Analysts say PNG would have to be in ruins before politicians in the corruption-ridden nation of 5 million agreed to allow Australia to intervene directly in its affairs.

While Australia's impending intervention in the Solomon Islands sends a stern warning to PNG, Australia would need an entirely different approach to resuscitate its former colony.

PNG political analyst Professor James Chin said many Papua New Guineans would view Australian intervention as "re-colonisation".

"As long as the PNG parliament is functioning, I don't think they'll ever issue an invitation to the Australian government," said Dr Chin.

"The prerequisite for Australian intervention would be the collapse of Waigani (the PNG government), just like in Honiara."

Many Papua New Guineans already feel that their country is being dictated to by foreign aid donors - the largest of which is Australia.

This point was brought home again when prominent PNG politician Peter Ipitas asked parliament whether Australia was now the "second government" of PNG.

Even if PNG did ask for Australian intervention, a military strategy would be impossible, said Dr Chin.

PNG, which has ten times the population of the Solomons, is made up of more than 800 tribes scattered across extremely rugged terrain.

In a recent supplementary election it took more than 2,000 PNG soldiers and police to keep the peace in just one of PNG's 19 provinces.

"Australia will intervene here, but not militarily. The Australian military know it is not possible for them to come up here - the terrain is too rough," said Dr Chin.

"The only way Australia can get around this is if it's not Australian troops leading it, therefore either the Pacific Islands Forum or the UN."

Without PNG, the Pacific Forum would be almost impotent, said Dr Chin. And the UN would be reluctant to get involved.

"PNG does not rate on the UN radar," said Dr Chin.

"Traditionally, the Americans and British see PNG as part of the Australian sphere of influence."

Dr Chin said the attitude of the UN and the Americans would be: "This is Australia's backyard - you've got to clean up your mess."

The United States keeps an extremely low profile in PNG, leaving domestic affairs largely in the hands of the Australians.

Dr Chin said Australia would use the Solomons as an example to other troubled Pacific nations such as PNG.

"Australia is now playing the 'meanie policeman' role in the South Pacific," said Dr Chin.

This is a flawed analysis of a situation that uniquely exists in Solomon Islands. The good professor is only attempting to reinforce the notion of Australia acting as Uncle Sam’s deputy sheriff in this part of the world. The events that led to the current situations in Solomon Islands are unique to that country and can not be extrapolated to PNG. Australia is already a de facto government in PNG with a budget of over K700 million to run. (Ipatas calls it the “second government”). With that amount of money at their disposal they would only fail in their responsibility if PNG degenerate into anarchy. Importantly, PNG does not have all the hallmarks of a failed state, although, few, including the good professor, would like us to believe otherwise. PNG has a robust legal system, a free press and a functioning government. PNG does not have a strong military or police force to bring about coups that will destabilize the country. PNG has the resources and the diversity to function as an independent country as it does for almost 30 years. Stability in PNG is vital for Australia's internal security. Australia is usurping the powers of the UN to “invade” Solomon Islands under the pretext of a SP joint force by conveniently drafting laws that are adopted by Solomon’s government. Such will not happen in PNG because people there are more dignified to be dealt with this way. The recourse will be a UN mandate for Australian “intervention” BUT (and a big BUT here!) is always an unlikely scenario to contemplate.