[Kabar-indonesia] Age: What's Wrong in Papua [SMH: Suspicious of Indonesia: Poll]

[JoyoNews at aol.com]

also: SMH: The older we get, the more we suspect Indonesia: poll

The Age (Melbourne)
Thursday, June 29, 2006

Opinion

What's Wrong in Papua

by Kenneth Davidson

THE chief criticism of John Howard's decision to reinstitute the Pacific 
Solution to deal with the threat of hundreds of Papuans fleeing military 
persecution and economic dispossession is that, in his desperation for a friendly 
personal relationship with President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono, he is dealing with 
the symptoms of the problem, not the substance.

Surely the first question should be to determine what is causing the problem, 
not how Australia deflects the problem by buying space for refugee gulags in 
failing South Pacific states.

A large part of the answer can be found in an excellent report, Environmental 
Impacts of Freeport-Rio Tinto's Copper and Gold Mining Operation in Papua, 
published in May by the Indonesian non-government organisation WALHI, or 
Indonesian Forum for Environment. The report, so germane to the crisis now tearing 
the Coalition apart and consuming a huge amount of media attention, has received 
virtually no attention.

It is a story of corruption and environmental damage on a massive scale that 
are impoverishing the Papuan people who, when they protest about their 
dispossession, are put down by an Indonesian military paid by the company (with a 
substantial Australian interest via Rio Tinto) for protection.

It is the richest copper and gold mine in the world, extracting fabulous 
riches for its owners, managers and shareholders. Rio Tinto's profits from the 
mine alone in 2005 amounted to $330 million. The mine is Indonesia's biggest 
taxpayer, paying Jakarta $1.6 billion in 2005, but only a small fraction of this 
money reaches the Papuan provincial and local governments.

Millions more is syphoned off by the Indonesian military and officers who, in 
common with the military throughout Indonesia, are expected to be responsible

for raising 70 per cent of their operating budgets.

Despite the wealth produced by Freeport and other extractive operations 
throughout Papua, the province is the poorest and most environmentally degraded in 
Indonesia.

According to WALHI, "millions of hectares of unique rainforest have 
disappeared from legal and illegal logging operations and palm oil plantations in West 
Papua. Large numbers of indigenous Papuans have been displaced by the granting 
of timber concessions on their land, without compensation. Logging has 
contributed to increased flooding and forest fires … while the loss of farm and crop 
lands left thousands facing starvation".

"Mining in Papua is particularly associated with environmental and human 
rights abuse of the worst kind, and has contributed to West Papua's ranking as the 
most polluted province in Indonesia," WALHI said.

A key finding of the report is that Freeport-Rio Tinto has failed to comply 
with government orders to amend its dangerous waste management practices 
despite years of official findings that the company is in breach of environmental 
regulations. Nor has it made public any independent external audits since 1999, 
breaching its environmental permit requirements.

The report states that "the environmental destruction which surrounds PT 
Freeport Indonesia reflects a neglect for the law in the name of economy and 
because of political pressure, proof of the invulnerability of corporate power".

Injustice, environmental vandalism and moral turpitude on this scale cannot 
withstand public scrutiny. Unless the implicit genocide policy is reversed, 
global outrage will lead to Papuan independence irrespective of the preferences 
of the Australian pro-Indonesia lobby.

Both Yudhoyono and Howard know that announcements that Australia recognises 
Indonesia's claims to Papua must be seen against a background of public 
opinion, which is already overwhelmingly sympathetic to the plight of the Papuans. 
This was shown by a recent Newspoll that found 76 per cent of the respondents 
agreed with the proposition that "the people of West Papua should have the right 
to self-determination … including the option of independence".

The recent history of Australia's official and popular attitude towards the 
independence of East Timor shows that in a democracy, public opinion based on 
perceptions of fairness and justice will eventually displace official policies 
based on Realpolitik. The film showing the Santa Cruz massacre of peaceful 
demonstrators by the Indonesian military in 1991 was the beginning of the end of 
Indonesia's occupation of East Timor.

Australia has nothing to gain from a flood of Papuan refugees attempting to 
escape political persecution by trying to reach Australia even if they can be 
successfully diverted to Nauru and other failed states that are prepared to 
take on Australian responsibilities in return for money, or, for that matter, 
from Papuan independence.

Above all, Australia must not become an agent for corruption throughout the 
region for a policy primed for failure. It is in both Australia's and 
Indonesia's long-term interests to make Papua a place fit for human beings who can be 
reconciled with Jakarta. But this means getting the military under control and 
getting Freeport-Rio Tinto to face its responsibilities. This means supporting 
Yudhoyono and other progressive democratic forces in Indonesia who are trying 
to rein in the military as well as using Australian leverage over Rio Tinto.

Kenneth davidson is a senior columnist.

----------------------------------------

The Sydney Morning Herald
Thursday, June 29, 2006

The older we get, the more we suspect Indonesia: poll

David Humphries

SUSPICION towards Indonesia strengthens with age, according to a poll
that finds the young are twice as likely as the elderly to hold a
positive view.

While 62 per cent of 18- to 29-year-olds are positive about Indonesia,
and only 16 per cent are negative, the over-60s are 29 per cent
positive and 50 per cent negative. Overall, 58 per cent of Australians
surveyed believed the Howard Government should stand up to Indonesia
more often, and 31 per cent believe Canberra's stance is strong
enough.

Most antagonistic are NSW men in their 40s, two-thirds wanting a
tougher Australian stand.

The telephone poll of 500 people for the public affairs firm Hawker
Britton was conducted last week and followed Indonesian anger at
Canberra's granting in March of temporary protection visas to 42
asylum seekers from the Indonesian province of Papua.

Although positive and negative attitudes towards Indonesia were equal
overall, about 40 per cent, 83 per cent regarded the relationship as
important.

This compares with 90 per cent for the relationship with Britain, and
92 per cent for China and the United States.

------------------------------------------
Joyo Indonesia News Service
------------------------------------------