West Papua Report September 2014
West Papua Report
September 2014
This
is the 125th in a series of monthly reports that focus on developments
affecting Papuans. This series is produced by the non-profit West Papua
Advocacy Team (WPAT) drawing on media accounts, other NGO assessments,
and analysis and reporting from sources within West Papua. This report
is co-published by the East Timor and Indonesia Action Network (ETAN). Back issues are posted online at http://www.etan.org/issues/wpapua/default.htm. Questions regarding this report can be addressed to Edmund McWilliams at edmcw@msn.com. If you wish to receive the report directly via e-mail, send a note to etan@etan.org. Link to this issue: http://etan.org/issues/wpapua/2014/1409wpap.htm.
The Report
leads with “Perspective,” an analysis piece; followed by “Update,” a
summary of some developments during the covered period; and then
“Chronicle” which includes analyses, statements, new resources, appeals
and action alerts related to West Papua. Anyone interested in
contributing a Perspective or responding to one should write to edmcw@msn.com. The opinions expressed in Perspectives are the author’s and not necessarily those of WPAT or ETAN.For additional news on West Papua see the reg.westpapua listserv archive or on Twitter.
CONTENTS
This month’s PERSPECTIVE
is by ETAN’s John M. Miller. It looks at differences and similarities
in the historical experience of Timor-Leste (East Timor) and West Papua.
UPDATE examines the potential impact a Joko Widodo administration may have on West Papua, noting high expectations for a new focus on the “neglected region.” Two French journalists
have been detained by security authorities in West Papua; this action
may be intended to challenge President-elect Widodo who has spoken of
his intention to open West Papua to international media scrutiny.
“Development” plans in the Bintuni Bay area appear to be ignoring the voices and interests of local Papuans. Security forces have detained and beaten two Papuans in Manokwari. Widodo plans to establish a human rights court
are encouraging, but it is not clear whether the court will address the
extraordinary abuses of the 1965-66 period or the systematic abuse of
human rights in West Papua extending back even further.
CHRONICLE highlights appeals to President-elect Widodo by Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch regarding the need to make human rights a priority. Both appeals include a focus on West Papua. A comment by Pat Walsh offers the view that the Widodo administration may offer the “best prospect” for progress on the decades-old “Papua problem.”
PERSPECTIVE
Timor’s Success, Papua’s Struggle
by John M. Miller
Fifteen years ago, on August 30, 1999,
thousands of East Timorese voters lined up to exercise their long-denied
right to self-determination, a process that had been interrupted by
Indonesia’s U.S.-backed invasion and occupation in 1975. By noon of that
day,
most had chosen independence
(in preference to an “enhanced autonomy”). As the United Nations
announced the result, the Indonesian military and its militia proxies
began their long-threatened wave of destruction and violence. This was
meant both to punish the East Timorese for their choice and to send a
message to other rebellious areas, especially West Papua and Aceh.
After a short period of UN
administration, East Timor finally became the independent Democratic
Republic of Timor-Leste on May 20, 2002. Timor’s successful referendum
inspired hopes for many in West Papua that they might also be able to
choose their political status. Indonesia’s elite reacted to the “loss”
of Timor-Leste by vowing never to let anything similar happen again.
Many in the military were upset about the loss of opportunities for
promotion and side income. In response, Indonesia combined grants of
“special autonomy” with harsh crackdowns in Aceh and West Papua.
There are many parallels between West
Papua and Timor-Leste and, as tellingly, substantial differences. First
some of the parallels:
On the periphery of the archipelago,
neither territory was part of Indonesia as it was established on
independence. The colonizers of both had said that they would help them
exercise their own rights to self-determination. Initially, the United
Nations also agreed. In both cases, when Indonesia acted to annex the
territories, major powers — especially the United States — actively
supported Indonesia. (Indonesia’s takeovers serve as bookends to
Henry Kissinger’s career
at the highest levels of the U.S. government. The annexation of West
Papua was completed soon after he began serving as Nixon’s National
Security Advisor; Indonesia’s invasion of Portuguese Timor was
notoriously given the green light by President Ford and Secretary of
State Kissinger a little more than a year before Ford’s term ended.)
The populations of both territories
suffered massive human rights violations, from arbitrary arrests and
systematic rape and torture to discrimination. Indonesian security
forces engaged in mass murder, deliberate starvation, and massacres —
some well-known, others little documented. Indonesia stands accused of
genocide in both regions. Where the number of pre-invasion colonizers
was relatively small, both places saw an influx of people from Indonesia
under formal and informal transmigration programs. Children orphaned by
war or otherwise, were permanently removed to other islands. Underlying
this was a paternalistic and racist attitude holding that the mostly
darker-skinned peoples of Timor and Papua were too stupid or primitive
to govern themselves.
No Indonesian generals or political leaders have been
heldaccountable
for war crimes and crimes against humanity committed in occupied
Timor-Leste. The same is true for West Papua. This impunity contributes
to on-going human rights violation in West Papua.
After a time, both territories were
opened to tourism, but the Indonesian government worked to keep
journalists, diplomats, and others from freely visiting to investigate
conditions.
Importantly, as many insisted their
causes were lost, both populations continued to insist on their right to
self-determination. In the face of Indonesia’s overwhelming force,
aided by weapons and training from the United States and others, the
armed opposition became less prominent and resistance tactics shifted to
emphasize nonviolent opposition in the towns and cities and stepped up
outreach and diplomatic efforts abroad. Indonesia’s violent reaction to
peaceful protest crucially highlighted the real nature of its rule over
its unwilling subjects.
Now some major differences:
While
Portuguese Timor was sometimes included in Indonesia’s leaders’
conception of a greater Indonesia, they never argued for any historic
claim to the territory, instead they said that they were protecting
their neighbour from civil conflict. On the other hand, West Papua —
with its Dutch colonial heritage and its place
in “the Indonesian nationalist imagination as ‘the martyr place of the
struggle for independence‘ in the words of Sukarno” – was always seen
as an important piece of a unified Indonesian state.
Timor’s petroleum and other limited
resources are mere drops in Indonesia’s bucket compared to the great
mineral and other natural resource wealth of West Papua.
Critically, while Timor’s
self-determination was never considered fully settled until it gained
independence, the United Nations views the issue as closed for West
Papua. Despite its well-documented flaws, the 1969
“Act of Free Choice”
was accepted as valid and West Papua was taken off the UN agenda. (The
Indonesians tried a similar gambit after invading Portuguese Timor. In
November 1975, representatives of four Timorese political parties signed the Balibo Declaration,
supposedly inviting Indonesia annexation. The declaration was written
hastily in Bali, not the Timorese border town notorious for the
pre-invasion murder of five Australian based journalists. )
Unlike West Papua, Timor remained on the
UN agenda, even after Indonesia formally annexed Timor as its 27th
province in 1976. The UN Security Council quickly, though ineffectually,
condemned the invasion in
two resolutions (on December 22 1975, and April 22, 1976) and the General Assembly passed annual resolutions
supporting Timor-Leste’s right to self-determination, beginning on
December 12, 1975, through to November 1982, when the issue was placed
under the good offices of the Secretary-General. The Committee of 24 on
decolonization held annual hearings on Timor up until it was removed from the UN’s list of non-self-governing territories on independence in 2002.
Even some staunch Suharto supporters
like the U.S. government were not ready to unconditionally endorse how
Timor became part of Indonesia. State Department officials were always
careful to say “We accept Indonesia’s incorporation of East Timor
without maintaining that a valid act of self-determination has taken
place.” When asked about West Papua, the response has no such nuance. It
is usually some variation of these
remarks by then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton
from September 2012: “Regarding the very important question on the
situation in Papua, we support the territorial integrity [of Indonesia]
and that includes Papua and West Papua provinces. We believe strongly
that dialogue between Papuan representatives [and] the Indonesian
Government would help address concerns that the Papuans have and assist
in resolving conflict peacefully, improving governance and development.”
This is usually followed by support for the “special autonomy” many in
West Papua haverejected and a statement deploring violence without identifying Indonesia’s security forces as the main perpetrators.
To reinforce its diplomatic efforts, the
Timorese resistance had the support of Portugal and the
Portuguese-speaking African countries. Portugal as an EU member vetoed
certain forms of cooperation with Indonesia and acted for the Timorese
resistance in UN-sponsored negotiations. The Dutch government has shown
no interest in advocating for West Papua, and Vanuatu has been its only
consistently supportive government.
Once Suharto fell, there were many —
inside and outside governments and the United Nations — poised to seize
the opportunity to press for Timor’s self-determination. And seize it
they did. Building on past activism and advocacy, U.S. policy changed to
an explicit call for “a valid act of self-determination.” (For an
overview of how U.S. policy toward East Timor shifted during the 1990s
see
here.)
The above is history and government policies. What about movements for change?
Awareness of West Papua is certainly
growing, as is the number of people acting as advocates. West Papuans,
often at great risk, continue to resist and demonstrate within the
territory and Indonesia proper. And Papuans are traveling the globe to
advocate for themselves. Grassroots global support is important, but
outside of Portugal support for Timor was never a mass movement except
for a few weeks in September 1999.
Changes in U.S. policy
were the result of targeted advocacy mostly aimed at ending U.S.
support for the Indonesian military in response to growing congressional
concern about the violations of human rights.
In the 1990s, the Timorese resistance
was clearly unified, both within the country and abroad, under the
umbrella of the National Council of Timorese Resistance (CNRT). Its
positions were clear, as was its main request to international
solidarity activists: change your own government’s policies to end
support for Suharto and the occupation. The multiple messages and lack
of unified leadership from West Papua is difficult for supporters to
navigate.
Post-Suharto Indonesia is now a member
of the international community in good standing, despite its on-going
rights violations in West Papua. Indonesia is seen as a democratic
example to the Muslim world, a bulwark against China, and important
front in the “war on terrorism.”
Overcoming the many disadvantages
relative to Timor’s struggle, international efforts for West Papua will
need to generate greater public support and more targeted campaigning to
ensure an effective international response to Indonesia’s 50-year rule
over West Papua.
President-elect Widodo Pledges Signals Greater Presidential Attention to Neglected Region
President-elect Joko “Jokowi” Widodo
pledged to construct
a “presidential palace” in West Papua; a gesture apparently meant to
convey the expectation of greater Presidential attention to the region.
His predecessor had visited the region only three times in ten years.
Widodo also pledged his administration would meet quarterly for
“dialogue” with Papuan leaders. These meeting would involve either
himself or key members of his administration.
These pledges are among a series of
steps and statements which suggest a new direction from the Widodo
administration regarding West Papua.
Widodo visited
West Papua during the parliamentary campaign and then while campaigning
for president. He also made a public pledge to open West Papua to
foreign journalists and others.
In early August, Widodo met with about
30 Papuan politicians and religious leaders to describe his plan to
increase contact between the Jakarta and Papua. The step was reminiscent
of a meeting called by President Habibie
with 100 prominent Papuans in February 1999. In that meeting, the Papuans told the stunned Habibie that they wanted independence.
Papuan leaders
reportedly raised
several issues with Widodo related to the Freeport gold and copper
mine, including demands for a greater share of money and for the company
to move its headquarters to Jayapura from Jakarta. They also asked for
investigations of killings allegedly related to the mine’s operations.
Reaction to the President-elect’s statements
has been sceptical:
“My experience of Indonesian politicians is that any program made for
Papua makes no difference – that is, it creates more suffering,”
Reverend John Djonga of Wamena said. Rev. Socratez Yoman, who was not at
the August meeting, said the President-elect “will not solve the West
Papua case in the short term if he spends two or three days there.” He
called for withdrawing Jakarta’s troops and police, stopping migration
from other parts of Indonesia, freedom for political prisoners and
inviting exiled activists home.
French Journalists Jailed in West Papua
International journalist groups and
others have called for the release of two French journalists detained in
West Papua. Thomas Dandois and Valentine Bourrat were arrested in
Wamena on August 6 while working on a documentary for Arte, a
French-German TV network. They had entered the region with only a
tourist visa. Indonesia rarely grants foreign journalists permission to
go to West Papua.
An action alert from Tapol and the International Coalition for Papua
calls on people to contact Indonesia officials demanding the
journalists release, “access for international journalists and
institutions to conduct journalistic or human rights related works
without restriction, in accordance with international human rights
standards.” And an end to “intimidation and legal threat” to
those providing assistance to the journalists. Police are holding Areki
Wanimbo, an indigenous leader from Lanny, who the journalists had met.
The police also want to question Theo Hesegem, a human rights defender
seen with the journalists.
Sulistyo Pudjo Hartono, a provincial police spokesperson,
said
“We were concerned that [the French journalists] activities were part
of a plan to create insecurity and instability in Papua.” The
journalists “video footage, audio recordings and the journalists’ phones
had been seized,” said Hartono.
The
Southeast Asian Press Alliance
said “the detention of Dandois and Bourrat and the on-going ban on
foreign journalists in Papua as blatant violations of Indonesia’s own
Press Law (U.U. 40, 1999).” Reporters without Borders called the arrest of the journalists “illegal,” and called for their “immediate release.”
The Association of Indonesian Journalists’ president Eko Maryadi
said that
“The arrest of foreign journalists in Papua is not new, but the
government’s repressive stance is increasing the desire of the
international media to go to Papua.” “We are hopeful that new President
will be more open to the outside world. Becoming more transparent and
accommodating to foreign journalists who wish to cover the Papua
region.”
Phelim Kine, a former Jakarta-based foreign correspondent now with Human Rights Watch,
wrote that the two journalists “are just the latest victims of the Indonesian government’s Papua censorship obsession.”
The
two journalists are currently being held on immigration violations, but
may face “subversion” charges for allegedly filming members of the Free
Papua Movement (OPM). A Papua police spokesman Sulistyo Pudjo accused the journalists of being “part of an effort to destabilize Papua.”
Successive Indonesian administrations
have long sought to hinder international scrutiny of conditions in West
Papua, including the widespread human rights violations by security and
intelligence authorities. Applications by foreign reporters to visit
West Papua are rarely approved. “Journalists who do get official
permission are invariably shadowed by official minders, who strictly
control their movements and access to interviewees,” writes Kine,
President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono, like
his predecessors, persisted in maintaining restrictions on journalists’
access to West Papua. However, President-elect Widodo during the
election campaign indicated he might change course. When asked if as
president he would open access to Papua for foreign journalists and
international organizations, he
replied “There’s nothing to hide.”
According to
the Committee to Protect Journalists, “Foreign journalists who are
detained in the region without a journalist visa or official permits are
usually deported immediately.”
WPAT Comment: The journalists should be
immediately released and allowed to resume reporting from West Papua.
Their harsh treatment is a stark contradiction to the Widodo pledge to
allow international journalists greater access to West Papua. The
detention of the French journalists should be viewed as a message from
Indonesia’s security forces to the President-elect that notwithstanding
his intention to allow greater access, they still call the shots in West
Papua.
Industrialization at West Papuan Expense
An August 23 report from AwasMIFEE
provides a detailed account of plans by the Indonesian government to
significantly expand the industrialization of the area around Bintuni
Bay in the Bird’s Head region of West Papua. AwasMIFEE reports that
“key decisions expected soon will give several multinational companies
the green light to build petrochemical factories” in the area. BP’s
Tangguh Liquefied Natural Gas project begun in 2005 currently operates
there, and several international corporations are interested in building
methanol plants which would source Tangguh gas. Companies are also
interested in developing ethanol and fertilizer factories.
Not surprisingly, the concerns of local
Papuans regarding these developments have not been sought and are
unknown. Failure to seek the involvement, opinions, much less the
consent of local people before major projects affecting them is not new
in West Papua. Local Papuans
were not involved in the decision to launch the Tangguh project.
Moreover, from the outset there have been and continue to be problems
associatedwith a lack of accountability
by Tangguh project authorities. The August 23 article points out, that
problems between the Tangguh project and local people are likely “only
get worse as Genting oil commences exploration activities — for example
there have been cases of intimidation from soldiers employed by the
company.” Malaysia’s Genting is operating in an exploration block, south
of Tangguh that extends into Fakfak regency.
The breadth of the challenges posed to
Papuans in the area derives not only from the development of energy
projects and subsequent downstream industrial development. According to
AwasMIFEE: “To make things worse, PT Varita Majutama has recently
obtained permission for a 35.371 hectare expansion of its oil palm
estate and PT Rimbun Sawit Papua has also just got permission for
another 30.596 hectares. The forest will soon be gone too, leaving an
industrial landscape where local indigenous people little choice but to
become dependent on handouts from the various companies.”
WPAT Comment: Corporations sourcing
workers from outside West Papua is another major impact seen in earlier
major projects in West Papua undertaken in collaboration with the
central government. This is a harsh reality that exacerbates the ethnic
cleansing of West Papua and the marginalization of Papuans in their own
land.
Indonesian Military and Police Beat Two Papuan Peaceful Dissenters
A West Papuan daily reports
that on August 8 Manokwari District police detained and severely beat
two members of the West Papua National Committee (KNPB). The Papuans had
written graffiti calling for a boycott of Indonesian National Day
(August 17) activities. According to a source who visited the two
victims in detention, Oni Wea, a 21-year old university student, was
beaten by a rifle butt and repeatedly kicked in the chest. His lip was
split and swollen and his eyes were swollen and he was unable see.
Sixteen-year old high school student Robert Yelemaken’s lip was also
split, his face swollen, and his chest hurt after he was also kicked and
beaten by rifle butts.
President-elect Widodo to Set Up Human Rights Court
President-elect Widodo intends to establish an ad hoc human rights court
to deal with past rights violations, according to Andi Widjajanto, a
member of Widodo’s transition team. He told the Jakarta Post
that “regulations which are being drafted by Jokowi’s transition team
include a presidential decree to hear cases of human rights violations
that took place during the 1998 May riots and a government regulation
in-lieu-of law (Perppu) to address the establishment of the Truth and
Reconciliation Commission (KKR) to bring about solutions to a number of
past human rights abuses.”
The 2000 Law on human rights states that
ad hoc human rights courts can be set up by a recommendation from the
House of Representatives and a decree by the president.
KontraS, the Indonesian human rights group,
doubted Jokowi’s commitment,
saying that if he were serious the President-elect should have
announced the step himself. KontraS Coordinator Haris Azar said that any
such court should prosecute a number of generals, including members
Jokowi’s transition team, such as the former head of the National
Intelligence Agency (BIN) A. M. Hendropriyono, and Jokowi supporter former Indonesian military commander Gen. (Ret.) Wiranto, as well as Jokowi’s opponent former Kopassus commander of Prabowo Subianto.
WPAT Comment: Such a court, to be
credible, would need to address human rights violations extending back
to the 1965-66 period. It would need also to address 40-plus years of
systematic rights abuse in West Papua, including the 1969 “Act of Free
Choice” which denied Papuans their fundamental right to
self-determination.
CHRONICLE
AI Calls on Indonesia to End Attacks on Freedom of Expression in West Papua
In an August 29 statement, Amnesty International said
called for an “end attacks on freedom of expression in [Indonesia's]
Papuan region.” Amnesty highlighted the apparent murder of KNPB
political activist Martinus Yohame
whose body was found near the Nana Islands in Sorong, after his family
reported him missing on August 20; the detention and torture of two
Papuan students in the Manokwari area (see above); and the long detention of two French journalists (see above).
These and other “recent attacks
highlight the repressive environment faced by political activists and
journalists in the area and the on-going impunity for human rights
violations by security forces there,” the group said.
HRW Urges Widodo to Address Human Rights, Including in West Papua
In a lengthy letter
to President-elect Widodo, Human Rights Watch wrote that he has the
“responsibility to address continuing human rights concerns in
Indonesia.” The group writes that “members of Indonesia’s security
forces — particularly Detachment 88 and Kopassus — continue to engage in
serious abuses… particularly in the two Papuan provinces.”
The letter cites three measures that
Widodo can quickly take in relation to West Papua: opening the region to
“independent observers, including international journalists and human
rights organizations”; “the immediate and unconditional release of Filep
Karma and other political prisoners”; and ending “unlawful
surveillance” of Papuans by Kopassus and others. HRW also urged Widodo
to “order an independent and impartial investigation into various
allegations of human rights violations in Papua… Such an investigation
should hold security forces accountable and bring the perpetrators of
such abuses to justice.”
Analysis Sees In Widodo “Best Prospects” for Progress on West Papua Issue
Pat Walsh argues in Eureka Street
that “settlement of the West Papua issue can only come from Indonesia
and the Jokowi presidency offers the best prospects for this in half a
century. Creating the conditions in which inclusive dialogue based on
mutual respect can occur will tax the political imagination and
creativity of all involved. The trust and goodwill Jokowi enjoys,
including in West Papua, make for an excellent start to this important
enterprise.”
By Koen NL
—————
.jpg)
