The Age, April 10, 2006
West Papuans are happy to be Indonesians
By M. Wahid Supriyadi
THE granting of temporary protection visas to 42 West Papuans has given new
ammunition to anti-Indonesian activists. Old issues such as genocide, human rights
abuse and the legitimacy of the Act of Free Choice (whereby West Papua became a
part of Indonesia) have once again reared their heads thanks to the arrival of 43
Papuan asylum seekers in Australia. Let me set the record straight.
In 1935, the population of West Papua was about 700,000. By 2000, however, the
population was 2,220,034. Between 1980 and 1990 the average population growth was
3.34 per cent, well above the national level of 1.74 per cent. From 1990 to 2000,
population growth of 3.22 per cent was recorded in West Papua, still well above the
national level of 1.49 per cent for the period. It is true that migrants account for a
significant slice of this increase in population, but that is the national trend throughout
Indonesia.
How can anyone accept claims that genocide has been occurring when the facts so
obviously indicate otherwise? Let alone when we remember that we are living in the
21st century, in an age of global communications, when not a single untoward death
in West Papua could possibly go unnoticed by the world's media.
The recent general election in West Papua province was relatively peaceful. About 1.1
million people, or more than 90 per cent of those eligible to vote, took part in the
election that saw Barnabas Saebu become Governor-elect with roughly 30 per cent of
the vote. This result indicates that, despite allegations to the contrary, the vast
majority of West Papuans independently choose to exercise their right to vote without
any government or military pressure.
Since the downfall of Soeharto in 1998, Indonesia has been steadily transforming itself
into the world's third-biggest democracy. In 2004 general elections were held in a
peaceful and democratic fashion and, for the first time, the nation directly elected its
president. Since its democratic transformation, Indonesia has established its own
Commission for Human Rights, empowered to ensure that human rights are upheld
throughout Indonesia. Any claims of human rights abuses by the 43 Papuans recently
landed in Australia could be addressed through this independent body.
Allegations that the "Act of Free Choice", by which West Papua became part of the
Indonesian nation, was somehow illegitimate are also without merit. The act was a
historic political exercise, involving a series of consultations with tribal councils over a
period of several months during 1969, whereby 1025 Papuan tribal chiefs voted for
their territory to be reintegrated into Indonesia. This approach was selected as being
the most appropriate given the logistical difficulties created by the region's geography,
and local political circumstances that dictated that tribal chiefs spoke for and
expressed the will of their native communities. The exercise drew extra credibility from
the fact that it was carried out in accordance with the New York Agreement struck
between Indonesia and the Netherlands. The final seal of legitimacy, however, came
from the United Nations' decision, based on a report by the UN Secretary-General, to
recognise West Papua as a part of Indonesian territory.
Accusations that the absence of a "one man, one vote" referendum on decolonisation
made this process of determination invalid are entirely spurious.
Finally, the inclusion of West Papua into Indonesia also accords with the principle of
international law "uti possidetis juris" that holds that the boundaries of post-colonial
states conform with their pre-colonial borders.
As to the argument that West Papua's Melanesian population makes it intrinsically
dissimilar to the rest of Indonesia, it is important to recognise that Indonesia is home
to about 12 million Melanesians, only about 1.4 million of whom live in Papua.
Indonesia in fact boasts the largest Melanesian population of any country in the world.
Moreover, almost all of the world's nations are comprised of different ethnic groups.
Australia is home to people of more than 140 different ethnicities, yet ethnic difference
per se does not generally imply a separate and distinct political identity either here or
in Indonesia.
In response to aspersions that West Papua is the target of a deliberate policy of
Javanisation or Islamisation, I feel it is imperative to point out that the majority of
Papuans still hold to their traditional beliefs, while Christianity and Islam are both
embraced by significant numbers and have been since before the republic was
established. Religious life in Indonesia has long been characterised by tolerance,
despite the fact that 87 per cent of the population are Muslim. It is true that West
Papua has absorbed significant numbers of transmigrants, as have other parts of
Indonesia such as Sumatra, Kalimantan and Sulawesi. However not all these
transmigrants have been Javanese, with many originating from Bali and Sulawesi. And
there is nothing sinister about this policy; Java is a tiny island about a quarter of the
size of West Papua, yet it is home to 140 million people, hence the pressure to move
can be considerable. To look at the question from a different perspective; significant
numbers of those living on Java are not Javanese, yet there's been no talk of ethnic
groups from other islands "invading" Java.
Given all this information, claims that the people of West Papua are subject to
systematic oppression by the Indonesian Government are clearly fundamentally
without merit, reflecting in certain instances the political designs of a small,
self-serving minority.
M. Wahid Supriyadi is consul-general for Indonesia.
Copyright © 2006. The Age Company Ltd.
|
