A group of Pacific Islands Forum Leaders at the Bishop Museum Atherton Halau for the Strategic Planning Meeting of the Pacific Islands Development Program (PIDP) ahead of the US–Pacific Investment Summit in Honolulu, Hawaiʻi. 23 February 2026
Photo: Pacific Islands Forum
Analysis: Pacific nations received their first major “America First” treatment in the sunny metropolis of Honolulu.
Called the “Pacific Agenda” and branded as a “Investment, Security, and Shared Prosperity Summit”, the gathering marked the Trump administration’s first major political engagement with the region.
The event was hosted jointly by the think-tank East-West Centre and US Deputy Secretary of State Christopher Landau, with participation from the US military’s Indo-Pacific Command (INDOPACOM).
On the Pacific side, attendants included the leaders of the Solomon Islands, Cook Islands, Palau and Tonga, and senior ministers from PNG, Vanuatu and Fiji.
Experts said the forum highlighted the US’s commercial and economic ambitions.
New Zealand academic Al Gillespie said the forum shows that Washington remains willing to support island nations, so long as commercial opportunities were abound.
“What you’ve seen of late is America backing away from all of that development assistance … but on the other hand have now said ‘let’s talk about investment and see what comes out of it,” he said.
Al Gillespie
Photo: Wayne Mead
The first year of Trump’s second-term marked a fundamental change in foreign policy doctrine since the change in administration. The by-products of this included cuts to development assistance through the USAID programme, institutional withdrawal from the likes of the Secretariat of the Pacific Regional Environment Programme (SPREP) and several United Nations agencies.
The US State Department has also laid off hundreds of staff, and Pacific ambassadors have been recalled, and are yet to be replaced.
Given the complexity of issues facing the Pacific region, a need for stability and security is paramount, which may pressure them to make more concessions in return for such a guarantee from the US.
The summit, in providing facetime with US officials and diplomats, could be a chance for the US to gauge what its Pacific Island “partners” want.
Landau heads out
Following the summit, US Deputy Secretary of State Christopher Landau is set to visit Fiji, Samoa and Tonga.
“During his trip, he will highlight commercial initiatives and reaffirm the strong and enduring ties between the United States and Pacific island nations, including through meetings with traditional leaders,” the State Department said.
One item on Landau’s schedule will be a “bilateral agreement” signing with Tonga on Friday. It comes two months after a near-complete travel ban on Tongan passport holders came into force.
US Deputy Secretary of State Christopher Landau.
Photo: SAUL LOEB
Though Tongan descendants make up a fraction of the US immigrant population (less than 0.3 percent of foreign-born Americans), the Trump Administration has dwelt on a number of “security” concerns with Tongan migration, including visa overstay rates and criminal activity.
Tonga’s Prime Minister Lord Fakafanua has said on several occasions that he has engaged with the US on working their way out of the ban, and within days of its effect, had spoken with Deputy Secretary Landau over the phone.
“This is something that is front of mind of the government,” he told Pacific Waves earlier this month.
“A lot of those issues are being worked on right now, some of them have already been overcome, and in terms of the requirements… we are in a willing position to work through a lot of those issues.”
Gillespie said that the overall approach being taken by the US could be putting the region on the backfoot.
“I’m not sure that this will be a good exchange for the Pacific,” he said.
The US-Tonga agreement is set to be signed on Friday.
Deep-sea mining deal with Cook Islands underway
But if Tonga’s negotiations highlights the security dimension of Washington’s Pacific engagement, the Cook Islands agreement underscores its commercial focus.
Two weeks before the summit, the US and the Cook Islands reached an agreement on a “Strategic Framework for Critical Minerals Research and Supply Chain Security” on 5 February, signed in Rarotonga.
Engagement on the deal had been ongoing since August last year, after an approach by the Cook Islands to explore a deep-sea mining partnership.
Under the non-legally binding agreement, both sides will work together to scout potential locations, and start initial negotiations with investors and contractors, under a non-legally binding “US-Cook Islands Working Group”.
“The Framework supports structured engagement with US public and private sector partners across finance, technology, and downstream markets, without pre-committing the Cook Islands to any specific project,” it read.
However, some civil society groups have raised concerns about transparency.
Adam Wolfenden, deputy coordinator at the Pacific Network on Globalisation, told RNZ Pacific civil society organisations are deeply concerned about implications for the Cook’s sovereignty.
Adam Wolfenden
Photo: PANG
“This creation of a working group between the US and the Cooks lacks a lot of information about its transparency, and about what the accountability processes would be,” he said.
“When you have a power like the US in discussion, and with the leverage that it has with the Cook Islands, it creates this avenue whilst the Cooks are still, just deciding and evaluating.”
Notably, the agreement is not legally binding, does not constitute a mining license for any entity, and does not affect Cook Islands law.
But a proclamation issued by the White House in January, which outlines a perceived “national security threat” of imported critical minerals, suggests the US may lean on their new partners.
The executive order directs the US Secretary of Commerce to pursue agreements with other countries “to address the threatened impairment of the national security” with respect to those minerals.
“The Secretary also suggested that it may be appropriate to impose import restrictions, such as tariffs, if satisfactory agreements are not reached in a timely manner,” the EO says..
Wolfenden said it gives the US a very strong position to influence decisions within the Cooks.
“So on the one hand it’s non-binding, but the bigger power in the relationship is saying we will enforce it regardless of whether or not (the Cooks) want to.”
When asked if New Zealand had been consulted on the deal, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade (MFAT) told RNZ Pacific that they “have had useful discussions about our respective approaches to critical minerals”.