint inauguration ceremony, including dignitaries from the United States, Australia, Japan, and the People’s Republic of China as well as representatives from a number of regional and international organizations with long-standing financial and technical programs of assistance for the FSM (Yap Congressional Delegation Office 2015a). Notwithstanding such dire sentiments, the president [End Page 94] devoted much of his inaugural address to exhorting the people and governments of the FSM to work together “to achieve our nation’s goal: to give every citizen of the FSM an opportunity—not just a promise—but a real opportunity to build a better life” (fsmpio 2015). In its first full year in office, the Christian administration led the FSM in an effort to achieve that goal, with varying degrees of success. Financial grant assistance and visa-free entry and residency privileges in the United States are arguably the main benefits that the FSM receives under the amended compact, but in the period under review, those components generated the greatest friction between the FSM and the United States. During the annual meeting of the Joint Economic Management Committee (jemco) on 1 September 2015, the United States majority on the committee made cuts of millions of dollars to FSM requests for grant assistance in support of public-sector capacity building, private-sector development, and infrastructure development, including disapproving $50 million for infrastructure development (fsmis, 21 Sept 2015). jemco’s cuts were not unprecedented, joining a long history of aggressively questioning and reducing grant requests from the FSM, including suspending the bulk of infrastructure grant funding since 2012. The FSM representatives nevertheless sharply criticized the committee’s actions, noting that infrastructure development was key to achieving the dual objectives of “economic sustainability and budgetary self-reliance” under the compact. The US representatives did not relent, arguing instead that the United States could not release the bulk of the requested infrastructure funding until the FSM produced an updated national Infrastructure Development Plan. The FSM eventually completed and submitted its plan (for fiscal years 2016–2025) to jemco in early October 2015, after years of consultations and crafting (fsmis, 22 Oct...
Read full abstract
Jul 25, 2019
Jodie Curth‐Bibb 
Open Access