A Call for Regional Solidarity: Restoring Balance in Papua New Guinea’s Political Landscape

By PETER KOMBEAKALI

The concentration of political power in Papua New Guinea’s upper highlands provinces Enga, Southern Highlands, Hela, and Western Highlands has deep cultural roots. Without a coordinated response from the Momase, Southern, and New Guinea Islands (NGI) regions, this pattern is likely to continue.

In traditional highlands societies, leadership was not conferred by election or formal appointment. It was achieved through personal ability, demonstrated influence, and the accumulation of wealth and social capital. Status was measured by the size of a man’s pig herds, his possession of traditional valuables such as shell money, and the extent of his marital alliances. A paramount leader would typically rise within a clan, but the position was rarely secure. Rival leaders inside the clan or from neighbouring groups engaged in constant, often discreet competition while maintaining a public face of cooperation. Influence itself was the ultimate prize. This worldview in which power and status are tightly intertwined has not disappeared with modernisation. It continues to shape the behaviour of many contemporary political leaders from these provinces.

For leaders steeped in this tradition, relinquishing power is not a routine political transition; it represents a profound loss of identity and standing. This helps explain the intense determination with which some upper highlands politicians defend their positions, often placing the retention of influence above other considerations, including institutional norms or broader national interests.

This dynamic has been visible in recent national elections. The People’s National Congress (PNC), under Peter O’Neill, won 27 seats in 2012 and increased that number to 29 in 2017. Following the 2022 Vote of No Confidence, the Pangu Party secured more than 40 seats. These successive strong results by parties closely associated with upper highlands leadership have generated widespread discussion about the role of financial resources, organisational machinery, and patronage networks in determining electoral outcomes.

When Peter O’Neill left the prime ministership, the position passed to another leader from the upper highlands rather than to a coastal MP. While some politicians from Momase, Southern, and NGI regions have sought to operate within established institutional frameworks, others have demonstrated a greater willingness to mobilise substantial resources to secure and maintain power. The perception that these methods have become systematic has deepened public concern about accountability and the fairness of the electoral process.

The central question is how Papua New Guinea can break this cycle and move toward more balanced and accountable governance. In my assessment, the most realistic path lies with the people of the Momase, Southern, and NGI regions.

I am calling for these three regions to develop a unified political strategy ahead of the 2027 National General Elections. This does not require hostility toward any group of citizens. It requires discipline: a deliberate decision to withhold support from parties and candidates whose primary base and operating style reinforce the current imbalance, and instead to back platforms and leaders committed to transparency, institutional integrity, and genuinely national development.

Morobe Province has already shown what is possible. In 2017, under the late Honourable Sam Basil, the province spoke with a single voice and returned Pangu candidates in every district. Other provinces in Momase, Southern, and NGI possess the same capacity. What is needed is the political will to act in concert.

Some will characterise this proposal as divisive regionalism. That criticism misses the point. When one region’s political actors appear to dominate national institutions at the expense of balanced representation and long-term national progress, other regions have both the right and the responsibility to organise in response. Papua New Guinea remains one country. Organising to restore equilibrium is not an attack on national unity; it is a defence of it.

As a man from the highlands, I make this argument from direct familiarity with the culture and politics I am describing. I do so because I believe in good governance, integrity, and the principle that power should serve the nation rather than entrench itself indefinitely.

If the Momase, Southern, and NGI regions do not develop a coherent strategy before 2027, the current trajectory will almost certainly continue. The consequences for transparency, accountability, and equitable development over the next generation would be significant.

The choice is straightforward. Either these three regions find the discipline to act together now, or they accept that the existing pattern of political dominance will shape Papua New Guinea’s future for decades to come. There is no third option that delivers meaningful change.