[Kabar-Irian] News: Nov 10-12 2006
========================KABAR IRIAN=========================================
News on Irian Jaya/West Papua/IRJA-BAR
Unsubscribe/Change Options:
http://www.kabar-irian.com/mailman/listinfo/kabar-irian
Archives: http://www.kabar-irian.com/pipermail/kabar-irian
Email Commands- Subscribe/unsubscribe/options/help
List-Post: kabar-irian@kabar-irian.com
List-Help: <mailto:kabar-irian-request@kabar-irian.com?subject=help>
List-unsubscribe:
<mailto:kabar-irian-request@kabar-irian.com?subject=unsubscribe>
List-subscribe:<mailto:kabar-irian-request@kabar-irian.com?subject=subscribe>
Contacts: admin@irja.org, news@kabar-irian.com, editors@kabar-irian.com
Too much mail? Switch to the digest version. As a matter of policy we DO NOT
handle requests except in emergencies.
KABAR IRIAN NEWS
Nov 10-12
TOPICS
* Gus Dur to receive award from Papuans
* The saga of war canoes
* Pepera Front Disputes Involvement in Abepura Incident
* Indo-Australian security accord 'historic'
* Govt explores artistic solution to tribal violence
* Australia vows to oppose separatists
* Indonesia denies pursuing security pact with Australia
* West Papua's struggle for justice
* Jakarta pact raises oppression fears
* Reject the `security' pact with Indonesia
* Justice for Papuans?
* Australia says new Indonesia pact will boost ties
* Indonesia-Aussie security treaty no defence pact: minister
* Bridging cultural divide: Australia-Indonesia relations
---
http://www.thejakartapost.com/detailnational.asp?fileid=20061111.G07&irec=6
Gus Dur to receive award from Papuans
Nethy Dharma Somba, The Jakarta Post, Jayapura
The Papua Traditional Council (DAP) will bestow its first ever award to
former president Abdurrahman "Gus Dur" Wahid on Nov.
14.
It will be given on behalf of all 350 tribes in Papua, as a sign of
appreciation for what the DAP regards as his favorable
policies toward the Papaun people during his presidency from 1999 to 2001.
The plan to present the award was announced by Papua Traditional Council
head Forkorus Yoboisembut and Council secretary
Sayid Fadhal Alhamid at DAP's office in Jayapura on Friday.
"Despite his impaired vision his (Gus Dur's) heart was not blind, as he
saw Papuans as human beings. He respected Papuan
identity and gave us room to express our aspirations," Forkorus said.
During his presidency, Gus Dur authorized the province's name change from
Irian Jaya to Papua and allowed the Papuan flag,
the Bintang Kejora, to be raised as a cultural symbol. He also authorized
funding for the second Papuan National Congress in
2000, providing Rp 2 billion (US$210,526) to finance the event.
Gus Dur's polices are considered by DAP to have contributed greatly to
democracy and human rights in Papua, and to have
helped spark local awareness of the need for collective responsibility to
further develop democracy in the province.
These policies, Forkorus said, were unfortunately not being followed
today, because president Megawati Soekarnoputri banned
the flying of the Bintang Kejora when she replaced Gus Dur.
The award is made of marble in a traditional Papuan style. "Sentani
artists crafted the award and the Sentani Traditional
Council will represent the Papua Traditional Council at the ceremony and
present it to Gus Dur" Forkorus said.
Fadhal said the award would be given in a special ceremony at Cendrawasih
sports hall in Jayapura. "The presentation of the
award will hopefully encourage other leaders to follow in Gus Dur's
footsteps," he said.
After the award presentation, Gus Dur is expected to deliver a speech.
The former president is scheduled to arrive in Jayapura on Nov. 13. He
also plans to visit the grave of Papuan leader Theys
Hiyo Eluay, who was killed Nov. 11, 2001.
---
http://www.thenational.com.pg/111006/w9.htm
The saga of war canoes
ETHEL NAMURI relives the days when war canoes were common in coastal
villages of Milne Bay
THE Sanderson Bay in Alotau came alive over the weekend with canoes of all
shapes and sizes that looked like jelly fish from
a distance.
While paddlers chanted and danced as they excitedly rushed ashore towards
the market jetty, the venue of the 3rd Canoe and
Kundu Festival, the crowd roared back to welcome them home.
Among the crowd, women stood wrapped in traditional regalia as they
awaited their husbands and sons' homecoming.
These were the scenes re-enacted from the past, something that had been
passed on from generation to the next.
A traditional welcome for the paddlers was gestured by women who threw
fruits or garden food towards the direction of the war
canoes to discourage the evil spirits that might have followed the
men-folk home after a successful kill from an enemy tribe.
It was also seen as a gesture of appreciation. After so many nights at
sea, these men who had done well for the tribe must be
rewarded with whatever was left in the village. In those times, young
women were often offered for the men to marry. Garden
food, fruits, and domesticated animals were also offered to appease the
spirits. A lot of rituals and magic spells are
involved in the canoe-making but it is not something for us to venture
into. Instead, we have to focus on something that has
become a part of a culture passed on to us by our ancestors.
Returning from a killing journey, these young boys now respected men were
ready to marry. It was also their initiation to
manhood.
History says that these war canoes (known to the locals as gebos or lopos)
were used during the cannibal era, before the
arrival of the missionaries. Women were not allowed within the vicinity of
the tree-felling grounds and the men's hut. Their
job was to attend to their food gardens specially planted for forthcoming
feasts, gather firewood and cook for the men-folk
during the different stages of the canoe-making until it is launched at sea.
How then were these trees chosen to make the best canoes? There are
special trees known to the locals for canoe-making.
For example, master canoe carver from Maiwara Terry Dickson said the tree
in their local dialect is called the "Ilimo" tree.
The clan that had a mature tree would volunteer to have their tree felled.
This practice still exists today but to some
extent, it is the village that offers its tree to be used for the
canoe-making.
This year in Maiwara, the Ahulana clan volunteered to have their tree
felled. Charles Wahai, master canoe carver from
Gabugabuna village, named their war canoe "Noahopu" meaning "not knowing
anything" in the Tawala language.
Mr Wahai said the canoe carried this name because it was their first time
to take part in this festival after breaking away
from Maiwara.
Special food bowls, hooks, and soup bowls were often carved from wood to
be used during these feasting ceremonies.
Today, war canoes are concentrated along the West Tawala area, which
includes Ahioma, Rabe, Maiwara and Wagawaga. But history
also tells us that in the North Coast area of the Rabaraba district which
includes Wedau and Wamira, war canoes were also
used until the arrival of the first missionaries in 1891 at Kaeta.
Wamira in the local dialect means "dirty canoe". Locals say the words "wa"
which meant canoe while "mira" to mean "dirty"
were often referred to the spilling of blood into the canoes after the
kill from an enemy tribe. Men were often discreet
about their departure time. But upon their return, they would chant and
make noise with their paddles on the side of the
canoe after the kill.
The men-folk were scared of their women-folk who were involved in
witchcraft. Locals say that witchcraft is one reason why
war canoes are not being used in this part of the province. This is
because witches had used the sea-craft to carry out their
own business and people feared their activities. It's because of this fear
that war canoe-making in this area died out.
However, these people now use canoes known in the local dialect as the
kukakukas, which are imitations of yachts and are very
popular in the Rabaraba area with their tarpaulin sails.
The non-decked sailaus are single wood dugout with a hull and are popular
along the Huhu Coast, Bwanabwana and Eastern Suau
area. They also use tarpaulin sails.
Also featured were the decked sailaus (Wala sailaus, Epoi, Kemuluwa). The
deep-sea sailaus are creatively designed and
popular among the D'Entrecasteaux Islands, Trobriand Islands and are used
in the Kula trade circle.
Small fishing canoes (gebos and kewokewos) made of plywood and introduced
by the Kwato Mission were also featured during the
festival.
Meanwhile, this year's event was yet again another success. Tourists from
as far as Japan, Australia, Indonesia, Europe and
Australia were part of a big crowd that flocked into Alotau to witness
this three-day event described by organisers as
"bigger and better" than the previous two events.
Chairman of the organising committee John Kaniku said this year's event
included church and public awareness programmes, food
exchange, traditional sing-sing, choral and string-band groups and more
stalls.
The festival also witnessed cultural activities like the Kula exchange
between the Esa'ala and the Kiriwina groups.
Traditional designs on tarpaulin and canoes made an entrance to
differentiate groups and traditional sails used for the
official opening and exhibition activities.
The lone outside participant to take part was Western province whose
delegates showcased their war canoes, traditional sing-
sing and arts and craft.
The three-day show aimed at creating an annual event of cultural
significance for the local people to actively participate
and at the same time benefit from the fast-growing tourism industry.
Mr Kaniku said the festival also stressed the need to:
1. Educate the young on the traditional canoe-building and in preserving
this rich culture;
2. To show the skills and craftsmanship and the rich history of
boat-making and sailing in Milne Bay;
3. And to show that tourism should be used as a community development tool.
Mr Kaniku said the peoples' positive response showed they needed only an
opportunity and avenue to showcase their knowledge.
He congratulated the local business houses and major sponsors for donating
funds, time and kindness. He also acknowledged the
organising committee for a job well done.
"This festival rides heavily on the enthusiasm, knowledge and passion of
the community, and of course, the goodwill and pride
of the committee members who were all volunteers and interest groups like
the Game Fishing Association," Mr Kaniku said.
He acknowledged the presence of Milne Bay Governor Tim Neville, Sir Moi
Avei, Opposition leader Peter O'neil, National
Cultural Commission Executive Director Dr Jacob Simet, invited guests from
the West Papua Arts Council and representatives
from the national and provincial governments.
---
http://www.tempointeractive.com/hg/nasional/2006/11/10/brk,20061110-87470,uk.html
Pepera Front Disputes Involvement in Abepura Incident
Friday, 10 November, 2006 | 16:41 WIB
TEMPO Interactive, Jayapura: many as 23 defendants and convicts of the
case on March 16 in Abepura, Papua, disputed that the
clash was coordinated by the People’s Front of Struggle (Pepera) of West
Papua.
“Some (people) use our name when committing an anarchistic act,” said
Selpius Boby, Secretary General of West Papua Pepera in
Jayapura.
According to him, some people want to stop Pepera’s efforts in radically
fighting for Papuan people’s rights including the
closure of PT Freeport Indonesia in Tembagapura.
However, Pepera was not involved in the clash which was started by the
demonstration of university students and organizations
of students, youth and the public.
The clash took place when the residents’ demonstration urging the closure
of Freeport caused several police officers to die
and many people injured.
Yahya Echo, Head of Port Numbay Pepera, hopes the Papua Regional Police
Chief, Papua High Court and the central government
recover their reputation.
“We’re the victims of political conspiracy,” he said. The prisoners also
appealed the verdict of the Jayapura District Court.
Cunding Levi
---
http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/story/0,22049,20737962-401,00.html
Indo-Australian security accord 'historic'
By Stephen Fitzpatrick
November 11, 2006 12:00
Article from: The Australian
THE new Australia-Indonesia security agreement to be signed on Monday was
a "historic document" that would lead to a more
comprehensive partnership between the two countries.
This assessment by Foreign Minister Hassan Wirajuda yesterday in Jakarta
are his first comments on the pact since it was
revealed this week that Alexander Downer would travel to the resort island
of Lombok to sign the document.
Mr Wirajuda said the agreement did not specifically mention the
controversial issue of Papuan separatism.
"It clearly provides that not only Australia but Indonesia as well both
will not support separatist movements on any side,"
Mr Wirajuda said. "Certainly the main principle will be applicable when
talking about separatism in Papua."
The Indonesian Foreign Minister would not say whether he expected
Australia to take any practical steps against separatist
movements or their supporters, explaining that it had "already been clear
on several occasions" that Canberra rejected
separatism in its largest neighbour.
The 10-point seven-page agreement largely consists of a cementing of the
existing understandings between Jakarta and
Canberra.
It replaces the 1995 agreement signed by then Labor prime minister Paul
Keating and Indonesian president Suharto, which was
torn up in the wake of the Indonesian military-led violence in East Timor
in 1999.
Mr Wirajuda said there had been "plenty of ups and downs" between the two
nations since then, but predicted the new agreement
would stand the test of time better than its predecessor.
"If this is compared with the security agreement of 1995, there was more
emphasis then on security details, because the key
was that if one of our countries faced a threat from a third party, each
would help the other," he said.
The treaty covers a range of issues including military co-operation,
counter-terrorism, fisheries, people-smuggling and
nuclear technology.
---
http://www.thejakartapost.com/detailnational.asp?fileid=20061111.G09&irec=8
Govt explores artistic solution to tribal violence
Markus Makur, The Jakarta Post, Timika
The government is exploring different solutions to recurring tribal
violence in Kwamki Lama village in Mimika regency, Papua,
including getting fighters to channel their energies into artistic
activities, an official said here Friday.
The secretary to the Coordinating Ministry for Political, Legal and
Security Affairs, Djoko Sumaryono, said the government
wanted to see war traditions in the area transformed into artistic
pursuits such as traditional dances, which would benefit
the welfare of residents.
Sumaryono said the government was continuing to monitor the situation in
Mimika.
A permanent solution to the recurring violence is being worked on, using a
variety of programs, he said.
"On Thursday in Jakarta we discussed a settlement of the Kwamki Lama case.
Now we are checking with residents on the post-
violence situation in Kwamki Lama, after receiving an invitation from the
Mimika regent to come and have a look at progress
in the construction of six security posts in Kwamki Lama," Sumaryono said.
As part of efforts to secure a permanent peace, the government plans to
repair houses damaged in the violence, creating job
opportunities for a large number of locals.
Sumaryono said the construction of the security posts was an integral part
of ensuring security in the area.
He said police officers and soldiers would be stationed at the posts once
they were completed.
The latest tribal war in Kwamki Lama erupted in July and lasted for two
months. At least 10 people were killed and dozens
others wounded. Up to 76 houses were damaged, along with a number of
buildings and schools.
During the visit to Kwamki Lama, Sumaryono was accompanied by Mimika
regency secretary Wilhelmus Haurissa, Mimika Military
District chief Lt. Col. Tri Soeseno and Mimika Police chief Adj. Sr. Comr.
Jantje Jimmy Tuilan.
At an informal dialog with residents, Sumaryono urged them to help ensure
there would be no more tribal wars.
---
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,20735481-1702,00.html
Australia vows to oppose separatists
By Karen Michelmore
November 10, 2006
THE Federal Government has given a clear commitment under a new security
pact to oppose Indonesian separatist movements,
including those operating within Australia, Indonesia has said.
Australia and Indonesia will next week sign the security agreement, which
reinforces cooperation on defence, police,
intelligence and counter-terrorism.
Under the pact, both nations have also promised to respect each others
territorial integrity and not support secessionist
movements.
It comes as the countries move to repair relations, damaged earlier this
year when Australia granted temporary protection to
43 asylum seekers from the separatist Indonesian province of Papua.
"Besides principles of respecting territorial integrity, sovereignty, not
interfering in domestic affairs - one important
principle in this agreement is that both parties will not use or support
separatist movements and will not use their
territory as a standing point for separatist movements," Indonesian
Foreign Minister Hassan Wirajuda said today.
He said Prime Minister John Howard had guaranteed earlier this year that
Australia "would not be used as bases or staging
(posts) for separatists".
"And now it's in the framework of a security agreement," Mr Wirajuda said.
While there was no specific mention of Papua in the agreement, the
"principle" of rejecting separatism was applicable.
In a letter to Indonesian President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono ahead of a
meeting in June, Mr Howard said Australia did not
support separatism and secessionist movements in Indonesia.
He also pledged that no Australian development funding would be used to
fund such activities.
"My Government does not wish to see Australia become a staging point for
any such activities," the letter read.
Today, Mr Wirajuda said it was a clear commitment, but did not say what
Indonesia expected Australia to do in order to meet
the pledge.
"Certainly this framework agreement will be the guiding principle on how
Indonesia manages its relations with Australia and
vice versa," he said.
"It's a question of principle that's very clear, there's no doubt about
that. That commitment is no longer verbal, but a
treaty-based commitment."
The wide-ranging agreement also includes cooperation in tackling problems
of people smuggling, money laundering, terrorism,
corruption, illegal fishing, cybercrime and drug trafficking.
However, Mr Wirajuda said it was different to the deal reached in 1995
between the two nations, which Indonesia tore up in
1999 following the crisis in East Timor.
"It's not a security pact, compared to Indonesia's security agreement in
1995," Mr Wirajuda said.
"The 1995 agreement was more like a security pact - there the main element
was in case one country was facing threats from a
third party, then both countries would help each other.
"In the security agreement that will be signed, there's no such thing."
He said Australia and Indonesia's relationship had had "its ups and
downs", but the latest agreement was a historic move.
"The framework of security agreement is something ... that we hope is an
important contribution to improve the relationship
between Indonesia and Australia," he said.
---
http://english.people.com.cn/200611/10/eng20061110_320352.html
Indonesia denies pursuing security pact with Australia
Indonesia Friday dismissed a report that it would sign a security pact
with Australia during the bilateral meeting scheduled
Monday on the resort island of Lombok.
"The security cooperation agreement that we are about to sign ( with
Australia ) is not a security pact," Foreign Minister
Hassan Wirajuda said at a news conference at his office here.
The security cooperation framework covers mutual respect of the
sovereignty and territorial integrity of the two countries,
he said.
"In the security agreement, Australia puts its firm stance over the
sovereignty of all Indonesian territories, including
Papua, in a written statement," the minister said.
The draft of the agreement also covers bilateral cooperation in a wide
range of security areas, including the fight against
terrorism, smuggling and trafficking in people; aviation safety; natural
disaster emergency response and nuclear energy.
The draft agreement is different from the security pact both countries
signed in 1995, in which both countries agreed to help
each other in case of attacks by another country, said Wirajuda.
The 1995 security pact was revoked in 1999, when Indonesia- Australia ties
fell to the lowest due to the presence of
Australian forces in East Timor, once one of Indonesian provinces that
seceded from the Jakarta rule that year.
Source: Xinhua
---
http://www.greenleft.org.au/2006/690/35847
REVIEW
West Papua's struggle for justice
Vannessa Hearman
10 November 2006
The arrival of the 43 West Papuan asylum seekers in Australia in January
forced Australians to confront two blights on this
country’s history: the government’s appalling treatment of refugees and
the same government’s ongoing support for the
Indonesian occupation of West Papua. The nation held its breath (and some
of us kept up the protests) while Canberra sent the
West Papuans off to Christmas Island and decided on what to do next.
Clinton Fernandes’s latest book follows hot on the heels of his first,
Reluctant Saviours, where he discussed the reservation
with which the Australian government deployed its troops to root out its
Indonesian military allies from East Timor in 1999.
The case of the 43 Papuan asylum seekers is not the focus of this book.
Instead Fernandes seeks to inform us more about the
history of West Papua and the political situation that these people fled
from.
Reluctant Indonesians extends Fernandes’s earlier writings on the nature
of Australian imperialism, as manifested in its
foreign policy towards Indonesia. In this book, Fernandes describes the
oft-repeated mantras regularly doled out to the
Australian public about why our government does nothing to prevent human
rights abuses from occurring in West Papua.
Ostensibly, we can do very little because it is not in the “national
interest” to do so, it would be meddling in Indonesia’s
internal affairs and it would result in disintegration and instability
just to our north.
Fernandes shows how meddling and destabilisation have in fact been
cornerstones of Australian foreign policy in ways that
have not brought about positive outcomes for the people of Indonesia or
Papua. Western powers, chiefly the United States,
aided sections of the Indonesian military in the Outer Islands Rebellion
of 1958 against the nationalist and anti-imperialist
president Sukarno. According to Fernandes, weapons were supplied to the
right-wing military leaders by the US via the Caltex
oil plant in Pekanbaru in Sumatra. Australian Foreign Minister R. G. Casey
supported these US actions, going so far as to
argue that covert bombing of Indonesia might be necessary.
The rebellion was quashed by the Indonesian military, but in 1965 the
Sukarno government was overthrown by a US-backed coup.
The mass killings of leftists that accompanied the coup were another
instance of US-Australian meddling in Indonesian
politics. Wholesale repression was easily tolerated in the interest of
regime change in Indonesia. The coup transformed
Indonesian society and installed the Suharto regime, which held onto power
for the next 32 years.
Fernandes then shifts his focus towards West Papua itself. He examines the
history of Papua before the so-called “Act of Free
Choice” in 1969 and during its life as an Indonesian province. He points
out that as a “treasure trove” of mineral and
environmental riches, it has been a lucrative target for Indonesian and
international capital. Its wealth of biodiversity is
threatened by the rampant exploitation of its natural resources and its
status as a territory under occupation.
Fernandes outlines the fate of West Papua in the post-Suharto period,
including the response of West Papuan society to the
post-authoritarian period. While Sukarno claimed West Papua as part of
Indonesian territory due to its status as a former
Dutch colony like the rest of Indonesia, its forcible integration into
Indonesia was carried out under the Suharto New Order
government.
The Suharto regime’s end in May 1998 promised much across the archipelago
in addressing past human rights abuses. Instead,
during current Indonesian president Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono’s
presidential tenure, West Papua has been divided into several
provinces and still goes without even the promised reforms under the very
limited Special Autonomy package. This has made it
more difficult for the pro-independence forces to organise. To make
matters worse, the Indonesian military has been
rehabilitated thanks to the “war on terror” and the ad hoc human rights
courts in Jakarta have failed to stop human rights
abuses.
Fernandes’s book is a good, succinct yet reasonably comprehensive
introduction to the issues and the broad political
landscape of West Papua. Importantly though, it has a message of hope. It
argues that no matter what geopolitical grouping
those currently residing in the Indonesian archipelago choose to live
within, the key issue is that people want to live in
freedom, free from repression and from being forced to live as “reluctant
Indonesians”. Until then, the 43 West Papuans who
have since been given temporary protection visas will probably not be the
last to arrive on Australian shores.
From: Cultural Dissent, Green Left Weekly issue #690 15 November 2006.
---
http://www.theage.com.au/news/National/Jakarta-pact-raises-oppression-fears/2006/11/12/1163266396110.html
Jakarta pact raises oppression fears
November 12, 2006 - 10:04AM
A new security pact with Jakarta will not make Australia complicit in the
oppression of Indonesian separatists, Defence
Minister Brendan Nelson says.
The Howard government said the agreement, to be signed Monday, will not
see intelligence gathered by Australian agencies used
against separatist activists from the province of Papua.
Labor says it will reserve judgment on the agreement until it sees the
fine print, but again urged the government to press
for autonomy for Papua while keeping the province under Jakarta's control.
Critics fear a clause in the treaty that denounces separatism means that
increased military and intelligence ties to Jakarta
will result in Australia aiding crackdowns on Papuan independence activists.
But Dr Nelson said the pact would not result in Australian forces
furthering any oppression in the Indonesian archipelago.
"That's a highly provocative statement - most certainly not," he told
Network Ten.
"It's very important that we have a cooperative relationship with
Indonesia in defence ties.
"The treaty will in a sense formalise what we are already doing."
The Australian government would never support separatism, Dr Nelson said,
but he indicated the treaty would not see local
intelligence agencies monitoring the activities of Papuans in Australia
and sharing the information with Indonesia.
"I can assure you that we don't use intelligence in relation to specific
issues and certainly not in relation to separatism,"
he said.
Foreign Minister Alexander Downer will sign the treaty with his Indonesian
counterpart, Hassan Wirajuda, on the island of
Lombok.
It is the first formal security agreement between the two countries since
Indonesia scrapped the previous treaty during the
East Timor crisis in 1999.
The pledge on separatism follows a row between the two countries earlier
this year when Australia granted protection to 43
Papuan asylum seekers.
As well as the separatism clause, the new treaty will cover cooperation on
counter-terrorism, border security and
intelligence.
Dr Nelson said he was satisfied the treaty would be heavily scrutinised by
both countries when it is released.
"It has to be ratified in the parliament and I know it'll be subject to
all sorts of public scrutiny, as it will also in
Indonesia," Dr Nelson said.
"So the ratification will need to proceed in both of our countries before
it's, if you like, locked in."
Mr Downer said the agreement, which has been two years in the making,
would be heavily scrutinised by parliament's joint
standing committee on treaties, although he expected the committee to
recommend ratification.
"That committee will call for public submissions and expressions of
interest, it'll hold public hearings so people are able
to make all manner of points about the treaty, and all this will happen
before ratification," he told the Nine Network.
Opposition foreign affairs spokesman Kevin Rudd said Labor would not
blindly support the pact without heavy scrutiny of its
detail.
"We are not about to buy a pig in a poke here," he told reporters.
"We want to make sure we get the detail right.
"We accept West Papua as being part of the Indonesian republic, but we
want to make sure that the detail of this treaty is
right as well."
© 2006 AAP
---
http://www.greenleft.org.au/2006/690/35851
Reject the `security' pact with Indonesia
Pip Hinman
10 November 2006
A new “security pact” between Australia and Indonesia, to be signed on
November 13 in Lombok, will strengthen Canberra’s
military and economic alliance with Jakarta, at the expense of the peoples
of both countries.
The Indonesia and Australia Framework for Security Co-operation will
assist Indonesia to develop its stalled nuclear program;
conduct joint border-protection patrols to prevent West Papuans, in
particular, from reaching Australia’s shores; and expand
Australian military and intelligence ties, including with the discredited
Kopassus special forces troops.
The Howard government is hailing the treaty as a breakthrough in relations
with the Indonesian government, strained after
Canberra agreed to give asylum to 43 West Papuans earlier this year. But
apart from the period around Australia’s
intervention on behalf of the East Timorese in 1999, Canberra and Jakarta
see eye to eye.
Since 1975, when Labor PM Gough Whitlam turned a blind eye to Indonesia’s
invasion of East Timor, through to Labor PM Paul
Keating’s 1995 security treaty with Indonesia that strengthened military
ties with Kopassus, Indonesia has had a strong
relationship with Australian governments, Labor and Coalition. This is
because, for an imperial power such as Australia,
business and trade with a nation of 200 million people is more important
than human rights, be they in Indonesia, East Timor,
Aceh or West Papua.
Popular support in Australia for East Timor’s national liberation struggle
forced a temporary retreat from this bi-partisan,
reactionary policy, and the Howard government has been trying to regain
ground ever since. The new security treaty is part of
that process.
The treaty formalises Australia’s support for Indonesia’s “territorial
integrity”. That is, Canberra pledges to assist
Indonesia in suppressing movements for self-determination, in West Papua
and Aceh in particular. It will do this mainly
through training Kopassus and other Indonesian troops and by doing all it
can to prevent West Papuans, among others, from
reaching Australia in a bid for asylum.
The treaty also opens the way for Australia to sell uranium to Indonesia,
which plans to begin building its first nuclear
power plant in 2010. Indonesia has previously toyed with this dangerous
fuel to boost its energy supplies, but backed away
after national and international campaigns against nuclear power plants
being situated on one of the earth’s most unstable
fault lines.
Since PM John Howard has now decided that Australia must expand its
uranium mining, finding willing trading partners becomes
necessary.
Supporting Indonesia’s brutal control over the province of West Papua is
also a priority for Howard. The biggest gold-copper
mine, part-owned by the Anglo-Australian company Rio Tinto, is located there.
Central to the wave of protests in West Papua this year is anger that mine
operator Freeport-McMoran has been making huge
profits while West Papuans receive virtually no benefit; tribal people
around the mine have lost their land, and their rivers
have been seriously polluted by tailings from the mine.
According to Oxfam, the mine disposes 230,000 tons of tailings into
surrounding rivers each day, causing major environmental
damage. This method of disposal is prohibited in most countries: only
three mines in the world, all in New Guinea, still use
it. The Mineral Policy Institute believes Rio Tinto prefers to operate
overseas to avoid environmental regulation.
In June, the Norwegian government decided to withdraw its investment from
the Freeport mine based on the company’s “severe
and irreversible damage to the natural environment” and “ethically
unacceptable practices” in relation to its treatment of
the locals. Canberra has no such scruples. The new treaty gives the tick
to corporate plunder that has horrified the world.
A survey by the solidarity organisation SNUP, in cooperation with
Kemitraan (Partnership on Governance Reform in Indonesia)
on attitudes in West Papua towards the special autonomy law (OTSUS) found
that five years after its introduction, 60% of the
323 respondents did not think that special autonomy would improve their
living conditions; 76% said the law was not
implemented well; 73% believed that corruption was very widespread; and
78% said that efforts at law enforcement did not
conform with people’s sense of justice.
Asked whether they felt proud of their Papuan identity, 96% said yes.
Asked whether they identified themselves as Papuans, as
members of their tribal group or as Indonesians, 52% identified themselves
as Papuans, 30% as members of their tribal group
and only 14% as Indonesians. These statistics, while based on a small
sample, reflect that Indonesia’s efforts to force West
Papuans to identify as Indonesians are having little success.
The signing of this treaty, which commits Australia to support and assist
Jakarta’s repressive rule in West Papua and across
the whole archipelago, is a retrograde step and should be opposed.
From: Comment & Analysis, Green Left Weekly issue #690 15 November 2006.
---
INSIDE INDONESIA
Jul-Sep 2006
Justice for Papuans?
New Human Rights Court fails victims' calls for justice.
Annie Feith
In the early hours of 7 December 2000, an unidentified group of people
attacked the police station at Abepura, a town just
outside the provincial capital of Jayapura. Two policemen and a security
guard died. Reprisal was swift and brutal, but was
not directed against the attackers who had got away. Over a 24 hour
period, Brimob (paramilitary police) troops raided
several dormitories housing students predominantly from highland regions,
and systematically brutalised them, fatally
shooting one high school student, and injuring many more. One student was
permanently incapacitated, while another man was
crippled and later died from his injuries.
Of the more than one hundred students, men, women and children detained,
many were beaten severely and tortured, two were
tortured to death. Incredibly a Swiss journalist Oswald Iten witnessed the
beatings at the police station. Police told him,
he said, that this was normal procedure when a policeman was killed.
Reformasi - hope for justice?
Confrontations between Papuans and security forces have occurred since as
early as 1964, increasing in the volatile post-
Suharto period. But while before reformasi security force abuse was rarely
brought to justice, hopes were now raised. The
Constitution had been amended to include a 'bill of rights' to protect
citizen rights, and also the new Human Rights Court
had been established in 2003.
By May 2001 Indonesia's National Human Rights Commission (KomnasHAM)
submitted its investigation report, naming 25 suspects.
Yet it took a further three years for the Attorney General's office to
bring the case to court, deciding only two of the 25
police would stand trial. In May 2004 the Human Rights Court in Makassar
began hearings against the two accused.
A civil society coalition from Papua and elsewhere in Indonesia - The
Coalition of NGOs for the Abepura Case - supported the
victims and families over the five long years of their quest for justice.
Making use of the provisions of Law No 26/2000
establishing the Human Rights Court, the coalition applied continual
pressure and ensured that the case proceeded, despite
apparent attempts by the authorities to hinder the case.
On 8 September 2005, in the Makassar court's first major case, Brigadier
General Johnny Wainal Usman was acquitted of charges
of ordering the torture and killing of civilians. The following day Senior
Commander Daud Sihombing was also acquitted.
Sihombing, who was police chief at the time, and Wailan Usman, then BRIMOB
commander, had allegedly ordered that the
attackers be 'hunted down'. The victim's claims for compensation were also
dismissed.
Brother Budi Hernawan, a member of the KomnasHAM investigation team and a
key supporter of the victims and their families,
believes the result was a travesty of justice. The NGO coalition supported
the victims believing that, in the new era and
with the new Human Rights Court, they would get justice. The acquittal
rendered this belief meaningless. Ordinary people in
Papua no longer have any reason to believe in the legal process. Hernawan
claims that there was 'strong political influence'
on the judges and prosecutors. As Budi told ABC Radio National 'I think
this is a bad precedent for the whole justice system
in Indonesia and the whole area of human rights.'
For the survivors, and their supporters, the acquittal was sign that
ordinary people cannot get justice. Would the verdict
have been any different if the victims had not been Papuans? During the
beatings, one student recalled the police spitting on
him and saying 'Your mother eats pig and you have the brains of a pig!
Even with your college degree you won't get a job. You
Papuans are stupid; stupid and yet you think you can be independent.'
This dehumanisation process is a powerful dynamic. John Rumbiak, ELSHAM's
former supervisor who was forced into exile
following persistent death threats, draws parallels between the racism he
observed in the US towards African-Americans and
the treatment Papuans experience.
To Papuans the legal reforms have made no difference. The security forces
still seem able to abuse Papuans with impunity.
After the Abepura case, how can Papuans hope that their interests will be
protected by the 'reformed' justice system?
Annie Feith (annie.feith@optusnet.com.au) wrote a minor thesis on human
rights NGOs in West Papua. (See www.papuaweb.org )
She works as a Red Cross caseworker.See 'To end impunity' by Lucia Withers
in Inside Indonesia No. 67, July-September 2001.
---
http://www.antara.co.id/en/seenws/?id=23141
Australia says new Indonesia pact will boost ties
Canberra (ANTARA News) - A new Australia-Indonesia security pact will
strengthen bilateral defence ties but will not lead to
Australian intelligence being used against Papuan separatists, Defence
Minister Brendan Nelson said on Sunday.
The treaty, due to be signed on Monday, was almost scuppered when Canberra
granted protection visas to 43 Papuan asylum-
seekers who claimed they were being persecuted at home.
The new pact, to be signed by Australian Foreign Minister Alexander Downer
and Indonesian Foreign Minister Hassan Wirajuda,
provies for stronger intelligence cooperation but makes it clear Australia
does not support separatist movements
in Indonesia.
"It's very important that we have a cooperative relationship with
Indonesia on defence ties. The treaty will in a sense
formalise what we are already doing," Nelson told Australian television.
"I can assure you that we don't use intelligence in relation to specific
issues, and certainly not in relation to
separatism," he said.
Jakarta tore up a defence pact with Canberra seven years ago after
Australia led an international force into East Timor to
restore order after the territory voted to break free of Indonesian rule.
The new agreement has been slammed by some Australian opposition
politicians and non-government groups, who fear the new
agreement will give Indonesia a free hand to suppress groups seeking
Papuan independence.
Nelson said the agreement would allow for stronger anti-terror
cooperation, joint naval border patrols, and would formalise
military exchanges and training. About 70 Indonesians were already
undergoing military training in Australia.
Downer said Australia had worked hard to persuade Indonesia to sign a new
pact, which will be subjected to a public inquiry
and which must be endorsed by parliament in Canberra before it can come
into force.
"It won't involve any change in what we do day by day," Downer was quoted
by Reuters as telling Australian television on
Sunday.
"It just makes it clear that the Australian government doesn't support
separatism, and the Australian government won't
support separatist movements in Indonesia." (*)
Copyright © 2006 ANTARA
November 12, 2006
---
http://www.antara.co.id/en/seenws/?id=23101
Indonesia-Aussie security treaty no defence pact: minister
Jakarta (ANTARA News) - Foreign Minister Hassan Wirajuda said on Friday
the new security treaty Indonesia and Australia would
sign on the eastern Indonesian island of Lombok next Monday would not be a
defence pact.
"The security treaty is not a defence pact if compared with the one signed
in 1995. The 1995 treaty is similar to a defence
pact," he said.
He said the defence pact signed in 1995 and annulled in 1999 stipulated
among other things that if the security stability of
one of the signatories was under threat from a third party, the other
signatory woud come to its assistance.
The pact to be signed next Monday would not include such a clause, he said.
"In the new security treaty, Australia reaffirms its recognition of
Indonesia`s sovereignty over its entire territory,
including Papua," he said.
Under the new security treaty, Australia would also refuse to serve as a
base for the launching of any Indonesian separatist
movement," he added.
The new treaty would not only require the two countries to respect each
other`s territorial sovereignty and not to intervene
in each other`s internal affairs but also open the door to cooperation in
aviation security, disaster emergency responses,
nuclear research for peaceful purposes, fighting human trafficking and
terrorism, he said.
"The signing of the treaty will be an historic event which is expected to
be a significant contribution to the improvement of
bilateral relations," he said.
Reuters quoted Foreign Minister Alexander Downer as telling Australian
Broadcasting Corp. radio on Wednesday the new document
did not mean Australia would never accept more Papuan asylum hopefuls, or
that pro-Papuan independence groups in Australia
would be banned.
Australia granted visas this year to 43 Papuan asylum seekers who landed
in Australia`s north.
Asked how Indonesia could trust Australia not to change its stance on
Papua, Wirajuda said the security treaty was a binding
agreement regardless of who was in power in the two countries.
"This is stronger than a verbal statement," he said.
He said any cooperation should be based on goodwill to forge relations
between the two countries.
"The challenge of foreign diplomacy is how to change potential conflict
between two countries into potential cooperation," he
said.
Indonesia and Australia early in 2006 agreed to establish joint security
cooperation. The idea of setting up the cooperation
emerged in the wake of the bloody post-ballot conflict in East Timor in
1999 when relations between the two countries turned
sour.
Through the cooperation, Australia focused on joint security among others
to deal with fish poaching.
However, the efforts were disturbed by tense relations between the two
countries following Canbera`s granting of visas
earlier this year to 43 Papuan asylum seekers. (*)
Copyright © 2006 ANTARA
November 10, 2006
---
http://www.thejakartapost.com/detailfeatures.asp?fileid=20061112.N02&irec=23
Bridging cultural divide: Australia-Indonesia relations
Different Societies, Shared Futures: Australia, Indonesia and the Region
John Monfries, ed.
Institute of Southeast Asian Studies
Singapore, 2006
204 pp.
Australia's popular perceptions of Indonesia swing from infatuation to
fearful recoil. In a little more than a decade, images
of Indonesia have shifted from it being the next Asian business miracle
and an exotic tropical holiday haven to a landscape
of political and economic chaos after the 1997/98 crisis and, more
recently, a country beset by Islamic terrorism.
Indonesians themselves have maintained a more consistent attitude towards
Australia. While Australia is rarely a subject that
preoccupies the vast majority of Indonesians, they generally see Australia
as an affluent and lucky outpost of the West --
and Australians as mostly benign, but not really having much in common
with Indonesians.
Those times Australia does feature prominently are when the country is
perceived to be taking an adversarial position as
regards Indonesia, such as over East Timor in 1999.
While events at the time were in fact very complicated, many Indonesians
saw the Australian-led United Nations peacekeeping
force -- which entered then East Timor following the post-referendum
violence -- as a slap in the face and indeed, as a
culmination of Australian pressure to encourage East Timor's independence
from Jakarta.
Exploring how such attitudes and stereotypes can affect relations is
Different Societies, Shared Futures: Australia,
Indonesia and the Region edited by John Monfries, a former Australian
diplomat and now academic, and published by Singapore's
Institute of Southeast Asian Studies (ISEAS).
The book is based on papers given at the 2005 Indonesia Update conference
at the Australian National University in Canberra,
an annual event held for nearly 20 years by the Indonesia Project at the ANU.
Strangely, this is the first time there has been a focus on
Indonesia-Australia relations. Given how important Indonesia is
for Australia's relations, not merely on a bilateral basis, but also for
Australia's wider relationships in Asia, the study
is long overdue.
As far back as the 1950s, Australian diplomat and academic Macmahon Ball
said that if Australia "made a mess of our relations
with Indonesia, we'll have little hope of being able to succeed with any
of the other nations in our region".
The book examines government-to-government links, public images and mutual
perceptions, regional organizations, the role of
Islam, aid and development assistance, security and counterterrorism, and
economics and business.
Authors range from academics and government policy makers to former
ambassadors and from businesspeople to journalists. They
include former Indonesian Ambassador to Australia S. Wiryono, the deputy
executive director at Jakarta's Centre for Strategic
and International Studies (CSIS), Rizal Sukma, and Indonesia-Australia
business council president Noke Kiroyan, who is also a
senior executive in the Indonesian mining industry.
Given how culturally different the two societies are, an unsurprising
conclusion is that building and maintaining closer
relations is unlikely to be a simple process.
As former Australian foreign minister Gareth Evans once said, there could
be no two neighboring countries in the world so
different.
Nevertheless, Evans, now head of the Brussels-based International Crisis
Group, believes it is vital for Australia's
political, security and economic interests that effort be made for better
understanding. According to Evans, there needed to
be more "ballast" in the relationship through stronger and broader
institutional and "people-to-people" links.
Evans' position is in the tradition of the post-1945 Chifley Labor party
government. Australia, then an early advocate for
multilateralism, became a champion in the UN of the Indonesian
independence movement, and played a key role in arbitration
between the nationalists and the Dutch -- an achievement that often seems
to be forgotten in both countries today.
And in Evans' time in office during the Hawke-Keating Labor governments in
the mid 1980s to the early '90s, Australians did
again become more interested in Indonesia in all sorts of ways.
Earlier stereotypes of an overpopulated, poor and often belligerent
Indonesia, dating from the days of Sukarno, Konfrontasi
against Malaysia, the feared communist threat and the 1975 invasion of
East Timor, gave way to a much more positive and
enthusiastic view of the archipelago.
But things swung back to another extreme after the 1997/98 crisis and the
fall of Soeharto.
Then, official relations suffered especially as a result of Australia's
military action in East Timor. Many Indonesians
believed that Canberra had a hidden agenda -- or at least one that could
be forced on it by public pressure -- to dismember
Indonesia.
But there has been good repair at the government-to-government level with
the election in August 2004 of President Susilo
Bambang Yudhoyono. Yudhoyono has shown perhaps more interest in Australia
than any recent Indonesian leader.
This has been matched by much greater effort to fashion better relations
by Australian Prime Minister John Howard, who has
headed a conservative Liberal-National coalition government for more than
a decade now. Howard launched this effort with a
surprise visit to Jakarta for Yudhoyono's inauguration.
Australia also distinguished itself in Indonesian eyes by its aid after
the tsunami disaster of December 2004.
Australian business, however, has not shown anywhere near the interest in
Indonesia that it showed before 1998, particularly
now that it has become so enamored with China.
But at official levels, the relationship certainly has seemed to be on the
up and up. Yudhoyono made a fruitful visit to
Australia in March-April 2005, and Indonesia provided key diplomatic
support for Australia's successful bid to attend the
first East Asia summit in Kuala Lumpur in December 2005.
Yet new tensions have also emerged, unfortunately, over the question of
Papua, flowing from Australia's decision to give
political asylum to Papuan refugees in April 2006.
Because the refugees are associated with the independence movement in
Papua, the action is interpreted by many Indonesians as
Australian support for Papuan separatism.
The event unleashed a barrage of Indonesian government, parliamentary and
media criticism of Australia and this, in turn,
triggered a lot of emotional and uninformed public criticism of Indonesia
in Australia. Canberra itself has sought to dampen
down the affair and has been adamant about its support for Indonesia's
territorial integrity.
But the Papuan situation, as several of the book's writers say, is now a
critical issue for relations between the two
countries.
Of course, Australia cannot dictate to Indonesia, a sovereign state, how
Papua should be governed. But neither should
Canberra compromise Australian laws and principles towards refugees simply
to appease Jakarta.
There is a third course: Australia, through its large development
assistance program to Indonesia, can contribute to
improving life for Papuans. Applied in cooperation with the Indonesian
government, supporting good policy, administration and
programs, this could be of significant help in promoting development and
reducing local grievances.
Yudhoyono has already shown in the case of Aceh how peace could be
achieved -- after years of bloody fighting between
separatists and Jakarta -- through courageous initiatives promoting local
autonomy.
For Canberra's part, it clearly is in Australia's interest for tensions to
be defused in Papua, as they could undermine wider
relations with Indonesia.
Whether there can be wise cooperation between the two governments over
Papua's economic and social development will test the
extent to which relations have truly moved into a new era.
The reviewer is an Australian business consultant based in Singapore and
works as Asia manager for the UK group, Menas
Associates. He worked as a journalist in Indonesia from 1992-97.
---
============================================================================
KABAR IRIAN ("Irian News since 1994") www.kabar-irian.com
NOTE: "All items are posted for their news/information content. They are
not necessarily the views of IRJA.org or subscribers. "