When looking a little closer at the details of the situation in Fiji, I have more decidedly mixed feelings than I did before.
On the one hand I dislike the spectre of an elite, especially a millitary elite, threatening to intervene, via coup if necessary, to overturn the policies of a democratically elected government. In theory this is a supportable action; in many democracies members of the armed services will swear allegiance to a particular set of pricniples and/or an apolitical head of state, with the idea that (say) upholding the constitution takes precedence over doing the bidding of a government that violates it.
In practise this rarely ends happily, however. Armed coups tend to look more like the Spanish Civil War, the murderous regime of the Shah of Iran, or the disgusting Pinochet junta as a best case scenario; at worst they tend to dissolve into the multi-generational civil wars these days most commonly associated with central Africa.
There are exceptions, of course. The Turkish millitary has, since Kemal Ataturk, acted as a guarantor of an ongoing secular democracy in Turkey; without timely sabre-rattling it seems likely that Turkey would have crept toward a religious state over the years. It seems unlikely this would have been a benefit for many Turks, starting with the women and non-Muslims. (Of course, without sabre-rattling from the army the Turkish Kurds might have been dealt with via more jaw-jaw and less war-war).
Which brings me, in a roundabout way, back to Fiji. The first Rabuka coup of 1987 was a coup in favour of racism: it was not universally condemed as such because it was brown people oppressing other brown people, something which causes many anti-racists to fall strangely quiet (and many brown Pacific anti-racists to suddenly decide racism is a good thing when practised by Melanesian). It was based on theories of Indian wealth-hoarding and skullduggery that could have been copied from any standard European or North American anti-Semitic tract.
This sabre-rattling, on the other hand, is the precise opposite: the millitary is standing up for the non-Melanesian portion of the country against a government that wants race-based controls over who may own and administer land, special race-based courts, and allegations of disenfranchisement. All of these seem like profound concerns (and if the beneficiaries were white, there would be more outcry, I suspect, against the government of the day). It is a pity that it seems Fiji is left choosing between an apartheid state and democracy guaranteed by the whims of a general.