Foreign policy experts, students and diplomats have been mulling over how best to handle Fiji.
The approaches discussed at Otago University's annual Foreign Policy School ranged from crude horse-trading to long-term strategic planning.
As Sally Round reports, there was no right answer, but plenty of debate.
Fiji's first coup leader Sitiveni Rabuka used the military dictionary to describe contrasting foreign policy towards Fiji before and after the latest coup.
SITIVENI RABUKA: When you look at the actions of Australia and New Zealand and some other former friends we had and you look at what China is doing, who is being tactical, who is being strategic?
The Australian High Commissioner in New Zealand, Michael Potts, agreed Canberra, for one, has taken a tactical approach.
MICHAEL POTTS: Australian voters feel quite strongly about the events in Fiji over three decades. So our government naturally feels responsive, I think, to that view, as well. The Chinese, of course, have the advantage of not having general elections every five years. And so they can take a much longer, and in many ways, a much more sophisticated world view.
But Michael Potts says Australia has not turned its back on Fiji.
MICHAEL POTTS: It is very clear we have walked away from the Fiji military. But the notion that we're walking away from the people of Fiji I think is misplaced. Despite the size of Chinese assistance, Australia is still the largest donor in Fiji. We run close to AUD$40 million a year.
But Sitiveni Rabuka described a strong defence relationship as essential.
SITIVENI RABUKA: Breaking the military link is the worst break because you have lost that contact between offices that you could fall back on when diplomacy fails.
Long-time Fiji-watcher Jon Fraenkel of Wellington's Victoria University says much of the debate around foreign policy towards Fiji has centred on theories of crude tit-for-tat horse trading. He says other countries' foreign policies are not the key driver of events in Fiji. But he suggests a foreign policy aimed at promoting democracy should be carefully calibrated. It is often the gradual and indirect approach, he says, which has more influence.
JON FRAENKEL: And often if you look at the experience in Africa, Asia and Latin America, what's been important is not the sort of direct one-to-one diplomatic challenge, but rather a longer-term filtering upwards of ideas about the connection between legitimacy, popular control and democracy.
The Director of the Centre for Pacific Island Studies at the University of Hawaii, Terence Wesley-Smith, says many assumptions are made about China's presence in and policy towards Fiji without a lot of research. He says he has yet to find back-up for assertions that China is somehow singling out Fiji for soft loans or bankrolling the regime leader Commodore Frank Bainimarama.
TERENCE WESLEY-SMITH: If there's a sin associated with China in Fiji, it's a sin of omission, meaning that they're really not doing anything differently. They have continued their relationship with Fiji where others have pulled back from that relationship.
A China foreign policy scholar from Canterbury University, Anne-Marie Brady, had this report from the Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs on its policy towards Fiji.
ANNE-MARIE BRADY: The Ministry of Foreign Affairs said to me, 'China does not interfere in the politics of other countries. China's support of the Bainimarama government is not interference. It's up to the Fijian people to decide who leads them. If Fiji can maintain political stability it would be good for the region. China wants New Zealand and Australia to understand Fiji's point of view'.
Anne-Marie Brady reported China does not want Australia and New Zealand to use extreme methods to criticise Fiji. Ernest Bower of the Washington-based think-tank the Centre for Strategic and International Studies says the US could be more effective in Fiji, but it doesn't know how.
ERNEST BOWER: I think the United States wants to get it right. They will always stand on the side of democracy, where there's a coup or where there's a clear violation of democratic values. There's not question where the Americans stand on that. We want to see an election, a free and fair election. I think the question is more at a practical policy level - how can you be effective in encouraging that outcome?
Ernest Bower described US policy towards Fiji as a 'work in progress'.