|
| Percobaan pengiriman Acara Adat |
 | Artikel | May 8, '08 6:03 PM
for everyone |
Syukur bagaimu Tuhan, Dear SPMNews Desk, Terimakasih atas balasan email saya sekaligus berikan beberapa sarang dan bantu buka website saya. Saya sendiri tidak tahu banyak tentang website tapi saya akan coba untuk pelajari. Saya sendiri mau jadi kontributor namun saya belum register. Untuk itu sekarnag saya ada attach berita saya untuk di muat di www.infopapua.org dan www.papuapost.com. Ada 2 (dua) berita : 1.Human Rights2.Environment Ini adalah 2 berita yang saya bicara di UN Permanetent Forum On Indigenous Issues ke 7 di New York. Salam Papua Merdeka. Yoab Syatfle
Kunume Wone
Berita ini merupakan perkembangan situasi umum pada hari ini, 01 Mei 2008 di Mbalim-Wamena, Yaitu:
Dibawah Komando Dewan Adat Papua, maka pada hari ini tepat Tanggal 1 Mei 2008 juga sebagai hari bersejarah bagi Bangsa Papua Barat yaitu diperingati sebagai hari Penindasan Bangsa Papua Barat oleh Kolonial (Luruskan e'no, wa) maka Dewan Adat Papau Wilayah Balim telah diadakan pesta peringatan besar-besaran dalam bentuk ibadah syukuran gabungan dari berbagai denominasi gereja.
Masa yang hadir kurang-lebih 9 ribu orang dari berbagai sudut kota dan kampung di KAbupaten Jayawijaya.
Dalam acara ini hadir pula Forkokus Yaboisembut, S.Pd. selaku ketua DAP dan Ketua DAP Wilayah Balim Lemok Mabel dan para undangan dari berbagai denominasi gereja dan para missinararis dari berbagai organisasi gerejani.
Demikian laporan kami dari
Balim-Wamena
Baliem-Blue
Wa wa wa w
|
A student writer believes greens are trying to preserve West Papua as an archaic backgarden for Westerners disillusioned by modernity.Wednesday 2 April 2008 Is West Papua being eco-colonised?A student writer believes greens are trying to preserve West Papua as an archaic backgarden for Westerners disillusioned by modernity. Lee JonesIndependence movements, once determined to win self-determination by force of arms, have increasingly come to rely on appeals for Western intervention to win freedom on their behalf. Rather than demanding our respect as self-determining peoples, independence movements have learned to depict themselves as victims, to appeal to Western prejudices and paternalism – with the result that, for instance, people in Kosovo are still not trusted to run their own affairs without our supervision (1). Now, in an effort to win backing for independence from Indonesia, West Papuans are even appealing to environmentalism. West Papua was integrated into Indonesia in 1969 via the ‘Act of Free Choice’, a stage-managed consultation of tribal elders, stitched up in advance by Indonesia, the United States, the Netherlands and the UN to produce this outcome. Like other outlying areas of Indonesia, West Papua’s resources were pillaged by powerful Javanese interests and foreign investors like the notorious Freeport mining company, while its people were brutalised by the Indonesian military. The Papuan people have seen little benefit, mostly continuing to live in tribal settlements in grim socio-economic conditions. The Organisasi Papua Merdeka (Organisation for a Free Papua), armed with bows and arrows, was no match for Indonesian troops. Faced with armed defeat, the movement decided to focus entirely on seeking international support for its little-known struggle (2). Benny Wenda, head of Demmak, a council of tribal leaders, and the Papuan face of the Free West Papua Campaign (FWPC), is based in Oxford, England. He says the OPM’s attempts to win outside support has meant moulding the movement into a form that the ‘international arena’ finds acceptable. Most obviously, this means stressing attachment to non-violence and parliamentary democracy (despite Wenda really favouring ‘tribal democracy’, when pressed). But in today’s political climate, it also means appealing to green sensibilities. In his talks around the Britain, Wenda, a political refugee who suffered torture by Indonesian soldiers, emphasises not merely the suffering inflicted on his people, but also on the birds-of-paradise and the world’s second-largest rainforest, arguing that a ‘genocide’ is being inflicted on nature. This has attracted some rather strange bedfellows for the FWPC, many of whom are less motivated by a political commitment to self-determination than by a romantic vision of Papua as an arcadian idyll to be preserved at all costs. This includes an organisation called Friends of People Close to Nature (FPCN), who have produced various films promoting the West Papuan cause, which Wenda tours with. Their ‘ethos and statement of principles’ celebrates hunter-gatherers for their ‘non-exploitative relationship with the natural world’ whose ‘unique cultures’ need to be ‘preserved’ from ‘the ideologies of “progress” and “growth” and absorption in the global economy’. Tribal peoples, it argues, ‘are not looking for “equal opportunities” but the[y] just want to be left alone, to live as they always have done’. They deride economic development for producing ‘a banal, homogenous pulp’, ‘eating at McDonalds, watching the satellite TV and listening to pop music on a Sony Walkman… Material abundance breeds iniquity and spiritual despair’. FPCN’s goal is actually ‘to reverse the process of development’, claiming ‘we should learn from [West Papuans’] reverence for nature… their ancient wisdom’. Its ‘preferential support’ is reserved for those who wish to ‘retain their traditional lifestyles’, and development aid is ‘categorically opposed’ while Western-style schooling is derided for its ‘false choices… the greed it teaches and the potential to pollute and erode distinctive cultures… We need tribal peoples far more than they need us. “They” show us how we once lived in harmony with nature and how we might live again.’ (3) This praise for archaic culture is also echoed by Survival International, which aims to ‘explain the contemporary relevance of their way of life’ (4). The idea that modern society should be modelled upon stone-age conditions flows directly from environmentalists’ self-loathing attack on economic development. For some greens, primitive tribal peoples are much better than we destructive Westerners at living in harmony with nature in a sustainable fashion. Little wonder that the FWPC’s backers include environmental campaigns like Watch Indonesia!, Indonesian Friends of the Earth, and Down to Earth: the International Campaign for Ecological Justice in Indonesia. West Papua’s mystical aura as the ‘last place in the tropics’ even attracted the attention of arch-green George Monbiot in his book Poisoned Arrows (5). These people do not support West Papua’s struggle for self-determination as a good in its own right. Indeed, some of them would likely withdraw their ‘preferential support’ if Papuans decided they wanted instead to dominate nature through rapid industrial development – the only way any people has successfully overcome poverty. Rather, they support the idea of man living in a primitive state of ‘harmony’ with nature, and that is what they admire about Papuans. Environmentalists frequently attack developmental projects in poor countries, because they do not think they should develop. It is far easier to hold back development in the global South than to turn the clock backwards in the North. To this end, they push notions of ‘sustainable development’ and ‘appropriate technology’ – often primitive, medieval devices like rope water pumps and ploughs. There is a revealing similarity between Papuan mysticism, which arises directly out of their subsistence lifestyles, and environmentalists’ dogmatic refrain that there needs to be a balance between man and nature, which apparently Western audiences reject (6). ‘We know how to balance the ecosystem’, an OPM representative tells an Eco-Action activist. ‘I cannot say “this is my plant and I want to take it” – in my culture I must wait for instructions to take it’. He says that Indonesians who say ‘This is my power, I can take whatever I want’ are ‘breaking up our culture’. These ‘instructions’ come from the ‘landlords’ of the forest who are not the Papuans themselves, but ‘spirits’ (7). This sort of subservience of man to nature and spirits must be like manna from heaven for Western greens who want to see people bow down before Gaia. However, it’s far from obvious that tribal people really reject the massive benefits of economic development and just want to live as they always have done. And yet, indigenist-environmentalists may exercise a pernicious influence on independence movements looking for Western support wherever they can find it. Independence leader Benny Wenda reveals that ‘before I thought, when I was inside [West Papua], people holding the radio, for instance, torch, for instance, car, for instance – “OK, I want that one!” When I came out, and I learned from those people, those groups. And then I compare, OK, what’s fit for my people? What’s good for my people? … Now I also give the message inside, OK, this is how the development can affect your way of life… So I always now educate my people.’ The FWPC’s Richard Samuelson implies that these efforts to (re)educate Papuans are legitimate since ‘the propaganda that Indonesia has put out over the years’ encouraging Papuans to ‘become modern’ makes it impossible to tell how much their desire for modernity ‘is a natural reaction when you see healthcare, or a car, or something that you actually, as a human being, you say, wow, I’d like to have that’, and ‘how much is the impact of that propaganda’. Indigenist ideology thus claims access to a tribal mindset unsullied by the dirty hands of modernity. Some West Papuans are understandably wary of development, since it has historically been of a deeply exploitative form, imposed by people seen as invaders and occupiers. But Wenda carefully reserves the right for his people democratically to decide on appropriate forms of economic development after independence. The danger, though, is the way that indigenist-environmentalists’ rejection of modernity plays on West Papuans’ rejection of domination. For Wenda now, the sort of development that is desirable is one that ‘fits’ Papuan culture: ‘We need to have a balance between our nature and what kind of development… Any idea, any campaign, any movement, I can feed it into my bag, I can bring it to West Papua. “OK, this is mobile, this is computer, this is clothes,” and then people can choose, “OK, this is good for us, OK, maybe bush knife or shovel”… That is my dream one day.’ The greens’ exploitation of West Papua is a far cry from the demand of Sukarno, Indonesia’s own revolutionary independence leader, speaking at the founding Bandung conference of the Afro-Asian Peoples’ Solidarity Organisation in 1955; he called for ‘the subordination of everything to the well-being of mankind’ (8). West Papuans undoubtedly deserve the right – denied to them in the past – to determine their own political futures, free from external interference. But they also surely deserve the right to achieve a better standard of living than one limited, if indigenists get their way, to the import of bush knives and shovels. Lee Jones researches Southeast Asian politics at Nuffield College, Oxford. See his website here. Source: http://www.spiked-online.com/index.php?/site/printable/4944/
The Jakarta Post
Wednesday, April 2, 2008
Ridwan Max Sijabat, Jakarta
In the first-ever informal meeting with the leadership of Regional Representatives Council (DPD) at the presidential office here Friday, President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono expressed his concern over the social unrest in Papua and simultaneously
his commitment to address the prolonged issue.
The President then instructed Coordinating Minister for Political, Legal and Security Widodo A.S. to prepare a government regulation in lieu of a law (Perpu) on West Papua
province, whose legal jurisdiction under a 1999 law was annulled y the Constitutional Court following the enactment of the 2001 Papua special autonomy law.
Is that all?
The Papuan issue is not only a matter of social concern and political commitment, but also a question of how to manage the prolonged conflict and determine what needs to be done to calm down a tense situation.
Not only the President and other state institutions but also the Papuan people and the international world have been worried about the tension. Papuan students have gone down to the streets of Papua's Jayapura, Central Java's Semarang and South Sulawesi's Makassar demanding a self-determination referendum for the province since the seven-year-old special autonomy status has brought no significant changes nor eased decades of
grievances of Papuan people still living in fear of intimidation, torture and violence.
Concerned over the terrible conditions, American Samoan Congressman Eni Faleomavaega, who was barred from visiting Papua last July, has launched a black campaign on the Indonesian government, accusing it of abusing human rights and turning a blind eye to Papuans living in poverty. The Germany-based World Church Council recently delivered an official letter to the President with a similar accusation and a call for immediate measures to fully implement the special autonomy and revive the Papuan people's human dignity.
As head of the government, the President should first identify major problems in the resource-rich province so the government knows what to do to better the real condition. He should also evaluate why the special autonomy, which came at the national consensus, does not work optimally.
The anti-Indonesia campaign abroad and the increasing demand for the province's secession from Indonesia will gradually go down if the major problems are settled. But we should bear in mind it could go wrong unless the people's disappointment is addressed.
The special autonomy is not only a matter of funds but also of law enforcement and security to return the tense situation to normalcy. As it was recognized by Governor Barnabas Suebu, despite the annual allocation of huge funds to the province a majority of people are still living below the poverty line and cannot afford the expensive education and health service. The special autonomy fund for the province has drastically increased to Rp 21 trillion (US$2.2 billion) this fiscal year from Rp 3.5 billion in 2003 and around Rp 4.5 trillion in 2006, but only a small part has been used to develop education, health and the people's economic livelihood.
If Jakarta is really concerned with the Papuan issue, the President should have the special autonomy fully implemented. The special autonomy will remain stagnant unless government regulations mandated by the 2001 law on the Papuan special autonomy are issued to allow the provincial government and the Papuan People's Assembly (MRP) to issue relevant bylaws as a legal basis for development programs in Papua.
The law mandates the issuance of seven government regulations as technical and operational guidelines for reconciliation and justice, human resource management, the MRP's establishment, Papuans' cultural rights, province symbols, the flag and other marks of identity and population affairs. So far, only a single regulation on the MRP has been issued.
The proposed development of Papua and West Papua into six provinces will meet stronger resistance because it will considerably solve the main issue, except for certain benefits to security and defense authorities.
The President should go down to relevant ministries to have the long-awaited government regulations issued to allow both the MRP and the provincial governments in Papua and West Papua to issue the bylaws.
Justice will be upheld and the people will no longer live in fears and under intimidation if the planned reconciliation is conducted and the unresolved human rights abuse cases are brought to an ad hoc human rights court despite strong resistance from the Indonesian Military and the police. With a special bylaw on Papuans' cultural rights, the MRP will work to educate some 1.5 million indigenous people partly living in the stone age in remote areas and ensure their access to modernity.
The provincial government should also issue bylaws to design pro-poor, pro-growth and pro-environment budget policies and ensure Papuans' civil and political rights and free access to education and health services, construction of public infrastructure and the sustainable management of natural resources. And any party will be barred from activities supporting secessionism inside and outside the two provinces.
The right approach to development will certainly be effective to develop Papua and West Papua into "a land of peace".
The author is a staff writer at The Jakarta Post.
By Damien Kingsbury, Associate Head (Research) of the School of International and Political Studies at Deakin University and author of "The Politics of Indonesia"
Entering its tenth year since the fall of the authoritarian President Suharto, Indonesia has progressed towards consolidating its democratic system, respecting rule of law and resolving ethnic grievances.
Notably, after a couple of false starts, the direct election of President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono helped consolidate Indonesia's reform process. Yet despite this progress, Indonesia retains a blot on its democratic and human rights record; that of West Papua.
There was some hope after 2001 that Indonesia's process of political and economic decentralization would allow West Papua a degree of genuine autonomy.
On paper, the "special autonomy" package offered to West Papua, and Indonesia's other formerly troubled province of Aceh, looked to address many outstanding issues.
Yet as has since been noted by many observers, West Papua's "special autonomy" status has been methodically undermined until it has become next to meaningless.
In particular, dividing the province into three provinces, later ratified by Indonesia's constitutional court as two, destroyed much of the substance of its autonomy package. A proposal to create even further provinces even further diminishes the original "special autonomy" package.
Meanwhile, since the redeployment of troops following Aceh's successfully negotiated peace settlement, West Papua has seen a significant build-up of soldiers and paramilitary police. The human rights situation, while not at record bad levels, has consequently deteriorated.
Underlying West Papua's problems with Jakarta has been the means by which the territory was incorporated into the state in 1968. In this, a little over one thousand hand-picked village leaders were compelled to ratify West Papua's forced incorporation into Indonesia in 1963. This process was sanctioned by the UN, but has since been discredited.
West Papua was not only constructed by many Indonesian leaders as central to completing their nationalist project, but the wealth it generates has since underpinned Indonesia's economy.
As a largely self-funded institution, Indonesia's military, the TNI, also has a major economic stake in West Papua, and for both reasons is profoundly opposed to its separation.
Yet for a wealthy province, most West Papuans are poor, have abysmally low levels of education, health care and other development indicators.
And, as Melanesians, West Papuans are looked upon by malay Indonesians with attitudes ranging from pity to contempt. Many Indonesians, in particular in the military, regard West Papuans as being less than fully human, which has exacerbated human rights abuses.
Following the Aceh peace agreement which has seen that province prosper in peace over the past two years, many West Papuan political leaders hoped for a similar resolution.
In order to achieve this, last year the province's disparate political groups, including the Free Papua Organisation (OPM), came together under an umbrella organization, the West Papua National Coalition for Liberation (WPNCL).
The word "liberation" in the WPNCL's title refers to freeing West Papuans from oppression, not necessarily separating from Indonesia.
However, to date, President Yudhoyono has refused to talk with the WPNCL, at least under international mediation, perhaps fearing political backlash from the often fractious and self-serving politics of Jakarta.
Yet following from Aceh's relative success, such a process might offer a means of resolving Indonesia's outstanding separatist issue while significantly improving the lives of a people who have been treated as second class citizens.
From an international perspective, such a resolution would remove a significant impediment from relations with Indonesia, particularly with Australia and the United States.
The West Papua issue retains the potential to destabilize bilateral relations, especially in Australia was faced with accepting another boat-load of West Papuan asylum seekers. Last year's Lombok Treaty does not trump Australia's international and humanitarian obligations to legitimate refugees, and the West Papuan issue continues to come up with members of the US Congress.
It is in Indonesia's interests, and those of its friends, to see the West Papua problem disappear. This cannot happen by sweeping it under the carpet, as with East Timor until the fateful referendum of 1999.
Rather, the problem of West Papua will only disappear when the government of Indonesia decides to seriously address the myriad issues that have bedeviled the territory.
The international community has a role in monitoring events in West Papua, at least as best it can given the continuing restrictions on travel there. And the international community might, as with Aceh, have a role in mediating and overseeing the implementation of any future agreement.
In this, Indonesia can build on its success in Aceh, which brought the government international accolades including Nobel Peace Prize nominations. The question really is, though, whether Indonesia is still serious about reform, or whether the gains of democratization will again be allowed to slip between it political fingers.
etanetanetanetanetanetanetanetanetanetanetanetan
The Universe Catholic Newspaper (UK)
Sunday 30 March 2008
The justice and peace worker for the Liverpool diocese has called on Catholics to speak out for the suffering people of West Papua.
Steve Atherton was speaking after Papuan leaders complained about the conduct in the country of oil company BP.
Papuan leaders complained that the company has blocked off their fishing grounds, attracted a flood of migrants to the villages, provided very few jobs for local people and is now siding with the Indonesian authorities against native Papuans who are engaged in a long struggle for independence.
Mr Atherton called on Catholics to look at their own lifestyles and asked them to be prepared to sacrifice some of their comforts to act for the people of West Papua.
"We need to put pressure on politicians here to act for the West Papuans," said mr Atherton.
Campaigners for Free West Papua are hoping that Catholic parliamentatarians John Battle and Lord Alton will raise the isssues of the West Papuan people in Westminster.
Suara Pembaruan, 21 March 2008
Abridged in translation
The government has announced its intention to introduce a Perppu (Presidential Regulation in Lieu of Law) to provide the legal framework for the Province of West Papua within the Special Autonomy Law No 21.2001 (Otsus Papua). According to the government, this would provide the legal umbrella that will resolve this problem.
It is very clear that a Perppu for the Province of West Papua would create a precedent. If the government does indeed introduce this regulation, West Papua would become a very special province indeed, because it would be the only province in Indonesia that is created not by law but by a presidential regulation (Perppu).
This would convey the message to Indonesians, especially those living in the Land of Papua, that a new province can be created by the Central Government, if need be, by force, although the basis in law has not been established. It would mean that a law will no longer be necessary to create a province.
Further consequences could ensue from this move. Although the President has announced a moratorium on the creation of new provinces, the enactment of a Perppu for the Province of West Papua would raise expectations and reinforce the determination of those who are campaigning to bring about the creation of other new provinces in the Land of Papua as well as in other parts of Indonesia. They would no longer need to go to all the trouble of providing the status in law for creating new provinces.
These people would draw the conclusion that, by using the Perppu for West Papua as the model, they can go ahead and declare the creation of new provinces such as South-west Papua, Central Papua and South Papua simply by means of a Perppu.
Those who want new provinces to be created would demand the same treatment from the central government. If the government were to refuse, they would accuse it of discrimination.. They would say, what is so special about people living in one part of the country if their own wishes were not heeded. This opens up the possibility that people anywhere could get together and demand that their regions should also become a new province..The political elite and bureaucrats in Papua and in other places could demand that the government can simply produce a Perppu to create the province for which they are campaigning. They could try to get
Parliament (DPR) to pass a resolution or, if not, get the President to issue a Perppu. If this happens, the Perppu for the Province of West Papua will create a very bad precedent indeed.
The creation of new provinces in Papua cannot be equated with other parts of the country because Papua enjoys a special status, namely that it has special status because of the Special Autonomy Law 21. 2001 which was introduced for the Province of Papua. The existence of the special province is protected within the 1945 Constitution, in particular Article 18 (b) which states that special governments are permissible. This means that if the government approves the Perppu for West Papua, the President is acting in violation of the Constitution.
In my opinion, this inconsistency from the government will have fatal consequences. The confidence of the Papuan people in the government will suffer drastically.and could reach the lowest point ever. They would come to the conclusion that if the country's Constitution can be violated, then other government regulations can also be ignored by the government. How can the Papuan people be expected to hope that the Special Autonomy Law can be properly implemented if the government itself violates the country's Constitution?
For this reason, the government should consider these matters very seriously indeed before going ahead with the Perppu for the Creation of West Papua.
The writer is a lecturer at the Fajar Timor College of Philosophy and Theology, Abepura, Papua.
When BP set out to build a £3.5bn natural gas plant in remote West Papua, local villagers hoped for a bright future. But all is not well. * John Vidal * The Guardian, * Wednesday March 19 2008 * Article history This article appeared in the Guardian on Wednesday March 19 2008 on p8 of the Society news & features section. It was last updated at 00:10 on March 19 2008.Recently, with hundreds of Indonesian troops just out of sight in scenes of intense security, Prince Andrew, the government's official business envoy, dropped in on Bintuni Bay, one of Indonesia's mots remote corners. The plan was to inspect BP's new £3.5bn natural gas plant. What the Duke of York probably did not know was that he had walked straight into a row between the giant oil company and local villagers. The British firm had promised its new neighbours, who live on the edge of the pristine Papuan rainforest, better homes, long-term jobs and full environmental protection when it started several years ago to build its giant plant to extract 14 trillion cubic metres of gas. But with the gas about to flow, village leaders have now complained bitterly that the company has reneged on its agreements. In a long letter sent to the Guardian and in telephone conversations, Papuan leaders requesting anonymity have complained that the company has blocked off their fishing grounds, attracted a flood of migrants to the villages, provided very few jobs for local people and is now siding with the Indonesian authorities against native Papuans who are engaged in a long struggle for independence. "Everything we feared when BP came to the area has come true," claims one community leader. "People are not allowed to catch any fish or shrimps in the exclusive zone established by BP. More and more migrants are coming because of the plant. There is very high inflation because there is lots of money around. The number of local people from Bintuni Bay who work in the project is very low. Local Papuans are never recruited as full-time members of staff." BP has been desperately keen to avoid the experiences that it, Shell and other oil companies, have had in Africa and Latin America, where oil and gas extraction has left a trail of pollution, human rights abuses and distressed people with no share in the wealth extracted from their land. The company pledged from the start to set new social and environmental standards, and to be a model of corporate social responsibility. It hired some of the best development NGOs to offer advice. Papuan leaders say they were initially impressed when BP completely rebuilt one fishing village, poured money into the nearby communities, and employed leading environment, human rights and health groups to advise them on how to avoid conflict and bring prosperity to the villages. But as the project has come closer to opening, people have flooded into the area. "Conflicts between local communities and migrants have begun," says the leader. "The migrants [from all over Indonesia] have come here to look for jobs, and are staying. There are about 1,500 in the village of Babo and 1,200 in Bintuni. They are the majority now in all the villages," he says. The Tangguh gas field, believed to be eventually worth more than £100bn to BP and the Indonesian government, is one of the largest in the world. Known as a "super giant", it is contracted to provide gas for China, Mexico and the US, and should last 30 years. But the Papuan leaders, who have long been pressing for independence from Indonesia, say they fear that BP is taking sides with the Indonesian government, as they are bypassed from all the lasting benefits. According to documents seen by the Guardian, less than £30m was budgeted for the Tangguh social programme over six years, including money for resettlement and security; nearly £15m was earmarked for "consultants" and administration. The nine most affected villages in the area are being given £15,000 a year for five years, and others in the area £5,500 a year. "BP has built 100 houses for 100 heads of families. All looks wonderful," another village leader says. "But the people actually suffer mentally from their new settlement. Their access to the sea is limited because of the company's exclusion zone, and they cannot expand their gardens. They do not have enough [space] to expand their families." Criticism of BP's employment policy was levelled at the company last year and the Tangguh Independent Advisory Panel, chaired by Lord [David] Hannay, to monitor the project, encouraged BP to employ more Papuans and to educate the local population about the "demobilisation" process when the construction work is complete. Although nearly 6,000 people have been employed in constructing the plant, fewer than 500 will be employed by the company after the building is complete later this year. Of these, only around 50 are expected to be Papuan. "People's dependency on BP is very high. There will be problems when the work ends. There will be economic and psychological degradation," say Papuan leaders in their letter to the Guardian. "We predicted that BP and Indonesia would not care about the very survival of the Papuans on their land and their nation. We expected that BP and Indonesia would continuously destroy our forests and our trees and pollute the rivers and seas," they says. "And we feared that BP and Indonesia would bring misfortune for the Papuans by employing skilled workers from outside West Papua, claiming that we Papuans are not 'skilled workers'. I have to tell you that our worst predictions and fears have come true." BP denies that it is causing environmental damage, or that it is favouring non-Papuans. The company said it is bound by strict guidelines about how many Papuans should be employed. A spokesman says: "We think about 30% of the construction workforce is Papuan. The intention is that there will be long-term employment for Papuans. We are prioritising the most affected villages," says a BP spokesman. But he also concedes that Papua is large and that it has been difficult to identify who is an original inhabitant of these villages. On the fishing situation, he points out that BP has provided outboard motors to some people so they can travel further to fishing grounds. "We believe we have set new standards for the BP group. There has been a lot of progress but there is no complacency," he says. * guardian.co.uk © Guardian News and Media Limited 2008
Judul:
KONTROVERSI DOGIYAI: Pro-Kontra Pemekaran Kabupaten Dogiyai dalam Fenomena Politik dan Ekonomi Global, Indonesia dan Papua Barat
Penulis:
Yakobus Odiyaipai Dumupa
Penerbit:
Paradise Press
Tahun terbit:
2008
Tebal:
xvi + 320 halaman
Daftar Isi: Halaman Persembahan Ucapan Terima Kasih Pengantar Penulis Bab I. Fenomena Politik di Papua Barat Bab II. Menimbang Kembali Aspirasi Pemekaran Kabupaten Dogiyai Bab III. Argumentasi Pro Pemekaran Kabupaten Dogiyai Bab IV. Argumentasi Kontra Pemekaran Kabupaten Dogiyai BAB V. Menjembatani Argumentasi Pro dan Kontra Pemekaran Kabupaten Dogiyai BAB VI. Sesat Pikir Tim Sukses Kabupaten Dogiyai: Janji-janji Kosong dan Tindakan Busuk BAB VII. Dampak Pemekaran Kabupaten Dogiyai di Masa Depan BAB VIII. Keteguhan di Tengah Badai Tuduhan: Sebuah Pemberontakan dan Pembelaan Diri Daftar Pustaka Tentang Penulis
Abstrak: Keinginan menulis buku berjudul "KONTROVERSI DOGIYAI: Pro-Kontra Pemekaran Kabupaten Dogiyai dalam Fenomena Politik dan Ekonomi Global, Indonesia dan Papua Barat" (Paradise Press, 2008) ini berawal dari rasa kesal dan sakit hati penulis terhadap adanya pemekaran wilayah di Papua Barat, terutama pemekaran Kabupaten Dogiyai. Rasa kesal dan rasa sakit itu lebih-lebih disebabkan oleh karena terjadi "berantakan" dalam hubungan sosial di kalangan masyarakat di wilayah kabupaten Dogiyai ini ingin didirikan. Gara-gara rencana dan perjuangan realisasi Kabupaten Dogiyai tali persaudaraan, kekeluargaan, dan hubungan lainnya putus, dan cenderung "baku makan" antara kelompok yang pro dan yang kontra. Buku yang berlabel "seri pendidikan politik untuk rakyat" ini diawali (pada bab I) dengan memberikan gambarang umum mengenai fenomena politik di Papua Barat, yang mengupas empat hal pokok: 1) Pertarungan Nasionalisme Indonesia versus Nasionalisme Papua Barat, 2) Aksi Kapitalisme Internasional, 3) Kelanjutan Nasionalisme Papua Barat di tengah Neo-kolonialisme dan Kapitalisme Internasional, dan 4) Fenomena Pemekaran Wilayah di Papua Barat. Dilanjutkan dengan bab II yang mempersoalkan kembali asal usul aspirasi Pemekaran Kabupaten Dogiyai, dengan mengetengahkan dua hal pokok: 1) Mengkritisi Penjaringan Aspirasi, dan disusul dengan kesimpulan atas peninjauan kembali, yaitu 2) Demokrasi Pilih-Pilih. Bab III mengemukakan argumentasi kelompok pro-pemekaran yang mengklaim bahwa apa yang mereka lakukan sangat logis untuk kepentingan masyarakat, dengan mengemukakan empat argumentasi pokok: 1) Kemelaratan Orang Lembah Kamuu dan Pegunungan Mapiha/Mapisa, 2) Tersisihkan dari Kekuasaan, 3) Memperjuangkan Aspirasi Masyarakat, dan 4) Memenuhi Syarat Ideal untuk Dimekarkan. Sedangkan pada bab VI mengulas argumentasi kelompok kontra-pemekaran, yang mengklaim bahwa pemekaran Kabupaten Dogiyai tidak pantas dimekarkan, dengan mengemukakan tiga hal pokok: 1) Trauma Neo-liberalisme, Neo-kolonialisme dan Militerisme, 2) Tidak Memenuhi Syarat Ideal, dan 3) Kepentingan Politik-Ekonomi Para Elit Politik dan Tim Sukses. Melihat adanya pro dan kontra terhadap pemekaran kabupaten Dogiyai, maka pada bab V penulis berusaha menjembatani perbedaan pendapat tersebut dengan mengajukan empat hal pokok sekaligus sebagai kritik terhadap kedua kelompok: 1) Kemelaratan Ekonomi sebuah Fenomena Global, 2) Banyak Elit Politik tapi Tidak Berhati Nurani, 3) Hanya Tahu Berpikir Situasional (Dikendalikan Arah Angin Politik), 4) Bukan Masalah Teknis, tapi Masalah Esensi. Dilanjutkan kemudian dengan menelanjangi segala janji kosong dan tindakan busuk Tim Sukses Pemekaran Kabupaten Dogiyai pada bab VI, dengan mengemukakan dua hal pokok: 1) Janji-janji Kosong Tim Sukses Pemekaran Kabupaten Dogiyai, 2) Tindakan Busuk Tim Sukses Pemekaran Kabupaten Dogiyai. Sedangkan paba bab VII mengulas tentang dampak yang akan muncul di kemudian hari, entah apabila kabupaten Dogiyai akan jadi dimekarkan atau tidak, yaitu akan munculnya empat dampak pokok: 1) Beda Pendapat Terus Berlanjut, 2) Fihak Lain Mengambil Keuntungan, 3) Pembangunan Humanis versus Pembangunan Kolonialis, dan 4) Nasionalisme Papua Barat versus Integrasi Indonesia (Nasionalisme Indonesia). Dan diakhiri dengan pembahasan di bab VIII yang mengulas tentang berbagai tuduhan yang dialamatkan kepada penulis secara pribadi oleh "fihak ketiga" dan dampaknya terhadap keluarga penulis secara khusus, dan orang Lembah Kamuu dan Mapiha/Mapisa secara umum dan pembelaan diri penulis dengan mengemukakan tiga hal pokok: 1) Gara-gara Dogiyai Keluarga Berantakan, 2) Isu-isu Omong Kosong yang Menyesatkan, dan 3) Keterlibatan "Fihak Ketiga". Buku yang ditulis dengan gaya bahasa subyektif ini, pada salah satu bagian dalam kata pengantar penulis mengemukakan bahwa, "Buku ini saya tulis bukan untuk mendukung dan menolak Pemekaran Kabupaten Dogiyai, dan juga tidak bermaksud untuk memaksa orang menerima atau menolaknya. Saya hanya menulis segala sesuatu yang saya tahu, yang ada kaitannya dengan Pemekaran Kabupaten Dogiyai. Mendukung atau menolak, itu urusan rakyat berdasarkan kesadaran hati nuraninya, karena kedaulatan ada di tangan mereka." 
FOR IMMEDIATE BROADCAST MARCH 12, 2009 1930 AEST WEST PAPUA, Wednesday March 12 2008: As West Papuan Youth and students prepare for another series of demonstrations across West Papua tomorrow, key leaders and human rights workers are being terrorised and intimidated by the Indonesian military and police, and threatened with arrest on charges of Subversion. Information received from sources in Manokwari report that Indonesian government and security forces are increasing repression on West Papuan people ahead of continued peaceful assemblies to draw international attention to the human rights and dysfunctional political situation currently inside West Papua. On 11 March 2008, 16:58:28 PM, five Indonesian intelligence agents arrived with black Taff Car to surveille a meeting of eighty Papuan students and youths. The five Indonesian spies are: 1. Yoris May, intelligence from Manokwari Regional Military Commando (INTEL KODIM Manokwari). 2. Mikael Marisan, specialist hunting and attacking from Manokwari Regional Police (BUSER Polisi Manokwari). 3. Pak Jefri, specialist hunting and attacking forces from Manokwari Regional Police (BUSER Polisi Manokwari). 4. Pak Sul, specialist hunting and attacking forces from Manokwari Regional Police (BUSER Polisi Manokwari). 5. Pak Arif, specialist hunting and attacking forces from Manokwari Regional Police (BUSER Polisi Manokwari). The first target of the operation now is to hunt and attack Jack Wanggai, Coordinator of peaceful demonstrations in Manokwari and spokesperson of the West Papua National Authority in West Papua. Wanggai's family in Manokwari had received an official letter from Indonesian police for the arrest of Mr Wanggai. Mr Wanggai and his family in Manokwari were intimidated and terrorised by 7 members of TNI and Police, when they came to Wanggai's house with automatic weapons, causing family to believe TNI wanted to shoot Wanggai if he was at home. However Jack was elsewhere organising large Papua wide protest on 13 March unaware of the intimidation of his family. The Indonesian government and military are doing extra work to stop Jack Wanggai and other peaceful protesters in Manokwari through terror, intimidation and the threat of violence. Previous arrests and interrogations of student leaders indicate that the TNI and POLRI are escalating operations against civilians and the guaranteed right to peaceful political expression. These threats are currently ongoing and escalating. Today Wednesday 12 March 2008 POLRI in Manokwari published the letter delivered to Wanggai’s family quoting the following: - Police justification under Law: SP.gl/147/III/2008/Reskrim base Dasar paragraph 7, Article (1) sub-paragraph G, sub-paragraph 11112 Articles (1) and (2) and paragraph 113 KUHP (Indonesian Criminal Code). This is the Indonesian law that classifies the peaceful rally coordinated by Jack Wanggai as “Subversion, terrorism and related crimes”.
- Indonesian government regulation No.2/2002 (UU No. 2/ 2002) About Indonesian National Police.
- Indonesian Police report No. Pol:LP/13/III/2008/SPK.III, Dated 3 March 2008
These Interrogations have been conducted by the following personnel: • First interrogator is Captain police Nyoman Sudama, NRP:78061319. Captain Nyoman Sudama is a head of the Criminal intelligent Unit of National police of Manokwari Regency. • Assistant interrogator is Sergeant POLRI Aris Patandung, NRP: 72110227 These charges, or even threat of these charges against Papuan exercising their rights to peaceful expression of aspirations guaranteed under Indonesian law, are a throwback to the days of the Suharto New Order (Orde Baru). It is proof that the Indonesian government is nothing but a military dictatorship: New Order Chapter 2 (Orde Baru bagian Dua). The same threats and intimidation as in Manokwari are also being endured by: • Mr. Zakarias Horota, Head of National FNMPP and another democracy activist in Jayapura; • Mr. Michael Mandobayan, Coordinator FNMPP and ather democrat actist in Sorong Regency; • Mr. Wilson Uruwaya, Youth Chief of Papua National Council based in Serui, the Regency Capital of Yapen Waropen; • and is also including other Papuan democracy activists in Serui. The Indonesian personnel responsible for giving orders to BUSER ( BU = Buru- hunting; and SER - attack. BUSER is part of the “anti terrorist” Detasmen 88). POLICE and BIN (Badan Inteljien Nasional) in both provinces in Papua is KAPOLDA (Head of Police Province Level) and PANGDAM (Supreme Commander Province Level). The distribution order operating by KAPOLRES (Head of Police Regency Level) and KODIM (Commando Military Regency Level). Please contact the numbers in Manokwari below to ask respectfully why West Papuan leaders are being threatened with Suharto era charges. • Police Papua province hp:967 531 014 • Indonesian Criminal Intelligence Unit Manokwari: + (62 986) 211363 • Indonesian TNI Commander of Manokwari regency/DANDIM phone Number: +62 (986) 211703 • Head of Police Manokwari Regency (KAPOLRES) phone No. +62 (986) 211359 • Deputy Police Manokwari Regency level (WAKAPOLRES) phone NO. +62 (986) 211826 • rmh dins kapolres tlp.0986 211355; • Waka (Deputi Commander) Polres.tlp.0986 211826. Tomorrow, Thursday 13 March 2008, West Papuan people, more than 500 Papuan youth and students and the Executive president of West Papua National Authority will continue to hold simultaneous peaceful rallies calling for Referendum in Sorong, Manokwari, Serui, Nabire and Jayapura. Melanesian people of Papua are calling to the international community to continue monitoring of the situation inside Papua, calling to Jakarta to allow international observers to go inside Papua as soon as possible, especially from the Australian, New Zealand and Pacific community. West Papuans are calling on the International community make immediate protests on the brutal and systemic repression of people’s legitimate right to peaceful expression by the Indonesian military, intelligence, police, and state sponsored jihadists and militias.. Rallies will continue until Indonesian and the international community hear and implementing referendum to the people of West Papua. West Papua needs a referendum on its future as a political solution to the ongoing genocide. Ongoing information, please contact: Dr Jacob RumbiakAustralia, Mobile +61 (0)4313 88 976 or +61 (0)3 9510 2193 Co-ordinator, Foreign Affairs, West Papua National Authority SORONG: Michael Mandobayan, West Papua National Youth Chief of Council/ Coordinator WPNA Sorong + (62) 85254517800 Topan Baho, Spokesperson of WPNA Sorong +62 85254559143 MANOKWARI Jack Wanggai, Spokesperson of WPNA Manokwari,: +62 85244340479 Abner Aisoki, HP: +62 85282919155 SERUI Wilson Uruway, Coordinator WPNA Yapen/Waropen , HP: +62 81240009398 Simon Dom (spokesperson) +62 85254934740 NABIRE MS Yetty Yoweni, Coordinator Ground Action of WPNA Nabire, +62 81344463429 JAYAPURA Terrianus Yoku, Head of National Congress, WPNA, HP: +62 85244357673 Markus Yenu, Coordinator Ground Action of WPNA, HP: +62 81344531793 MEDIA CONSIDERATIONS. The situation is being monitored closely, and update will be available from people on the ground. Photographs will be provided as soon as we have them. Please visit www.manukoreri.net to accessphotographs. This Alert and Media co-ordination has been prepared by Nick Chesterfield, Independent Human Security and Media Consultant to West Papua Movement.www.manukoreri.net +61(0)409 268 978 manukoreri@riseup.net GPG Key available on request.
In recent years, there has been a sickening process of Judaization, in which Jewish towns are built to encircle and close off most Arab villages, towns and cities. It's ethnic warfare by any definition, and is typical of extremely racist settlement policies practiced by states against separatist movements - i.e. Indonesia in East Timor and West Papua, China in Tibet, Morocco in Spanish Sahara and Syria in the Kurdish North. ------------------- Settler Criminals Not Innocent Civilians Via Joachim Martillo, we have this interesting piece, Settler Criminals Not Innocent Civilians, on the attack on the Yeshivat Merkaz haRav in Jerusalem that killed 8 young Israeli male yeshiva students. There are some errors in this piece. Read more:HERE
The 2,500-year-old Malay tradition of chewing nuts from the areca palm (Areca Catechu) may be deemed backward by the younger generation in Sumatra and Java but for Papuans, especially in Jayapura, it is a popular social pastime for young and old. In the Papuan capital, one can easily find people as young as five years old with its telltale red blotches around their mouths, a sign they have been chewing the nut. Chewing areca (known as pinang in Bahasa Indonesia) is an anytime-anywhere activity for Papuans who hold the nut in high regard. Known locally as Tarang Habui, Papuans use areca nuts in traditional ceremonies and present them to guests as a sign of friendship and kinship. For the young areca nut chewing is part of the social language. Papuans chew areca nuts with betel fruit and chalk made from ground white shell. Before chewing, they peel off the betel nut skin using their teeth. They then chew the betel fruit which is dipped in white chalk. Afterwards, they spit out the distinctively bright red juice. The origin of the areca palm is still debated, with some saying it is from the Malay peninsula and others saying the Philippines. Vast expanses of areca forests once existed on the northern coast of Aceh in an area known as Pinang beach. On the streets of Jayapura areca nut vendors are scattered all over the city. On sidewalks, in front of shops and in markets the nut is available. One packet of pinang, comprising two areca nuts, one betel fruit and chalk goes for Rp 1,000. These packets are known as pinang ojek according to Ricky Yudhistira. Most of Jayapura’s pinang sellers are women. By investing Rp 60,000 a day on ingredients, a seller can earn up to Rp 120,000, resulting in a monthly profit of Rp 1.8 million. One of the down sides to the habit is the red spit that is synonymous with areca chewing. Jayapura streets are stained with red blotches of dried betel/areca and saliva. In some places in Jayapura like Sentani airport pinang has been banned in efforts to keep the area clean. The other down side is that pinang is believed to cause oral cancer. Pakistan, where many also chew areca, has ruled that pinang packets must carry health warnings similar to those on cigarette boxes. http://www.indonesialogue.com/destinations/chewing-areca-nuts-papua.html
West Papua 1969 Act of NO Choice letter to Rob Wilson MP (Conservative
Member of Parliament for Reading East & Shadow Minister for Higher
Education)
Mr Rob Wilson MP, House of Commons, LONDON SW1A 0AA
24th February 2008.
Dear Mr Wilson,
WEST PAPUA: 1969 'Act of Free Choice'.
Thank you for your letter enclosing a reply from Meg Munn MP, Foreign Office
Minister with responsibility for the UK's relations with Indonesia. (Her
ref.53976)
I have read her letter very carefully and, I admit, discussed the matter
with colleagues and friends who are more expert than I in the technical
details surrounding the subject to which she refers, namely the Act of Free
Choice. As one of your constituents, I have an interest in the UK's foreign
affairs, and especially how our country is perceived by others abroad - I
would like it to have a reputation for fairness and justice in its foreign
policy. I am therefore very concerned about the Government's stance on this
matter, as outlined in Ms. Munn's reply, and would be grateful if you could
raise this issue further with her on my behalf. For ease of reference, I
have included the Minister's words from the letter in bold, followed by my
comments on each statement, and my specific questions in italics.
The Act of Free Choice took place in Papua in 1969. A group of 1,000 Papuan
representatives, who were given the responsibility to make the choice on
behalf of the Papuan people, voted to remain part of Indonesia.
Ms Munn's brief description of the 'Act of Free Choice' is a very distorted
one. To quote Baroness Symons, one of her own Ministers addressing
Parliament in December 2004, 'there were 1,000 handpicked representatives
and [that] they were largely coerced into declaring for inclusion in
Indonesia'. Even more recently in January 2007, Baroness Royall admitted
that 'we recognise that it [the Act of Free Choice] was extremely flawed'.
This position is reflected in much greater detail by the Dutch Government
commissioned Drooglever report, a summary of which can be found here:
http://tapol.gn.apc.org/reports/droogleverengsum.htm
and as she may be aware concludes as follows:
'In the opinion of the Western observers and the Papuans who have spoken out
about this, the Act of Free Choice ended up as a sham, where a press-ganged
electorate acting under a great deal of pressure appeared to have
unanimously declared itself in favour of Indonesia.'
This conclusion seems to support the views expressed by Baroness Symons and
Baroness Royall.
The British Government of the day supported the Act of Free Choice, as did
the United Nations and almost all members of the international community.
I feel I must make two comments on this statement:
Firstly, to say that UN and members of the international community supported
the Act of Free Choice is at best an overstatement, at worst misleading. The
relevant part of the text of UNGA Resolution 2504 (XXIV) of 19 November 1969
states that the General Assembly:
'Takes note of the report of the Secretary-General and acknowledges with
appreciation the fulfilment by the Secretary-General and his representative
of the tasks entrusted to them under the Agreement of 15 August 1962 between
the Republic of Indonesia and the Kingdom of the Netherlands concerning West
New Guinea (West Irian)'
The 'tasks entrusted' to the Secretary-General were very limited. They were
to advise, assist and participate in the arrangements for the Act of Free
Choice. The UN representative and his team did advise, assist and
participate in the arrangements, to the very limited extent that they were
allowed to do so by the Indonesian authorities, as detailed in Dr. John
Saltford's book, 'The United Nations and the Indonesian Takeover of West
Papua, 1962-1969: The Anatomy of Betrayal'. So in the above Resolution the
UNGA appreciates the fact that the UN representatives advised, assisted and
participated in the arrangements for the Act of Free Choice.
The General Assembly is NOT however, commenting on whether their advice,
assistance and participation amounted to a fair exercising of the right to
self-determination by the people of West Papua, which is the point at issue.
The Resolution does NOT support the Act of Free Choice in this sense.
This leads to my second and more important comment, namely that Ms. Munn is
confusing the arrangements made under the bilateral treaty (New York
Agreement) with the quite separate right to self-determination held by the
West Papuans under international law. The General Assembly was commenting on
the bi-lateral treaty and nothing else.
Any Act of Self-determination must be carried out in accordance with
international law, as established in such documents as the UN Charter, the
Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and
Peoples (UNGA Resolution 1514 (XV) of 14 December 1960), the rules
concerning when a territory ceases to be non-self-governing (Res 1541 (XV)
of 15 December 1960), published opinions of the International Court of
Justice etc.
The New York Agreement was a purely bi-lateral arrangement between the
Netherlands and the Republic of Indonesia, in which Indonesia took over
colonial administration (not sovereignty) from the Netherlands. The Papuan
peoples, who were the object of this arrangement, had in 1969 a legal right
to self-determination. That right cannot be removed by the Indonesian
government or indeed by a major power like Britain. The right to
self-determination continues until the right-holders freely express their
wishes, which, according to Principle IX of UNGA Resolution 1541(XV) of
1960, (see below), must be by 'universal adult suffrage' i.e. by way of
plebiscite.
The International Court of Justice has also confirmed that
self-determination requires a free expression of the will of the peoples
concerned. As the British Government has conceded, the Papuan peoples did
not agree to integration with Indonesia (They were 'largely coerced'
according to Baroness Symons quoted above [2004], a comment confirmed by the
then Foreign Secretary, Jack Straw [2005]).
It follows that Indonesia's acquisition of West Papua is an illegal
annexation and Indonesia's position continues to be that of a colonial
power.
The UN Secretary-General's Special Representative at the time reported that
'in accordance with Indonesian practice' the population had 'expressed their
wish to remain with Indonesia'. Thus Papua became an integral part of the
territory of Indonesia.
Ms. Munn mentions that the UN report stated that the 'Act of Free Choice'
took place 'in accordance with Indonesian practice'. However, if you read
the actual text of the 1962 New York Agreement, which I have done, it
specifies that something different should happen - Article XVIII (d) refers
to:
'The eligibility of all adults, male and female, not foreign nationals, to
participate in the act of self-determination to be carried out in accordance
with international practice.' (My emphasis)
The UN report is therefore saying that the 'Act of Free Choice' was NOT, in
fact, carried out in the way specified in the New York Agreement -
'Indonesian practice' is not 'International practice'. The 'selection' of
'representatives' is NOT how such acts of self-determination are to be
carried out according to 'International practice'. This term was clearly
defined at the time, in fact. For example, Principle IX of the 1960 UNGA
Resolution 1541 (XV) (on the integration of one territory with another)
states:
'The integration should be the result of the freely ex-pressed wishes of the
territory's peoples acting with full knowl-edge of the change in their
status, their wishes having been expressed through informed and democratic
processes, impartially conducted and based on universal adult suffrage.'
As all objective commentators, including Baroness Symons, acknowledge, the
'Act of Free Choice' bore no relation to this. Instead 1,022 Papuans were
hand picked by Indonesia, supposedly to represent the entire West Papuan
population. They were then paraded in front of Indonesian Generals, UN
officials and a few foreign Ambassadors who watched as they were coerced
into voting unanimously to integrate with Indonesia.
In August 1969, Brigadier-General Ali Murtopo, special envoy of President
Suharto, speaking to West Papuans selected to take part in the 'Act of Free
Choice', made this threat:
'This is what will happen to anyone who votes against Indonesia. Their
accursed tongues will be torn out. Their full mouths will be wrenched open.
Upon them will fall the vengeance of the Indonesian people. I will myself
shoot them on the spot.'
And at the same time, the recently deceased Indonesian dictator Suharto sent
this message to his military forces in West Papua:
'See that the [act] on West Irian's [Papua's] future status will yield a
clear pronouncement in favour of Indonesia.'
It would seem that Baroness Symons was correct that the Papuans 'were
largely coerced into declaring for inclusion in Indonesia.'
We can also see why Baroness Royall was led to comment that the Act of Free
Choice was' extremely flawed'.
Just by way of reminder, Ms Munn describes this in her letter as: 'A group
of 1,000 Papuan representatives, who were given the responsibility to make
the choice on behalf of the Papuan people, voted to remain part of
Indonesia'.
Perhaps Ms. Munn didn't know the background I have summarized above.
My questions here are:
1. In the light of the comments above, does she still stand by the statement
highlighted above?
2. What comment would she give on the statement of Baroness Royall that
'[the Act of Free Choice] was extremely flawed.'?
3. What comment would she give on the statement of Baroness Symons that the
Papuans 'were largely coerced into declaring for inclusion in Indonesia.'?
We do not support a re-visitation of the 1969 Act of Free Choice.
My next question relates to this statement, and is the following:
4. In the light of the facts above, WHY does the UK Government not support a
re-visitation of the Act of Free choice?
As a Permanent member of the UN Security Council the UK has a special
responsibility to hold the UN and its member states to account when it the
organisation is brought into disrepute by its involvement in such a tragic
episode. It is surely in the best interests of West Papua, the UN and even
Indonesia, that the full facts surrounding the Act of Free Choice be
examined and acknowledged. There is nothing to be gained from maintaining a
distorted version of history that can only further distort current efforts
to solve the West Papuan issue peacefully. It does the UK no credit if it is
seen to be supporting something that is clearly recognized today, even by
ministers in its own Government, as 'extremely flawed', resulting in the
Papuans being 'largely coerced into declaring for inclusion in Indonesia'.
I would therefore ask that the FCO reflects on these fundamental issues
instead of ignoring or distorting them, when it responds to queries about
the 'Act of Free Choice'.
As I have set out in my previous replies to your letters on behalf of Dr
O'Leary, and as stated in Parliament most recently by Lord Malloch-Brown on
13 November [2007], the UK respects the territorial integrity of Indonesia
and does not support independence for Papua.
Maybe the British Government should support Indonesia's territorial
integrity but, as explained above, Indonesia's acquisition of West Papua was
an illegal annexation, so that 'territorial integrity' does not include West
Papua. West Papua cannot legally be a part of Indonesia's territory unless
the West Papuans agree in a genuine act of self-determination.
Further, it is not a matter for the UK 'to support independence for
Papua', and I am not asking them to do this. Who am I to say whether West
Papua should be independent? That is for the people of West Papua to
decide. But as pointed out below, the UK has a legal obligation to ensure
that the West Papuans are given the opportunity to exercise their existing
right to self-determination.
We believe that full implementation of existing Special Autonomy legislation
is the best way to proceed towards a sustainable resolution to the internal
differences and the long-term stability of Papua.
The situation in West Papua is not a matter of 'internal differences' but of
international law. Self-determination is an obligation erga omnes,
recognised by the International Court of Justice in the 1995 'Case
concerning East Timor' for example, and cited with approval in paragraph 156
of their Advisory Opinion on the Legal Consequences of the construction of a
wall in the occupied Palestinian Territory in 2004. Thus it imposes on
Britain a legal obligation to ensure that the West Papuans are able to
exercise their right of self-determination freely. It also imposes on
Britain a legal obligation to avoid recognition of the current illegal
situation.
Finally Ms Munn mentions that full implementation of existing Special
Autonomy (SA) legislation is the best way forward to resolve West Papua's
problems. This is something that all FCO responses have referred to since
the legislation was first introduced in 2001. May I therefore draw her
attention to two recent verdicts on Special Autonomy? In late 2007,
Octavianus Mote, a fellow at Yale University, completed a paper titled 'The
failure of Special Autonomy'. In this he notes that among others, the Papuan
Traditional Council, the Papuan Peoples Council and Governor of Papua,
Barnabas Suebu have all concluded that Special Autonomy has failed. He went
on to say that throughout 2006 and 2007, Papuans, sometimes numbering in
their thousands, have demonstrated to renounce Special Autonomy and
petitioned their representatives, formally to reject it. At the same time,
nearly 50 Christian, Muslim and Hindu religious leaders from West Papua sent
a series of recommendations to the government and also concluded that SA had
been improperly implemented.
In the light of this can Ms Munn answer this question:
5. What evidence does she have that Special Autonomy really is helping to
improve matters in West Papua?
She might like to read the recently published report on the situation in
West Papua, by Franciscans International, a non-governmental organisation at
the UN, which has General Consultative Status with the United Nations
Economic and Social Council:
<http://www.franciscansinternational.org/news/article.php?id=1417>
http://www.franciscansinternational.org/news/article.php?id=1417
It makes grim reading for those who might believe that things are getting
better there.
6. Will she then look for other solutions, such as genuine dialogue between
Papuan representatives and the Indonesian Government without pre-conditions
on either side?
7. Would Ms Munn, as has been suggested by FCO officials in the past, offer
to take on a role as mediator?
I am very grateful to you Mr. Wilson, for your continued efforts on my
behalf to ensure that my Government answers my questions fully and
truthfully. Ms. Munn's reply to my most recent questions indicates that the
UK is in danger of seriously damaging its reputation for fairness and
justice in its foreign relations, through its approach to the situation in
West Papua. We, in Britain, and more importantly the long-suffering West
Papuans themselves, deserve better.
Yours sincerely,
Dr Sean V. O'Leary
Sunday, 10 February 2008, 9:40 am
Press Release: Australia West Papua Association
AWPA Calls on Prime Minister Kevin Rudd to raise the issue of West Papua with the Indonesia's Foreign Minister Hassan Wirajuda Joe Collins from the Australia West Papua Association said that AWPA is still concerned about the ties with the Indonesian military that the Lombok Treaty commits us to. (The treaty came into force on Thursday at a ceremony in Perth which was attended by the foreign ministers of Australia and Indonesia.
Prime Minister Rudd will meet with the Indonesian Foreign Minister Hassan Wirajuda in Sydney today. Joe Collins from the AWPA said that "West Papua will be one of our most pressing foreign policy issues in the future, here is the opportunity for the Prime Minister to raise the issue of West Papua with the Indonesian Foreign Minister. We all want to have good relations with our neighbours but good relations with Jakarta should not be at the expense of the West Papuan people who are struggling for their right to self-determination".
Australian governments of all persuasions have believed that a stabilised region to our north is our best defence. Kevin Rudd gave a talk last July to the Lowy Institute on the very subject called Fresh Ideas for Future Challenges: A New Approach to Australia's Arc of Instability. In discussing Australian-Indonesian relations, however, there was no mention of West Papua. Yet it is the Indonesian military that are one of the main destabilising factors in West Papua. The activities of the military, their involvement in human rights abuses and resource extraction will lead to the very instability the government is trying to avoid.
The message that Kevin Rudd should give to the Indonesian Foreign Minister to take back to the Indonesian President is that Jakarta should dialogue with the Indonesian leadership to try and solve the many issues of concern in West Papua.
We know from history that dialogue is the beginning of the political resolution of such conflicts. To quote from Nelson Mandela, "One of our strongest weapons is dialogue".
ENDS
ttp://www.isn.ethz.ch/news/sw/details.cfm?ID=18733
In December 2007, President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono appointed Army General Djoko Santoso as his new commander-in- chief. His appointment was part of significant organizational changes initiated by TNI headquarters since September 2007. These changes have major implications, RSIS writes.
By Leonard C Sebastian and Andi Widjajanto for RSIS (07/03/080
The appointment of Army Chief of Staff Djoko Santoso as TNI Commander-in-Chief has both political and military implications. The political implication is that President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono intends to promote certain military officers to exert his influence over the military as he prepares his re-election strategy for the 2009 presidential election. The military implications indicate the start of a process of regeneration within the military as well as the need to keep up the momentum of military reform.
The new top brass
The promotion of Lieutenant General Erwin Sujono as the new chief of general staff (Kasum TNI), Lieutenant General Cornel Simbolon as the new deputy army chief of staff, Major General Suryo Prabowo as the Jakarta regional military commander, Major General Suroyo Gino as the West Java regional military commander, and Brigadier General Pramono Edhi Wibowo as the chief of staff of Central Java regional military command is seen as part of Dr Yudhoyono's maneuver to strengthen his personal influence within the military. All these generals are known to have close personal relationships with him. Erwin Sujono, Suryo Prabowo, and Edhi Wibowo are part of Dr Yudhoyono’s extended family; Cornel Simbolon was his classmate in the military academy; and Suroyo Gino in 2006-2007 commanded the presidential guard, solely responsible for the president’s security arrangements.
The reorganization of the army as part of Dr Yudhoyono’s strategy to win the 2009 national elections started in September 2007 with the promotion of Lt-Gen Simbolon (as deputy army chief of staff), Lieutenant General George Toisutta (Commander of the Army Strategic Command), Brigadier General Soenarko (Commander of Army Special Forces), and promotion of several officers to become army regional commanders such as Suryo Prabowo (Jakarta), Suroyo Gino (West Java), Pramono Edhi Wibowo (Central Java), Bambang Suranto (East Java), Djoko S. Utomo (Sulawesi), and Haryadi Soetanto (Papua).
This process culminated in January 2008 when Dr Yudhoyono, surprisingly, appointed his close aide Lieutenant General Agustadi Sasongko Purnomo to become the new army chief of staff. Under normal circumstances, such a strategic position would be given to a three-star general who had previously served as commander of the Army Strategic Command, better known as Kostrad, or as deputy army chief staff. By appointing Agustadi Sasongko Purnomo - secretary of the Coordinating Minister for Political and Security Affairs - to become his new army chief of staff, the President continues to extend his personal influence within the Army.
TNI's strategic transformation
Besides the political ramifications, changes to the military hierarchy from September 2007 to January 2008 should be seen as part of the TNI's strategic transformation aimed at designing a professional armed forces configured for dealing with 21st century contingencies.
The promotion of General Djoko Santoso as the new commander-in-chief is part of a regeneration process particularly necessary due the passing of Law of TNI 2004 extending an officer’s retirement age from 55 to 58 years old. Without the law, former commander-in-chief Air Marshall Djoko Suyanto would have retired in December 2005. Similarly, former Air Force and Navy Chief of Staff Air Marshall Herman Prayitno and Admiral Slamet Subijanto would have retired in January and June 2006.
The extension of the retirement age has created a backlog in promotions affecting a significant number of high ranking military officers, especially officers those who graduated from the military academy from 1973 to 1978. From 2004 to 2009, there will be approximately 120-150 army generals from 1973-1978 classes and another 50-70 generals from 1979-1981 classes. These 170-220 army generals will have to compete with each other to fill approximately 130 positions in the Army.
The available positions for army generals has reduced significantly into only 44 strategic positions in the army regional commands, army special forces, and army strategic command, and another 80-90 positions in army headquarters. This reduction is due to cutbacks of the number of army regional commands in the late 1980s and as a consequence of the elimination of its dual-function role.
Military academy's role
As part of the regeneration process, a high-ranking officer from the military academy's graduating classes from 1977-1979 will be promoted as the next commander-in-chief just before the 2009 national elections. In order to do so, at some point from December 2008 to June 2009, Dr Yudhoyono will have to replace the current chiefs of staff. The appointment of General Djoko Santoso from the class of 1975 as the commander-in-chief is a first step in this transition. In fact, General Santoso is younger in age compared to the current army, navy, and air force chiefs of staff and all the current three star officers (with the exception of Commander of the Army Strategic Command, Lieutenant General Toisutta).
General Santoso is conservative and represents continuity. He supports the principle of political neutrality of the military; he guarantees that serving army personnel would not get involved in local and national elections; he accepts the separation of military justice system from the criminal justice system in principle; he has stated the need for a reserve force; and he favors the elimination of military businesses.
In 2006, General Santoso created a new Total Defence College in Bandung to initiate a series of discussions on doctrinal reforms. He wants an open debate on the basic concepts of Indonesia's defense doctrine. Foremost in these discussions is whether Indonesia should maintain its People's War doctrine or have it modified to become a new doctrine of total war or total defense.
Another issue for discussion is whether a doctrine of asymmetric warfare relying on military capacity to maintain a war of attrition against a much stronger adversary would become a more appropriate strategy for Indonesia.
Leonard C Sebastian is Associate Professor and Coordinator of the Indonesia Programme at the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies (RSIS), and Andi Widjajanto is a PhD candidate at RSIS, Nanyang Technological University. Reprinted with permission from RSIS. Copyright (c) 2007 S Rajaratnam School of International Studies, Nanyang Technological University, Blk S4, Level B4, Nanyang Avenue, Singapore 639798.
Google Blogs Alert for: west papua
href="http://geoconger.wordpress.com/2008/03/08/government-chided-over-inaction-cen-30708-p-4/">
Government chided over inaction: CEN 3.07.08 p 4.
By geoconger
Speaking in the House of Lords on Feb 26, Lord Harries said the government’s “bland disingenuousness” over West Papua had been discreditable. The Indonesian government was guilty of torture, “systematic brutality” and “genocide” against ...
title="http://geoconger.wordpress.com">
Conger - http://geoconger.wordpress.com
href="http://thebloodwoodtree.org/?p=104">
West Papuan churches & other religions appeal for an international ...
By Phil
(Source: Kabar Irian Digest) Catholic & Protestant churches, Muslims, Hindus & Buddhists together made this appeal: WE 1. declared West Papua as ‘Land of Peace’ on the 5th February 2002. 2. made an appeal to the international community ...
title="http://thebloodwoodtree.org">
The Bloodwood Tree - http://thebloodwoodtree.org
href="http://www.westpapua.ca/?q=en/node/498">
Urgent Alert: March 3 2008 Demonstrations in Manokwari
Unswayed by threats, previous police brutality and their release from prison yesterday, Youth and Students of West Papua have joined today with detainees to keeping up the pressure on the Indonesian Government in demanding a Referendum ...
title="http://www.westpapua.ca">
WestPAN: Canada's West Papua... - http://www.westpapua.ca
href="http://thebloodwoodtree.org/?p=103">
West Papuan Leaders Released From Prison After International ...
By Phil
http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/WO0803/S00076.htm Thursday, 6 March 2008, 11:36 am Press Release: West Papua Leaders For Immediate Broadcast Wednesday March 5 1830 Aest Jayapura, West Papua, March 5, 2008 WEST PAPUAN leaders calling for ...
title="http://thebloodwoodtree.org">
The Bloodwood Tree - http://thebloodwoodtree.org
href="http://sandboxtests.blogspot.com/2008/03/scorpion-and-frog.html">
The Scorpion and the Frog
By -ben(-ben)
In addition to having a weary Portuguese friend and a Swedish military bike, I prepare my coffee in a French press, relieve myself in a Turkish toilet, wear a West Papuan penis gourd in warm weather, and have an unpronounceable sexually ...
title="http://sandboxtests.blogspot.com/">
Sandbox - http://sandboxtests.blogspot.com/
href="http://westpapuafree.wordpress.com/2008/03/06/government-to-make-legal-umbrella-for-west-papua/">
Government to make legal umbrella for West Papua
By westpapuafree
Papuan leading figures are working very hard to support development particularly in the transportation sector in an effort to boost economic growth in Papua and West Papua. It is very fortunate that Indonesia is democratic now, ...
title="http://westpapuafree.wordpress.com">
Free West Papua - http://westpapuafree.wordpress.com
href="http://kirribilli.wordpress.com/2008/03/06/alice-alice/">
Alice, Alice….
By kirribilli
Parts of the tour are fairly dull, but there was something about being in the General Assembly room and asking Alice difficult questions about Taiwan, Tibet and West Papua that made the experience fascinating. ...
title="http://kirribilli.wordpress.com">
Kirribilli - http://kirribilli.wordpress.com
href="http://mafrench.blogspot.com/2008/03/centrality-of-africa-to-defeat-of.html">
The Centrality of Africa to the Defeat of Global Zio-White Supremacy
By MAFRENCH(MAFRENCH)
Whether we are fighting here in the belly of the beast, in Haiti, in West Papua, in South and Central America, wherever this plague is infecting African life.-trinicenter.com. IOL: Africa The Times - Entertainment News The Times ...
title="http://mafrench.blogspot.com/">
ZIMFRENCH - http://mafrench.blogspot.com/
href="http://christianandjenn.blogspot.com/2008/03/risk.html">
Risk
By christian and jenn(christian and jenn)
A team of eight from Cornerstone (our church) are heading to Papua New Guinea and we are leaving this Saturday evening. The trip has quickly approached, and we are all finishing up the final details. It's not a long trip, ...
title="http://christianandjenn.blogspot.com/">
it's an east coast - west coast thing... - http://christianandjenn.blogspot.com/
href="http://thebloodwoodtree.org/?p=100">
UN report says human rights defenders are labelled as separatists
By Phil
... of the Secretary General on the situation of human rights defenders in Indonesia. The full report can be dowloaded from here. “The Special Representative visited Jayapura, capital of the West Papua province, on 8 and 9 June 2007. ...
title="http://thebloodwoodtree.org">
The Bloodwood Tree - http://thebloodwoodtree.org
This once a day Google Alert is brought to you by Google.
Remove this alert.
Create another alert.
Manage your alerts.
|
