Paras Indonesia, September, 14 2006 @ 11:39 am
Debunking The Papua Myths
By: Roy Tupai
The Brussels-based International Crisis Group (ICG) has released a new report that
debunks various "misconceptions" about Papua province: that military-backed Muslim
militia groups have entered the province, that genocide has occurred, and that troops
being removed from Aceh are being systematically placed in Papua.
The report, "Papua: Answers to Frequently Asked Questions", acknowledges that
pro-independence sentiment is widespread, "thanks to poor governance, a sense of
historical injustice, a feeling of cultural and racial difference from the rest of Indonesia
and chronic low-level abuse, extortion and indignities on the part of security forces". It
says more serious human rights abuses occur, but less frequently than in the past
and often in response to acts of violence against police or the military. ICG says
much, but not all, of the pro-independence sentiment could probably be addressed by
a more benign government that provided genuine services to the population. It says
pro-independence sentiment is less evident in the area that has become the province
of West Irian Jaya and along the southern coast.
According to the report, there is little evidence that Muslim militias are present. "The
salafi militia Laskar Jihad had a few hundred men in Sorong, in what is now West Irian
Jaya, in 2001, but the organisation disbanded in October 2002, and there is little
reason to believe it survived in Papua when it collapsed everywhere else. Jemaah
Tabligh, a non-political missionary organisation, has had a presence in Papua since
1998, and its members, who often wear long white robes and turbans, are frequently
confused with Laskar Jihad. They focus on making Muslims better Muslims, not jihad
activity."
As for genocide claims, the ICG says two foreign reports suggesting that Indonesia
might have been responsible for genocide in Papua fail to make a strong case and
one of them is marred by many factual errors. "The reports cite campaigns by the
Indonesian military in the 1970s that killed thousands of Papuan civilians. These
operations could conceivably fit the definition of a war crime or crime against
humanity, but not genocide. Neither of the reports provides any evidence of intent on
the part of the Indonesian government or military to destroy the ethnic Papuan
population as such in whole or in part. Nor have there been killings of civilians on
anything like that scale since the 1980s."
Regarding the allegation of a military build-up, the ICG report says the Indonesian
Defense Forces (TNI) has over 12,000 troops in Papua, and there are between 2,000
and 2,500 paramilitary police. "Rumours notwithstanding, there is no evidence that
troops pulled out of Aceh are being systematically redeployed in Papua. But the
numbers have increased over the last two years, as the size of three infantry
battalions permanently stationed in Papua has increased from 650 to 1,050 soldiers
each. A similar expansion is planned for three other battalions by the end of 2007."
ICG criticizes the ban on foreign journalists entering the province since 2003. It
mentions that several Jakarta-based correspondents have received permission to visit
in 2006, "however - to work on non-political or human rights-related stories - even to
sensitive areas in the central highlands. The official reason for the restrictions is that
foreign reporters would be used as a platform by Papuan political activists, possibly
'threatening Indonesian unity and cohesion'. If the restrictions were lifted, however,
Papua-related stories in the international media might reflect more nuance."
The report concludes by stating that persuading the government to lift restrictions on
foreign journalists would help to provide more balanced reporting inside and outside
the country. "At the moment, there is probably not very much that the international
community can do to facilitate dialogue between Papuans and the central
government, given the latter's sensitivities. But technical assistance could help in a
process of consultation across the two provinces to discuss revisions to the special
autonomy package so that Papuans have a genuine sense of ownership of the
amended law."
There is virtually no mention in the report of allegations of the military's widespread
involvement in illegal logging in Papua. Illegal logging is only mentioned in the
following context: "... to step up patrols against illegal fishing, transport of illegally
logged timber (and probably Papuan asylum seekers), the navy is talking about
increasing its presence in Papua." Also, there's no mention of allegations that
alcoholism has played a role in contributing to ethnic rivalries and the absence of
strong, professional local leadership.
Following are the ICG's media release and overview of the report, which can be read in
full at the ICG website.
Media Release
Papua: Answers to Frequently Asked Questions
Jakarta/Brussels, 5 September 2006: Correcting false assumptions about Papua and
the Papuan independence movement can lead to better policies on the part of
Indonesia and the international community.
Papua: Answers to Frequently Asked Questions,* the latest briefing from the
International Crisis Group, examines what lies behind some of the most commonly
held assumptions. Abroad, Papua is pictured by many as a place where the
Indonesian army perpetrates genocide against a defenceless people struggling for
freedom. Inside Indonesia, Papua is often portrayed as the target of machinations by
Western interests, bent on bringing about an East Timor-style international
intervention that would further divide and weaken the Indonesian nation. Neither
portrayal is accurate.
"Both external and internal misconceptions of Papua are difficult to dislodge because
they contain kernels of truth", says Francesca Lawe-Davies, Crisis Group South East
Asia analyst. "Papua is not a happy place, but neither is it a killing field".
Among the issues examined are:
* Governance - Implicit in the image of Papua as a place of persecution and
oppression is the idea that non-Papuan Indonesians are in control. In fact, governors
and district heads are all indigenous Papuans, with significant political and fiscal
authority. But this has not eased corruption or improved local government.
* Military expansion - rumours that the Indonesian military is about to double its
forces in Papua or that soldiers withdrawn from Aceh have been systematically
rotated there are untrue, but the number of troops has risen in the last two years.
* Human rights violations - Allegations of genocide by security forces are not
well-founded, but a past pattern of grave human rights violations and a current one of
chronic low-level abuse and extortion are facts. Improving the financial and human
rights accountability of the military and transferring security to locally-recruited police
could help.
"The most useful assistance the international community can provide to Papua is
development aid to strengthen local institutions and deliver basic services", says
Sidney Jones, South East Asia Project Director. Facilitating wide-ranging
consultations to evaluate and revise the 2001 autonomy package would also help.
Many of the distortions about Papua could be addressed by lifting restrictions on
foreign journalists.
OVERVIEW
No part of Indonesia generates as much distorted reporting as Papua, the western half
of New Guinea that has been home to an independence movement since the 1960s.
Some sources, mostly outside Indonesia, paint a picture of a closed killing field where
the Indonesian army, backed by militia forces, perpetrates genocide against a
defenceless people struggling for freedom. A variant has the army and multinational
companies joining forces to despoil Papua and rob it of its own resources. Proponents
of this view point to restrictions on media access, increasing troop strength in Papua
of the Indonesian armed forces (TNI), payments to the TNI from the giant U.S. copper
and gold mining company, Freeport, and reports by human rights organisations as
supporting evidence for their views.
Others, mostly inside Indonesia, portray Papua as the target of machinations by
Western interests, bent on bringing about an East Timor-style international
intervention that will further divide and weaken the Indonesian nation. Specifically,
according to this view, Western interests are encouraging an international campaign
to review and reject a 1969 United Nations-sponsored plebiscite, called the Act of
Free Choice, that resulted in Papua's integration into the Indonesian republic. Should
that campaign be successful, the international legal grounds for a referendum on
independence would be established. They believe that the independence movement
consists of a small band of criminals who have no real support in the population at
large.
Neither portrayal of Papua is accurate, but both are extraordinarily difficult to dislodge
- particularly because both contain kerneels of truth that fuel false assumptions. Papua
is not a happy place, but neither is it a killing field. Historical injustice and chronic
low-level abuse on the part of security forces are facts. Solidarity groups concerned
about Papua are more active now than five years ago, and some parliamentarians in
Western countries have taken their cause to heart; this has not, however, translated
into growing international support for Papuan independence.
Failure to understand the complexities of the Papuan problem not only produces bad
policies in Jakarta, but can also have severe international consequences, as
witnessed by the plummeting of Indonesian-Australian relations in early 2006 over
Australia's decision to grant temporary asylum to a group of Papuan political activists.
This briefing will examine several questions that lie behind the distortions:
* Who governs Papua and how? Are TNI numbers increasing, and if so, why?
* What substance is there to the claim of historical injustice in Papua's integration
into Indonesia?
* How strong is the independence movement in Papua? Who supports it?
* What substance is there to allegations of genocide?
* Are there Muslim militias in Papua? And a process of Islamicisation?
* How much of Papua is off-limits to outsiders? Why the restrictions?
* What can the international community do?
Copyright (c) 2005 - PT Laksamana Global International. All rights reserved
|
