Papua Press Agency

Icon

Free West Papua Documents and Information Centre


Three years on, Papuans win the right to a life

Papuan Assylum Seekers in Australia
Papuan Assylum Seekers in Australia

Welcome: Successful asylum seekers from back right, Hendrikus Sarau, Herman Wainggai, Julius Kogoya, Izack Marani and Richard Rumbiak and, front row, Marike Tebay, Papuana Motte with her baby, William Omabak, and Stefanus Akanmor. Photo: Justin McManus

Andra Jackson
June 2, 2009

FOR the past 4½ years, life in Australia for West Papuan asylum seeker Izack Marani has meant constant worry that the Australian Government might give in to Indonesian demands and return him to West Papua.

But that cloud of uncertainty has disappeared thanks to the Immigration Department granting permanent residency to him and the 38 countrymen with whom he arrived by boat in 2006.

The 46-year-old former sailor said he felt “free and safe”. He has been working on a banana plantation near Cairns, and feels he can now look for a permanent job.

Marike Tebay was 17 when she boarded the large outrigger canoe that was to carry her to an unknown future in Australia. “It changes everything,” she said of gaining residency. “I can now choose a study course. Before I couldn’t.”

The people she met on her arrival had been helpful, she said. “Now I feel like I have a home.”

The group’s final visa was received last week by student David Wainggai, the son of leading independence figure Thomas Wainggai, who died in an Indonesian jail.

David’s cousin, Herman Wainggai, leader of the group, who is studying English, said: “For me and my friends it now feels like we are living permanently in Australia. They (the Australian Government) respect our position.”

He said it was sad that four of their original party — a couple and a father and daughter — had returned to West Papua, but said they were offered inducements by Indonesia.

Mr Wainggai said the group wanted to show their appreciation to the Australian community by inviting them to a celebration this Thursday night at Northcote Uniting Church.

Sumber

708 Papuans waiting to return from PNG; LIPI discussion highlights marginalisation of the Papuan people

Kompas 12 January 2009

Plans for 708 West Papuans to return home from Papua New Guinea have been postponed because of a lack of funds to cover the expense of the journey.

According to Sujatmiko, a representative of the Indonesian Department of Foreign Affairs, there are altogether about 25,000West Papuans currently living in PNG spread out in ten provinces and they have been there for between 5 and 25 years. Many of them say they left home out of fear of the conflict involving the OPM or because of conflict with migrants (from Indonesia) or for economic reasons. Many of them were border-crossers who had walked across the border because the authorities are not able to control the 700 kms-long border.

Sujatmiko said that they had not been able to enjoy better living conditions, and had in fact become even poorer in PNG.

There have also been reports of the return home from Australia of 43 Papuans. Five of them have been assisted in their return while the other 38 are waiting to return.

LIPI discussion points to marginalisation of the Papuans At a discussion in Jakarta addressed by Muridan Widjojo from the Indonesian Academy of Sciences, LIPI, it was pointed out that a great deal needs to be done by the Indonesian authorities in West Papua to improve conditions there. This included ending the marginalisation of the indigenous people, promoting development activities and dealing with human rights violations, as well as understanding the Papuan people’s
belief in their right to independence. Development meant improving the education facilities, the health facilities and paying attention to the very low level of welfare among the Papuans.

Muridan suggested that the Indonesian government should encourage the National Human Rights Commission to publish a White Paper on the state of human rights, and there should also be a dialogue between the Papuans and the Indonesian authorities.

Another speaker, Yoel Rohrohmana, a Papuan, said that much of the development work going on in Papua failed to do anything about the basic living conditions of the people, in particular their social, economic and security conditions. As a result, the Papuan people were getting even more left behind, which was highly regrettable because the economic and social-cultural potentials of the Papua people were very high

Foreign Policy In Focus - Obama: Stand Up to the Indonesian

Military John M. Miller | December 4, 2008

Editor: John Feffer

www.fpif.org

According to some pundits, U.S. reengagement with the largely unreformed and unrepentant Indonesian military is the best way to promote reform and human rights. The Wall Street Journal Asia, for instance,

called on President-elect Barack Obama “to stand down liberal senators and interest groups

“for seeking conditions on military assistance to Indonesia. “Indonesia’s military has certainly had human rights problems in the past,” the editorial states, but urges the incoming administration to forget about them in the name of building an alliance on the “global war on terror.”

The Obama administration and incoming 111th Congress should indeed change course on Indonesia. It should put human rights at the forefront of U.S. policy. This would contribute more to encouraging democratic reform and human rights accountability in the world’s largest Muslim-majority country than any amount of military training or weapons. Indonesians who view the military as a chief roadblock to greater reform will be grateful.

History Lessons

In 1965, when U.S.-Indonesia ties were the closest, General Suharto seized power and, according to scholars, the Indonesian government killed up to one million people in the coup’s aftermath. Earlier, Indonesia took over West Papua in 1963, leaving up to 100,000 dead. In 1975, with explicit U.S. support, Indonesia invaded East Timor, resulting in another 100,000-200,000 dead. Some 90% of the weapons used in the invasion and subsequent occupation came from the United States. These are the lessons the Indonesian military learned from unfettered U.S. military assistance.

The only period of significant reform came when the United States actually suspended much assistance during the 1990s. Chief among the changes were the end of the Suharto dictatorship in 1998. After he was driven from office, East Timor became independent (the Indonesian military’s destructive exit from the country led for a time to a full cutoff of all military assistance). In the late 1990s, the military gave up a few prerogatives, including its seats in parliament. But since the United States began incrementally to reinstate military assistance in 2002, the reform process has stalled.

By 2005, the Bush administration reinstated nearly all military assistance and has since sought further expanded ties through training of the Kopassus, the notorious special forces unit responsible for some of the worst human rights violations in East Timor, West Papua, Aceh, and elsewhere. Senators Patrick Leahy (D-VT) and Russ Feingold (D-WI) have opposed lifting this final hurdle to unrestricted military engagement.

They have called for following existing law barring training of military units with histories of human rights crimes where those responsible have not been brought to justice. If that provision has any meaning, it must apply to the Kopassus.

Reengagement has failed to end the widespread impunity enjoyed by Indonesia’s security forces for crimes against humanity and other serious violations committed in East Timor and Indonesia. Rather, reengagement has emboldened the military’s continued resistance to civilian control and persistent emphasis on internal security. The Indonesian military continues to resist attempts to dismantle its “territorial command” system, which allows it to exert influence over politics, commerce, and justice down to the village level. Finally, efforts to implement a law ending the military’s involvement in business have degenerated into farce, and it remains involved in a variety of illegal enterprises, including logging and narcotics trade.

Several retired generals responsible for some of the worst atrocities in East Timor are serious candidates for president in next year’s elections. General Wiranto is perhaps the best known after coming in third in the 2004 presidential campaign. A UN-sponsored court in East Timor indicted Wiranto for crimes against humanity for his role as top commander of the military during the bloodletting of 1999. Former Kopassus commander (and Suharto son-in-law) Prabowo Subianto is another credible presidential candidate. A third potential candidate, Lt. General Sutiyoso, was a member of a unit that, according to an Australian coroner’s report, murdered five foreign journalists after they crossed the Timorese border a few months prior to Indonesia’s full-scale invasion.

Current AbusesHuman rights violations

are not just a matter of history. In West Papua, with Indonesian military protection, the U.S.-based Freeport Mining Company has destroyed the environment, livelihoods, and culture of the local people while making billions off the largest goldmine in the world. Just this year, the Indonesian government punished the protests of Papuan people demanding self-determination and greater voice with harsh reprisals, including long prison terms, torture, and the death of at least one bystander.

In May 2007, Indonesian marines killed four civilians and wounded eight in a land dispute between villagers and the Indonesian navy in Pasuruan, East Java.

According to The International Herald Tribune, “The marines were tried by a military tribunal but ultimately sentenced to just 18 months in prison. The marine station’s relationship with the plantation company was never investigated, nor were any of the station’s officers. The land dispute remains unresolved.

As in the past, the current U.S. administration downplays these and other human rights violations, while celebrating its reinvigorated institutional partnership with Indonesia’s security forces. Military assistance flowing to Indonesia has yet to reach the levels of the Suharto years. The United States has funded coastal radars, supplied spare parts, and urged the Indonesians to prepare a military wish list. Earlier this year, the Indonesian Air Force sought F-16 fighters and C-130 Hercules transport planes. For 2008, foreign military finance funding jumped to $15.7 million from only one million dollars two years earlier. For now, an Indonesian budget crunch and a lingering wariness bred of past restrictions on assistance have limited Indonesia’s willingness to buy substantial stocks of new weapons.”

Meanwhile, the number of Indonesian students in the International Military Education and Training (IMET) program is increasing. IMET was the first military assistance program that Congress restricted in the early 1990s. Indonesia was a major beneficiary of the Regional Defense Counterterrorism Fellowship Program, created soon after the September 11 attacks to circumvent the IMET ban on Indonesia and other countries. Joint military exercises have covered counterinsurgency and counterterrorism, among other topics. However, the Indonesian police, not the military, tracked down and arrested those responsible for a series of bombings in Bali and Jakarta in 2002 and 2003. The Indonesian military tolerates and, more ominously, continues to back militias and vigilante groups that intimidate civilians, particularly those in ethnic, religious, and political minorities.

Ultimately, the size of the military assistance package may not matter. The United States had restricted aid as a means to build pressure for human rights accountability and reform. Now that Indonesia is eligible for unrestricted aid, its military can assume those issues no longer matter to their once and future patron.

A New Era with Obama

President-elect Obama has described U.S. engagement in Indonesia, where he lived as a child, as less than positive. In The Audacity of Hope, Obama writes that “for the past sixty years the fate of [Indonesia] has been directly tied to U.S. foreign policy.” This policy included “the tolerance and occasional encouragement of tyranny, corruption, and environmental degradation when it served our interests.” In his earlier book Dreams from My Father, Obama writes of Suharto’s bloody seizure of power: “The death toll was anybody’s guess: a few hundred thousand, maybe, half a million. Even the smart guys at the [CIA] had lost count.”

Based on these early positions, Obama is quite conscious of the problems with the Indonesian military. While in the Senate, he rarely spoke about these issues.

Indonesian advocates have called on Obama and Congress to pressure Indonesia’s government to respect human rights. Rafendi Djamin, coordinator of the Human Rights Watch Working Group, acknowledged the U.S.’s past “huge role in pushing for rights advocacy in Indonesia… I have seen that during the Bush administration, the U.S. Congress is still concerned with Indonesia’s democratization and human rights
advocacy, but Bush has rarely given a direct warning of the importance of human rights advocacy.”

Djamin said in the Jakarta Post, “We are now expecting Obama to put more pressure on Indonesia to resolve unfinished human rights cases by directly questioning the government about them and by addressing their importance.” Another advocate said that “if Indonesia does not respond positively to U.S. pressure…the U.S. would reinstate its military embargo against us.”

East Timor’s official Commission for Reception, Truth and Reconciliation, after examining in detail the impact of Indonesian occupation and destructive withdrawal on the East Timorese, called on countries to make military assistance to Indonesia “totally conditional on progress towards full democratisation, the subordination of the military to the rule of law and civilian government, and strict adherence with international human rights.” President Obama and the next Congress should follow that recommendation.

John M. Miller is the national coordinator of the
East Timor and Indonesia Action
Network and a contributor to Foreign
Policy In Focus.

etanetanetanetanetanetanetanetanetanetanetanetan
ETAN welcomes your financial support. Go to
http://etan.org/etan/donate.htm to donate. Thanks.

John M. Miller
fbp@igc.org
National Coordinator
East Timor & Indonesia Action Network (ETAN)
PO Box 21873, Brooklyn, NY 11202-1873 USA
Phone: (718)596-7668 Mobile phone: (917)690-4391
Skype: john.m.miller
Web site:
http://www.etan.org

Send a blank e-mail message to info@etan.org to find out
how to learn more about East Timor on the Internet
etanetanetanetanetanetanetanetanetanetanetanetan