MIFEE: The Stealthy Face of Conflict in West Papua

 

Asian Human Rights Commission
July 19, 2012MIFEE: The Stealthy Face of Conflict in West Papua

Contributors: Selwyn Moran

West Papua, the easternmost island under Indonesia’s control, is a
land beset by troubles. Rarely a week goes by without news of some new
tragedy in a relentless conflict that has endured and evolved over
fifty years.

Last June has been a particularly bloody one: troops have gone on the
rampage in Wamena, burning houses and shooting indiscriminately. On
the island of Yapen, security forces have been carrying out raids on
villages, arresting several people and forcing thousands to flee in
fear. Around the West Papuan capital, Jayapura, several supporters of
the West Papua National Committee (KNPB) have been killed by police in
separate incidents: three men were killed on a demonstration, Teyu
Tabuni was shot in the head by a uniformed policeman and finally Mako
Tabuni, a KNPB leader, was also shot, unarmed, running from
plain-clothes police.

Adding to the climate of tension and fear has been a spate of
seemingly random fatal shootings, presumably carried out by someone
with a vested interest in promoting conflict. The police say the
shootings are the work of persons unknown, who they never seem able to
track down. Intelligence agents blame ‘separatists’. Papuan groups
suspect the state somehow plays a hand.

It is this unstemmed tide of bloodshed and terror that earns remote
West Papua any little attention it might attract. And so it must be; a
conflict that causes such deep suffering across West Papua must be
responded to, whether in Papua, in Indonesia and overseas.

However in Papua there are many other aspects of conflict, more
complex and subtle than the headline-grabbing news of shootings and
terror.

One factor driving continuing conflict is the lucrative appeal of the
natural riches that are to be found in and around West Papua: wood,
minerals, fish and land. The military, for example, have a financial
stake through their private business such as illegal logging,
protection rackets around mining areas, or prostitution or gambling
outfits, while using the violent conflict to justify their presence.
Meanwhile the lure of possibly finding well-paid work continues to
draw many migrants from other parts of Indonesia. This creates tension
as native Papuans find themselves stigmatised and marginalised, with
no place in the booming economy.

This is the story of how resource conflicts are building in the
southernmost part of West Papua, as agribusiness companies stealthily
invade the forests, leaving its people dispossessed.

The Claim that West Papua can feed Indonesia and the World.

West Papua’s deep south, the hinterland of the city of Merauke, is
less often a flashpoint in the violent conflict than some areas, such
as the Central Highlands, the area around the Freeport gold and copper
mine in Timika, or the Papuan capital Jayapura. However, a different
kind of conflict is occurring in this mostly flat land. Companies are
moving in to colonize the land for their plantations, cheating and
coercing local people to give up their land.

This conflict goes by the name of MIFEE – the Merauke Integrated Food
and Energy Estate. It is an ambitious program designed by the former
leader of Merauke Regency Johannes Gluba Gebze together with the
national government and certain companies. Together they conceived the
idea that the flat and fertile land around Merauke would be the ideal
location for a major agricultural expansion, guaranteeing Indonesia’s
national food security into the future, and establish Indonesia as a
food exporter.

The plan was given extra impetus by a Saudi investor, the Bin Laden
Group, which promised to invest four million dollars to cultivate rice
on 500,000 hectares of land. In the words of the Indonesian President,
Merauke would “Feed Indonesia, then feed the world”.

Eventually the Saudis pulled out, and the scheme was redesigned, now
allowing for the cultivation of agro-fuel crops as well as food. 50%
of the land was designated for rice and other basic food crops, while
20% would be oil palm and 30% sugar cane plantations. A ‘grand design’
was elaborated for efficient, modern agribusiness, which divided the
project area into clusters and provided for associated processing
facilities.

MIFEE was officially launched in August 2010. Then as 2011 progressed
there was some speculation of whether the program would go ahead or
not. For the moment, the ambitious dream it promotes of highly
mechanised intensive agricultural production still persists, even if
only in glossy reports of Indonesia’s national development strategy,
the ‘Master Plan for the Acceleration and Expansion of Indonesia’s
Economic Development (MP3EI)’, where Merauke is earmarked as a hub of
food production.

Seen from the Forest, MIFEE looks a little different

Looking beyond the grand plans, what is actually happening on the
ground? Well agricultural development is certainly going ahead, but
it’s not exactly as had been promoted. There has been limited interest
from companies wanting to plant rice or other basic food crops, and
those companies that did make such plans complain that there is no-one
to foot the bill for the infrastructure development needed.

Instead, companies attracted to the area in 2008, 2009 and 2010 are
now starting to develop vast oil palm, sugar cane and wood chip
plantations. By May 2010 local government data revealed that there
were 36 large plantation plans on the table.

Those plans are indeed vast. If every company in possession of
provisional location permits were to exploit their allocations, the
new estates would cover more than two million hectares.

Some companies are moving forward faster with their plans, others more
cautiously, whilst there has been no news of recent activity from
several of the potential investors. However the pioneers are ploughing
ahead, and have already started clearing land. Medco, a company whose
principal interests lie in oil and gas exploration, has been clearing
forest to export wood chips. Another Indonesian company, the Rajawali
group, has been planting sugar cane. Korindo, an Indonesian-based
Korean company with a history of operating in the area, has been
clearing land for oil palm.

Other companies are a few steps behind; applying for the extra permits
they need, evaluating the terrain, trying to win the support of local
communities and waiting to see how the political and economic climate
develops. They include companies owned by some of Indonesia’s richest
people, including husband and wife team Murdaya Poo and Siti Hartati
Murdaya and Martua Sitorus, chief operating officer of Singapore-based
Wilmar.

While many of the companies interested in MIFEE are owned by the
Indonesian elite, there are also foreign companies planning investment
in Merauke, mainly coming from South Korea. Apart from Korindo
mentioned above, and the LG International Corporation, which holds a
25% stake in Medco’s wood-chip operation, two other Korean companies
are involved. One is Daewoo International Corporation (owned by
Posco), which is trying to establish itself in West Papua planting oil
palm after meeting heavy resistance to its planned land grab in
Madagascar, and Moorim Paper, who bought a controlling stake in local
company Plasma Nutfah Marind Papua in order to develop an industrial
forestry plantation.

When Agribusiness Arrives at Your Village…

The Malind, the indigenous people of Merauke, live in close connection
with the forest. Their staple food is the starch of the sago palm
which grows in groves in the forest, which they supplement by hunting
wild animals. Each person belongs to a clan, which represents an
important plant or animal and so connects them to some part of the
forest ecosystem. The forest is divided between the different clans
for hunting, using a geography based on remembered stories of the
ancestors’ journeys.

Indonesian law also recognises that local people have collective
ownership rights over the forest, which are known as ulayat rights. A
company wanting to take control of the land must ensure that it
secures the consent of the ulayat holder to be able to use the land.

This becomes the first point of conflict. Big companies, experienced
in the art of manipulation and deception, and easily able to buy
influence and military protection, flex their muscles against
villagers who have always allocated land on a collective basis through
age old customary practices.

Armed with GPS machines to delineate exactly the boundaries of their
allocation, the companies offer the villagers compensation based on
what they regard as the value of the land: the marketable timber
contained in the trees that grow on it. By doing this, they claim that
they are buying the right to use the land for industrial plantations.

Yet to the Malind, this forest defies valuation: it is not only where
they find their sago and hunt animals to nourish themselves, but also
their culture, their history and their very identity.

Villagers, local NGOs and local media have reported how companies
involved in MIFEE have been cheating local people even out or this
limited compensation. In Nakias village, for example, which lies in
Korindo’s operational area, the company gave villagers the equivalent
of $6000 US dollars for the wood they had already taken from their
land. This was far below the levels stipulated by the provincial
governor, which should include a premium for valuable timber species.
But since it was the company who did the accounting of the volumes of
wood they had taken, the people had no way to check their
calculations.

Villagers from Muting village have also reported that PT Bio Inti
Agrindo, a company linked to Daewoo International Corporation, has
bought up land for the pitiful price of six dollars per hectare.

Meanwhile in Zanegi village, villagers told researchers from the NGO
Pusaka how they were cheated by Medco. In a ceremony in 2009, Medco
staff and villagers signed what the company called a “Certificate of
Appreciation”, which was accompanied by a gift of $33,400. They took
it as a goodwill gesture. Only later, when Medco had felled the forest
and wanted to take away the wood did the company’s real intentions
become clear. They produced a document which they claimed was an
appendix to the “Certificate of Appreciation” which stated that wood
was to be compensated at 2000 Rupiah per cubic meter, about
one-hundredth of what the community would have received if they had
sold the wood directly to a local wood-trader.

Other villages in Medco’s concession area tell similar stories of
deception. They also report broken promises – the schools, clinics,
churches and roads which the company was supposed to build and never
did.

From around the affected area, the Malind people have regularly voiced

opposition to MIFEE and their shock at the people who have already
suffered at the hands of Medco, Rajawali and Korindo. Few villagers
may want this form of progress, but it is hard to know how to prevent
these developments. In May 2012 news came through of communities
trying to make it as difficult as possible for the companies. Four
villages were refusing to release the land that Korindo wants for less
than 100 billion Rupiah, or over $10 million.

It is a large amount of money, but far from unreasonable, as it is the
price for the whole population of four villages to accept a permanent
dislocation from their current ways of subsistence and somehow join
the money economy. Korindo was refusing to offer more than 4 billion
Rupiah. But even if they managed to get the full amount that they have
demanded, would such a financial prize really reflect the heartfelt
aspirations of those villagers?

Sums of money which may be insignificant as a replacement for the
forest can nevertheless be large amounts in day-to-day life. This then
becomes the cause of further conflict, not directly with the company
this time, but between the people themselves. Disputes over land and
money have caused envy and conflict between the people of Sanggase and
Boepe villages, as it has between Domande and Onggari villages. The
arrival of development brings social breakdown in many subtle ways.

Adding to the pressure will be the military and police presence, and
the effects of large numbers of migrants from outside Papua who arrive
to work on the plantations. The Marind people will be forced to find
ways to adapt quickly to new ways of living, or if not, face a life of
poverty squeezed between the plantations, the latest victims of the
enclosure of land for private economic interests.

This is a slow and stealthy conflict, the transformation of such a
great expanse of forest into farmland cannot be done overnight, nor
can forest people casually leave behind their identity and livelihood
to enter this brave new world. The Malind have a long struggle ahead
of them, whether they aim to reject the developments entirely or find
some way to adjust to life in very different surroundings.

On the most basic level many Malind people can expect to face hunger,
with their sago forests gone and too poor to buy rice. This is the
grand irony of MIFEE, a project that was supposed to ensure the food
security of the whole of Indonesia cannot even provide a secure future
for the people in its immediate area.

The views shared in this article do not necessarily reflect those of
the AHRC, and the AHRC takes no responsibility for them.

——–

About the Author:
Selwyn Moran is an independent translator and researcher based in the
UK. Having lived in Indonesia previously, he now tries to disseminate
information about environmental and social struggles in Indonesia in
the English language. He has prepared a comprehensive briefing on
MIFEE available at https://awasmifee.potager.org. Visit the blog to
learn more about MIFEE and be a fan of ‘no to MIFEE’ Facebook page.
People who read Indonesian are recommended to consult Pusaka’s
thorough study of MIFEE –
http://www.forestpeoples.org/sites/fpp/files/publication/2011/06/mifee-buku-low-res.pdf

Link: http://www.humanrights.asia/opinions/columns/AHRC-ETC-022-2012

 

Doubts grow of OPM responsibility for Puncak Jaya aircraft shooting

Special Report by Nick Chesterfield at West Papua Media

Monday, April 9, 2012

Concern is mounting in Puncak Jaya that an Indonesian military unit of “unknown persons” seeking to create a security crisis in Puncak Jaya may be behind the April 8 shooting attack on a Trigana Air Twin Otter aircraft in which a Papua Post journalist was killed.

Civil Society representatives, media sources and representatives from the rebel TPN (Tentara Pembebasan Nasional or National Liberation Army) have all cast significant doubt on the Indonesian military claim that Papuan guerrillas were responsible for opening fire on the aircraft. The aircraft came under accurate small arms fire as it was approaching from the Noble airfield in Mulia, Puncak Jaya, forcing the plane to make an emergency landing.

Leiron Kogoya, 35, the Puncak Jaya correspondent covering local elections for the Nabire-based Papua Post, was fatally injured by a gunshot to his neck.

During the landing the injured pilot panicked, according to local media sources, and crashed the plane into the terminal building (shed). Four people sustained injuries from bullet fragments. A child, Pako Korwa, was wounded in the left finger, Jackie Korwa (mother) was wounded in the right shoulder; Dedy or Beby (pilot), was hit in the left ankle, and Willy Resubun (copilot) injured his right hand and fingers.

Papua Police’s public relations head, Commander Yohanes Nugroho Wicaksono, told Tempointeractif.com that the shooters were hiding in the hills 50 metres from the airport. Police had been unable to identify the perpetrators or the guns used in the incident. Yohanes guessed the shooter had used a M-16 or SS1 – the standard issue weapon for the TNI. “We’re still studying what particular type of gun was used,” he said.

Djoko Suyanto, the Coordinating Minister for Political, Justice and Security Affairs condemned the attack and demanded security forces immediately capture the perpetrators, but admitted that the case would likely remain unsolved. “Their actions must be stopped although it is difficult to do this because of the hills and dense forests,” Suyanto said.

A joint team of the Australian-created Detachment 88 counter-terrorism unit,

Australian funded Detachment 88/ Brimob unit near shooting site, Mulia, 2010 (West Papua Media sources)

Brimob snipers and members of the notorious Nabire-based Indonesian army (TNI) Battalion 753 AVT gave chase to the shooters – according to the police statement – but failed to locate the shooters. Perpetrators for “unknown persons” shootings are rarely located by Police in Papua, despite significant intelligence resources and funding provided to the counter-terror units by the Australian Government.

Australian funded Detachment 88/ Brimob unit near shooting site, Mulia, 2010 (West Papua Media sources)

A West Papua rights activist and former political prisoner Sebby Sambon has told Tabloid Jubi that the work is not that of the TPN, and was far from the areas of operation for troops of TPN leader Goliat Tabuni. “If it occurred near the TPN-OPM headquarters in Tingginambut, then accusations (that TPN may be  involved) may make sense,” he said.

However, according to Sambon, TPN/OPM will not shoot civilians. “TPN / OPM (is there) to fight for the people. Period. It is not possible to shoot people.”

Sambon, who is in regular contact through the underground network with Tabuni’s men, said there is a group that was playing at Mulia. “There is a play, therefore, forged evidence. TPN / OPM has made no orders to shoot civilian aircraft, Sambon explained.

Police have accused TPN of involvement without any evidence, according to Sambon. “Is it the TPN / OPM purely firing, or other parties who deliberately do this to create a “project” in Papua?”

“For every event at Mulia, legal facts have never been substantiated,” said Sambon.

Indonesian press outlets are reporting that Indonesian police have conceded that the shooting is the work of “Unknown persons”, Polri Public Information Bureau chief Brigadier-General M Taufik told Vivanews.com that the police could not confirm whether the shooting was carried out by the Free Papua Movement (OPM). “So far we have not been able to ascertain whether or not they are the OPM, and we suspect they are a bunch of strangers,” he told Vivanews.com.

Yet a senior media source told West Papua Media on condition of anonymity, that both Police and military intelligence officers have been sending contradictory SMS messages about the shooting to journalists across Papua. “Two SMS messages about Trigana shooting were received from ASINTEL (Assistant Intelligence Commander of the Cenderawasih military district) and two from Kadivhumas (Public Affairs) Police.”

“Asintel told me that the shooter is OPM, but Kadivhumas Police told me that the shooter were “unknown persons”. This is a common habit known among journalists in Papua. TNI (Indonesian military) will send SMS to journalists to told them that the shooter is OPM. But the police already know who actually did the shooting in the Puncak Jaya and Freeport area. You know, TNI also has many groups that conducted operations in Papua,” the source told West Papua Media.

In a statement obtained by West Papua Media, Indonesian human rights organisation Imparsial suggested that the shootings were carried out as an “outrageous act” by elements that want to destabilize the security situation in Puncak Jaya and take advantage of the chaos. “Shoot civilian aircraft on the holy day of Easter, there are casualties. I guess there is a deliberate manufacture of the situation in Mulia, (so the area) seems to be harbuoring terrorists,” said the Executive Director of Imparsial, Poengki Indarti.

Indarti says that serious investigation must occur into events surrounding the shootings in Puncak Jaya. “I hope the government and security forces act seriously, because Papuans don’t want to dirty their hands with blood of others on Easter Sunday,” she said. “This act was orchestrated to make Mulia a (place) of terrorists, but it is not at all, “said Indarti again. Imparsial urged the police to immediately identify the imposters with sophisticated intelligence sent to Puncak Jaya.

The Alliance of Independent Journalists Papua Branch has also called for Kogoya’s death to be properly investigated by police, and for them not to fall back on the usual defence of “unknown persons”.

In a statement, the Chairman of the Alliance of Independent Journalists Jayapura, Victor Mambor said “The incident is very regrettable. Leiron Kogoya was confirmed as the journalist for Pacific and Papua Post Nabire, and was commissioned by the editors to cover the phase of the elections in Puncak Jaya district.”

“It is clear that Leiron Kogoya was killed while on journalistic assignment, because he flew on the plane ordered by the editors to cover the phases of elections in Puncak Jaya,” said Mambor. According to AJI Jayapura, the police are supposed to ensure the safety of civilians, including journalists carrying out their journalistic duty.

“To his fellow journalists in Papua, (this is a renewed warning) to always be alert and careful in carrying out journalistic duties, since the recent intimidation and violence against journalists in Papua is increasing in intensity.” said Mambor. Victor Mambor is also is editor in chief of tabloidjubi.com.

Journalists in Papua are regularly subjected to violence and intimidation by Indonesian security forces, including direct monitoring by intelligence officers in newsrooms. The Pacific Media Freedom Report 2011 documented cases where at least two journalists have been killed in West Papua, five abducted and 18 assaulted in 2011.

westpapuamedia

Structural discrimination against Papuans in many districts of Papua

[A very revealing report about how indigenous Papuans are being denied access to something as basic as education, thus maintaining their position as the underdog – TAPOL]JUBI, 23 March 2012

 

The author of the book, Paradoks Papua, The Papuan Paradox. said that there is systematic discrimination against the indigenous Papuan people in Keerom in all fields of endeavour.

Cipry  Jehan, the author, was speaking at a seminar on Just Development which was convened by the Catholic Church in the Diocese of Keerom.

‘There is structural social injustice in the district of Keerom and it is structured around peoples’ clans and religions.’

He said that this discrimination is apparent in all facets of life and is because the government concentrates all its development activities in the districts of Arso and Skamto.

‘Both these districts are populated by transmigrants (newcomers from outside Papua) whereas indigenous Papuans live mostly in Waris and Towe and they are not catered for in all this development.’

He said that discrimination in the field of education is evident from the nursery school level  right up to secondary school level. For example, in this district [Keerom], nursery schools [taman kanak-kanak] are spread right across  the districts whereas in the districts of Waris and Towe Hitam which is where the majority of the population are indigenous Papuans, there are no educational facilities at all. ‘Education facilities for the  Papuans  are very disappointing indeed.’

The author who is himself from the island of Flores.said he feels very sorry for the indigenous people in Keerom who are not getting their right to education. ‘This is after all one of the most important of all peoples rights. The government  pays no attention to this important matter.

‘The government is much more consistent about sending troops to this area than sending teachers.and doctors,’ he said.

Translated by TAPOL

New Matilda: Australia’s Money Helps Kill, Intimidate And Torture

from our good friends at

New Matilda.com

NM INVESTIGATES

23 Mar 2012

Our Money Helps Kill, Intimidate And Torture

By Marni Cordell

Bob Carr and Stephen Smith

Australia plays a key role in training and funding elite Indonesian counter-terror unit Detachment 88 – but wants to distance itself from the unit’s violent reputation, reports Marni Cordell

Bob Carr and Stephen Smith with

their Indonesian counterparts.

There’s been a terror threat in Jakarta. A group of hardliners claim they intend to bomb the city’s transport system, just days before the UK prime minister is scheduled to arrive for a state visit. Indonesia’s counter terror agencies scramble to respond to the critical incident as the population goes into lockdown.

I’m sitting in the Control Room at the Jakarta Centre for Law Enforcement Co-operation (JCLEC) alongside international police trainers Bob Milton and David Gray.

On the screens in front of us, Indonesian police are acting out roles in this imagined terrorism scenario — and Milton and Gray are the puppet-masters.

Inside the JCLEC Control Room. Photo: Marni Cordell

“Basically the scenario develops into a more and more complicated problem,” explains Milton, a former Metropolitan Police commander from the UK.

“We try to make it as real as possible. We’ll have things such as pictures, audio, taped phone conversations, anything that we can try and get the information to them in a more interesting way.”

“We then challenge the students and ask for quite a lot of detail about how they are going to respond, and how they are going to deal with it.”

Fake terror scenarios like this one are a regular part of the immersive training that goes on at the Australian-funded police training centre.

JCLEC was set up in 2004 as a result of a bilateral agreement between Indonesia and Australia to strengthen Indonesia’s counter-terror effort in the wake of the Bali Bombings.

I visited the centre last week as part of an investigation into Australia’s funding and training of Indonesia’s crack anti-terror squad, Detachment 88 — the unit responsible for capturing or killing most of Indonesia’s terrorism kingpins since the 2002 Bali attack.

Detachment 88 employs a controversial brand of policing in which suspects are shot dead rather than arrested — like a soldier would shoot an enemy combatant. The high profile counter-terror raid in Bali last Sunday, in which five suspected terrorists were killed and the police were hailed internationally as heroes, was just the latest in a long line of lethal operations.

The unit is funded and trained by Australia and while the Australian Government might not endorse their paramilitary-style tactics, it’s been willing to turn a blind eye because Detachment 88 has been extremely effective at disrupting Indonesia’s extensive terror network.

JCLEC itself is deep within the grounds of the Indonesian National Police Academy, in the city of Semarang in Central Java. When I arrive at the centre I’m met by AFP federal agent Brian Thomson, a friendly, middle-aged cop from Canberra who is nine months into a two-year stint here. I’m the first Australian journalist he has hosted in that time.

JCLEC is touted as an international police training centre but in fact its students are over 90 per cent Indonesian — 9 per cent of whom are Detachment 88. The centre hosts trainers from Indonesia and across the globe, predominantly from Australia, Europe, and the UK.

Students undertake computer-based training courses – this one tests their knowledge of the difference between intelligence and information. Photo: Marni Cordell

Its core funding for more than 130 staff on six hectares of well maintained grounds comes directly from the Australian Federal Police’s own budget.

The self-contained centre — complete with student accommodation, lap pool and gym — couldn’t stand in greater contrast to stories that abound in Jakarta about Detachment 88’s operations.

JCLEC’s shtick is about “learning and understanding through shared experience” — and teaching best practice terror investigation techniques and proper use of the judicial process. Detachment 88, an elite and highly skilled unit with unique powers of surveillance in Indonesia, seems to operate above the law.

As I reported earlier this month, there is growing evidence to suggest what was once solely a counter-terror unit is now moving into counter-separatist operations. Activists in West Papua claim the squad is being deployed to hunt down civilians aligned with the independence movement in a growing campaign of intimidation.

According to Eric Sonindemi, a participant in last October’s Third Papuan People’s Congress, says Detachment 88 personnel were involved in the deadly attack on Congress in which six people were killed and many others wounded.

“Most of the security forces were in plain clothes, but they weren’t really concealing their weapons — they were sort of showing off,” Sonindemi told me when I met with him in Jakarta. “Detachment 88 was there,” he said, explaining that he “saw their equipment and riot shields”.

“Hundreds of people were detained [by police] that night and many of them were beaten in detention,” Sonindemi said. “I spoke to one person who had a gash in his head, a broken nose and bruises on his face. He had been beaten with the butt of a rifle by a policeman.”

“He was subsequently released and never charged with any crime.”

So exactly how closely does Australia work with the deadly unit?

According to a Jakarta-based security analyst who asked not to be named, “There was a big push after the first Bali Bombing, to the point where Detachment 88 actually had Australians with them on [counter-terror] operations.”

“It’s been a long time since that’s happened,” the analyst continued. “The AFP says that sometimes Detachment 88 doesn’t even share information with them any longer. There’s a real pride in doing things themselves now without relying on the Australians.”

But a diplomatic source in Jakarta confirmed that the relationship remains extremely close — and that the AFP continues to work with the Indonesian National Police, of which Detachment 88 is a part, at head office in Jakarta.

Australian Federal Police agent Brian Thomson at JCLEC, with an Indonesian colleague. Photo: Marni Cordell

Details on our financial support for the unit are harder to come by. The Australian government committed $36.8 million over the first four years of JCLEC. Now Thomson tells me the Australia’s support for JCLEC comes out of the AFP budget, which continues to provide “roughly the same amount” of funding to the centre. We also assist the unit directly — although just what that assistance entails is a closely guarded secret.

“I’ve pursued that question through senate estimates, through questions on notice, I’ve had DFAT briefings, and I can’t get any clarity about the role of Australian support of the Indonesian military and police and specifically whether our contribution benefits Detachment 88,” Greens senator and spokesperson on West Papua Richard Di Natale told NM.

“And it’s very clear that Detachment 88 has been involved in some of the violence that has occurred in the region.”

Details from the Indonesian side are just as shady.

Although some of Detachment 88’s terror raids have been simulcast on television in Indonesia, scratch below the surface and it’s difficult to get any real detail on the unit, says Usman Hamid, advisor to the International Center for Transitional Justice.

“The accountability of Detachment 88 is very low,” Hamid tells me when I meet him in a hotel lobby in Jakarta where he is meeting with other experts to prepare a response to the draft national security bill.

“Detachment 88 has special allocation of the budget and international funding — which has never been explained to the Indonesian public clearly, or even to the parliament for that matter.”

“We hear vague amounts but it’s not under the state budget.”

“It should be accounted appropriately,” Hamid told NM. “To the Indonesian parliament, to the Indonesian public, and of course to the Australian parliament and public … to make sure that the budget Australia gave is really being used for the right purpose.”

As Brian Thomson walks me through the official JCLEC Power Point presentation, I ask how Australia can be sure that the training taught at the centre is also being “used for the right purpose” — how do we know it isn’t being used to crack down on civilian dissent?

He’s silent for some time before asking me to repeat the question, and then ultimately refusing to answer it — handballing to his Indonesian counterpart, Dwi Priyatno, who refers me to the Indonesian law on terrorism, and back to the public affairs branch of the Indonesian police.

I also ask specifically about separatism in Indonesia and whether techniques to quash independence movements are ever discussed at the Australian-funded centre. Thomson again gets nervous.

“I can’t really answer that because my job here as an executive director is to be involved in running the centre, so what’s actually discussed in the classroom, I can’t give full [details],” he says.

“Although separatism…

“Yeah…

“No…

“Not separatism.

“When you say separatism, in what regard are you referring to it?”

Back in Australia my inquiries about Detachment 88’s operations in Papua and their move toward policing separatism have been met with an almost uniform response. Here’s what I received from the AFP head office in Canberra: Australia has no mandate to tell the Indonesian Police how to run their business. And yes, we will continue to provide “capacity building assistance”.

Meanwhile, Eric Sonindemi says he remains traumatised by the police and military attack on the Third Papuan People’s Congress. He clearly remembers the sound of gunfire, he tells me, and now jumps when he hears loud noises. He is sure he is being monitored by the police. “I’ve been threatened by the police before,” he says, “but this is the first time I’ve feared for my life.”

Other Papuans I met in Jakarta told similar stories — of constant surveillance by the security forces, phone tapping and intimidation. They told me that fear is part of their daily lives.

Australian officials may well seek to disclaim any responsibility for the behaviour of the Indonesian police and particularly from the activities of Detachment 88. Given the close relationship between the AFP and the unit, however, it’s hard not to conclude that Australia is directly contributing to this climate of oppression.

This is the second article in an NM investigation of Detachment 88 and Australia’s role in the Indonesian counter-terror effort. Read the first article here.

Human rights abuses and the question of genocide in West Papua

A scene from a notorious video of Indonesian military torturing a Papuan. Photo: originally provided by West Papua Media

Asia-Pacific Journalism, Pacific Media Centre

18 January, 2012

After a period of Dutch control, possession of West Papua was handed to Indonesia in a deal brokered by the US. This deal, known as the New York Agreement of 1962, promised West Papuan self-determination which led to the 1969 Act of Free Choice. This act, later branded as the “Act of No Choice”, was stripped of any legitimacy as a little more than 1000 hand-picked West Papuans representing a population of close to one million voted unanimously under military threats and coercion to retain Indonesian sovereignty. Reported incidents of human rights abuses inflicted on the West Papuan people at the mercy of the Indonesian military includes widespread violence, killings, torture, disappearance, rape, sexual violence, transmigration schemes, forced relocation, and the spread of infectious diseases such as HIV which has seriously harmed the existence of the West Papuan people. This article is a newspaper analysis of the Jakarta Globe, The New Zealand Herald, and The Sydney Morning Herald media coverage. Nigel Moffiet reports.

ANALYSIS: It can be argued that Indonesian abuses in West Papua are crimes consistent with the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide as a consequence of exploitation, transmigration, West Papuan displacement, targeted military brutality at West Papuan communities, and the systematic spread of infectious diseases. Given genocide is not a term to use lightly extreme caution must be made in using the label so as to avoid “the risk of setting up taxonomies of genocide, or opening crucial space in debates for re-engaging precisely the kinds of discourses that enable and naturalise it in the first place” (Banivanua-Mar, 2008, p. 586). Yet, the debate is taken seriously with the interests of ‘prevention and restitution rather than simply definition in order to “more effectively work backwards to a deeper and more practical understanding of how genocide happens” (Banivanua-Mar, 2008, p. 596-597). In this context, I also carry out media analysis and reportage of West Papuan human rights abuses and the question of genocide by The Jakarta Post, The New Zealand Herald, and The Sydney Morning Herald.

Analysing human rights abuses within West Papua involved searching for the words “West Papua” and “genocide” within the archives of the three newspapers’ respective search engines. Surprisingly, the Jakarta Post had the most content fitting this description with 25 articles, followed by the Sydney Morning Herald with five articles and The New Zealand Herald with six.

Exploitation of West Papuan land and resources
The province of West Papua is rich in natural resources and since Indonesian rule government and military officials have been involved in the extraction this wealth through mining and forestry. The consequences of this exploitation has been dire for the Papuan people and has led to human rights abuses as observed by West Papuan campaigner John Rumbiak who stated that “all abuses in West Papua were caused by military and police presence aimed at protecting mining firms, forest concessions and timber estates exploiting natural resources”(Wing & King, 2005, p. 2).

Part of the systematic abuse towards the Melanesian people of West Papua included denying them the right to work or gain any wealth from their own natural resources in favour of generating work and wealth for the Indonesian Javanese population. On a 1980 visit to West Papua, a US professor noted a “planned influx of Indonesian workers, including more than 2000 families that were scheduled to be ‘dropped’ near two major oilfields in order to implement a ‘policy of non-employment of Melanesians in the oil industry’” (Brundige et al, 2004, p. 26).  This is also evident in the US-ownedFreeport copper mine which in 1982 employed 452 expatriates, 1859 Indonesians, and only 200 Papuans who were employed as unskilled laborers” (Brundige et al, 2004, p. 26).

Intensifying the problem is the relocation of villages due the seizure of land. In June 1980, the Amungme tribe from the Tembagapura region were relocated to a coastal area that had widespread malaria creating an epidemic that killed 216 children. Freeport failed to provide food or medicine during the epidemic and the Indonesian government failed to assist despite the official acknowledgement of the epidemic” (Brundige et al, 2004, p. 26-27).

The exploitation of West Papua’s timber resources and exploitation of West Papuan labour is another problem with evidence of serious breaches of human rights. One of the documents of abuse includes the relocation of the Asmat tribe from the southern coast of West Papua by Jakarta-based timbre companies. The Asmat people were forced into compulsory labour which included the deforestation of their own land at below-subsistence wages with threats of arrest for those who refused to work. This relocation and enforced labour within the timber industry had such an impact that an Indonesian environmental group warned that the Asmat people were “on the brink of cultural starvation after a decade of enforced ironwood logging” (Brundige et al, 2004, p. 28).

A major 2005 report by Indonesian based environmental organisation Tilapia and the UK and US-based Environmental Investigation Agency found that the Indonesian military and government officials are involved in the illegal smuggling of up to 300,000 cubic meters of timber a month from Papua to China. This illegal smuggling is valued at more than US $1 billion (Wing & King, 2005, p. 4).

Transmigration and West Papuan displacement
As well as forcing many West Papuan tribes and communities from their land in order to exploit natural resources, Indonesia has also carried out systematic transmigration policy that has been designed to strip the West Papuan people of their identity making them minorities on their own land. By the end of 1984, the Indonesian government had set up 24 transmigration sites across 700,000 hectares of reappropriated West Papuan land. This resulted in 27,726 Indonesian families relocating on West Papuan land; close to 140,000 people over 10 years. Further more, the Indonesian government required that “Papuans be dispersed, with one Papuan family to every nine Javanese families, thus ensuring that the Papuans would become a minority in each area” (Brundige et al, 2004, p. 33).

This has resulted in the marginalisation of West Papuans within the cities as second class citizens to the extent that “propaganda posters sponsored by the ‘Project for the Guidance of Alien Societies’” urged the Papuans to relinquish their inefficient and primitive ways for the superior lifestyle of the Indonesians (Brundige et al, 2004, p. 34). As well as marginalisation within their own communities, transmigration has “led to the loss of traditional lands and forests where once local tribes used to hunt and gather food. There is no transfer of knowledge and technology to substitute for lost basic rights’ (Wing & King, 2005, p. 4).

Increased presence of Indonesian military
In a 2005, in a University of Sydney report for the West Papua Project, it was concluded that “the Indonesian armed forces (TNI) in Papua are the main source of suffering and instability in the province” (Wing & King, 2005, p. 2). Human rights abuses carried out by the Indonesian armed forces is only escalating as troop build up in the West Papuan region continues with incidents of rape, torture and extrajudicial killings. In 1981, the Indonesian military launched Operation Clean Sweep which resulted in rapes, assaults, killings, and looting of villages if anybody was suspected to be part of the Papuan independence movement Organisasi Papua Merdeka (OPM) (Brundige et al, 2004, p. 29). The operation aimed to “intimidate those suspected of supporting the OPM and to cleanse the boarder regions of Papua to make room for Javanese migrants”. Survivors of the operation reported that “whole families had been bayoneted to death and their bodies left to rot”. The Indonesian military also had the slogan: “Let the rats run into the jungle so that the chickens can breed in the coop.” By the summer of 1981 the operation escalated into the Central Highlands of West Papua were the Indonesian armed forces responded to suspected OPM activity by bombing the village of Madi in the Paniai basin. The attack included the use of napalm and chemical weapons against the villagers and killed at least 2500 people with estimates that the death toll could have even reached 13,000 (Brundige et al, 2004, p. 29).

Since then, Indonesian troop buildups have continued and between 2005 and 2009 up to 15,000 extra troops were deployed throughout the West Papuan region (Wing & King, 2005, p. 13). The result of this military buildup is that there is an increased level of human rights abuses and violent clashes between resistant West Papuans and the Indonesian military. This is catastrophic for local communities as the incidents are “used to justify the deployment of new troop reinforcements, which in turn lead to greater human rights abuses, reaction from aggrieved Papuans, then further militarisation. A dangerous and destructive spiral is thus perpetuated” (Wing & King, 2005, p. 7).

The spread of serious disease and HIV/AIDS
The disruption and upheaval to traditional West Papuan existence brought about through Indonesian colonisation and exploitation of the regions natural resources has also led to the spreading of serious disease. A Dutch missionary working in West Papua during the 1980s said infant mortality rates in the region were above 60 percent, and the average life expectancy no more than 31 years (Brundidge et al, 2004, p. 34). Of grave concern is the spread of HIV infection which is rising dramatically in the region to the extent that 40 per cent of Indonesia’s HIV and AIDS cases were located in Papua despite accounting for less than one per cent of Indonesia’s population. Another figure from 2002 shows that just over 20 people per 100,000 were infected with HIV in Papua, compared to only 0.42 people per 100,000 in the rest of Indonesia (Brundige et al, 2004, p. 34). Much has been suggested of Indonesia’s responsibility for the spread of such disease throughout the Melanesian population to the extent human rights groups say the spread of HIV is the result of systematic attempts to destroy the Melanesian population of West Papua. Interviews conducted with workers in Jayapura and Merauke who deal with prostitution and the spread of HIV suggest clear evidence “that there is security force involvement in prostitution at different levels” (Wing & King, 2005, p. 8). Leo Mahuye, a health worker in Merauke says HIV is spread by prostitutes who are brought in by the military to the extent that there is “an indication it is systematic killing…[a]s long as they are importing these women, as long as the military and the police back these activities here, they are committing killings” (Butt, 2005, p. 413).

The Jakarta Post
Searching for the words “West Papua” and “genocide” on The Jakarta Post’s online search engine returned 21 relevant articles between 2001 and 2011 relating to genocide and human rights abuses in the region. The articles were a mix of 14 opinion pieces and six news reports, as well as one question and answer article with West Papuan human rights campaigner John Rumbiak.

Of these 21 articles, one opinion piece and one news report both addressed the issue of genocide in the headlines. The first article published on 8 January 2001 titled “Is Indonesia becoming a genocidal society?” and despite its title it does more to contextualise the nature of genocide throughout history rather than draw any strong conclusions on West Papua. The article references the nature of genocide in Germany, Yugoslavia, Rwanda, and Burundi and makes the statement that the “cycle of genocidal society, which is already apparent in Maluku and other regions, must be broken by effective law enforcement measures”. The article makes this statement without any reference to West Papua or without further contextual evidence to back the statement up.

An article published on 19 August 2005 titled “RI condemns report by Aussie researchers on genocide in Papua” does more to address human rights abuses and genocide in West Papua in light of the University of Sydney’s Centre for Peace and Conflict Studies report Genocide in West Papua? The article provides diverging view points with Indonesia’s foreign ministry spokesman, Marty Natalagawa, calling the report “baseless” and Indonesia’s deputy military spokesman, Bibit Santoso, labeling the report “incorrect and untrue”. Yet the article uses more space quoting from the report and the centre’s director Stuart Rees, who says even though he is cautious using the word “genocide” this “significant document details the destruction of a people, their land and prospects”. The article also quotes one of Papua’s leading church figures, Rev. Socratez Yoman, who talks of the Indonesian military intimidation and says wherever there are Indonesian soldiers, “the militia and jihadists are there too. They are inseparable.”

There were five remaining news articles which addressed human rights abuses in West Papua and the issue of genocide through the sources that had been quoted. An article published on 8 April 2006 titled “Netherlands ‘respects’ RI territorial integrity” does little to address the issue of human rights abuse in West Papua rather it focuses mostly on the Dutch Prime Minister Jan Peter Balkenende’s recognition of Indonesia’s territorial integrity including Papua’s integration into Indonesia. It also focuses on Indonesian criticism of Australia’s decision to grant temporary visas to 42 Papuan asylum seekers. In this criticism the article mentions the Papuan activists have accused Jakarta of genocide.

A news article published on 20 May 2006 titled “RI asks Australia to recognise territorial integrity in treaty” focuses on Indonesia’s effort to ‘get assurances that no neighboring country will support the succession of Papua from Indonesia’ and asking for Australia to “express its commitment to Indonesia’s territorial integrity in a written agreement”.  Once again the article does little to address issues of human rights in the region by failing to quote West Papuan sources. It only puts some context to the story by saying that the “Papuans, including pro-independence activists and their families, have accused Jakarta of ‘genocide’ in Papua”.

The remaining articles focused more heavily on human rights abuses and the question of genocide. A news article published on 9 June 2007 titled “Papuans greet UN envoy with rallies, demands” focused on the visit of UN Secretary General on Human Rights Defenders Hina Jilani’s visit to the region. The article draws many sources and quotes around human rights abuses and the issue of genocide quoting West Papuan’s who had pleaded with Jilani and the UN to “stop the genocide of the Papuans” and “stop the killing in west Papua”. An article published on 27 January 2011 titled “RI, int’l public push for civilian court for torture”  focuses on the torture of two West Papuan and calls for the Indonesian soldiers who committed the torture to be tried in a civilian court rather than an Indonesian military tribunal. Lastly an article published on 18 October 2011 titled “ 5000 attend 3rd Papuan people’s congress” focuses on the congress looking at the issue of human rights abuses in the region. It quotes organizing chairman Selpius Bobii who says “we greatly need support and solidarity from every party that upholds the values of democracy, basic human rights, honesty and justice for the sake of protecting the people of Papua from genocide”.

The remaining opinion pieces provided various forms of context to the human rights abuses in West Papua written mostly by outside observers. The most critical opinion piece was written by Roman Catholic Priest Neles Tebay on 28 September 2006 titled “More questions for the ICG on Papua issue”. The article strongly criticises the findings of the International Crisis Group who denied allegation of genocide in West Papua and downplayed any human rights abuses in the region. Tebay asks “what was or were the true intent(s) of the military operations conducted against the Papuans then, if not to wipe out the people in whole or in part?”

Finally, a question and answers article with West Papuan human rights campaigner John Rumbiak on 24 March 2000 titled “No letup in security approach spells trouble in Irian Jaya” does a lot to provide context and a West Papuan view point to the situation in the region. It adds context to the abuses with reference to the 1969 Act of Free Choice and the political circumstances surrounding the act and Rumbiak articulates West Papuan grievances on a number of levels.

The New Zealand Herald
Searching for “West Papua” and “genocide” on TheNew Zealand Herald’s online search engine drew only five relevant articles dating from 1999 (two articles have not been dated).  Of these five articles, two are opinion pieces by Auckland Indonesian Human Rights Committee spokeswomen Maire Leadbeater, one is an opinion piece by former President of East Timor Jose Ramos-Horta, one news piece that briefly mentions Yosepha Alomang’s award for her “resistance against the destruction of rainforest, rivers and local culture caused by decades of gold mining in West Papua”, and another article that questions the right of four Indonesian military officers to study at Massey University in light of Indonesian military brutality.

Maire Leadbeater’s article (undated) titled “On the brink of genocide” is critical of the Pacific Islands Forum leaders’ failure to address the issue of West Papua. In the article she contextualises West Papua by drawing parallels to East Timor and by mentioning the 1969 Act of Free Choice and the consequences of the act. She draws on human rights estimates that 100,000 Papuans have been killed as a result of Indonesian military brutality and she references The University of Sydney’s Centre for Peace and Conflict Studies report to make her claim that the situation in West Papua is approaching genocide.

Leadbeater’s second article (undated) “West Papuans Face Masters of Terror” cited the Yale report to draw attention towards crimes against humanity including “torture, disappearance, rape, extra-judicial killings and destruction of resources” and that the report “strongly indicated a breach of the United Nations genocide convention”.

Jose Ramos-Horta’s opinion piece on 13 September 1999 titled “A terrible price to pay for freedom” again draws a parallel between West Papua and East Timor and raises the question of crimes against humanity, including genocide.

The Sydney Morning Herald
Searching for “West Papua” and “genocide” on The Sydney Morning Herald online search engine retrieved five relevant articles including two opinion pieces and three news articles between 2007 and 2011.

An opinion piece by Jennifer Robinson on 12 September 2011 titled “Leaks reveal it’s past time to speak for West Papua” draws attention to human rights abuses in the region and the level of surveillance and lack of transparency for journalists and human rights watch groups. On a visit to West Papua for a human rights group she mentions she was warned by an Australian diplomat that her “human rights work risked ‘becoming a political football’’ for [the Australian] government and that [she] was to ‘’keep [her] head down’”.

An opinion piece by Greg Poulgrain on 31 December 2009 titled “Oil and politics prove fatal mix for the people of West Papua” draws on West Papua’s colonial context since the Dutch and states that “[m]ilitary dominance in West Papua began in the 1960s and documents released under freedom-of-information from the US embassy in Jakarta in 1968 refer to the possibility of genocide occurring even then”.

On 18 June 2010 a news article titled “Papuans rally for independence” covers West Papuan protest to “reject the region’s special autonomy within Indonesia and demand a referendum on self-determination”. On 21 November 2009 a news article titled “Death in Papua: political intrigue clouds miner’s murder” refers to the killing of an Australian mine worker in West Papua as the result of an Indonesian military assault. And on 27 March 2007 an article titled “Report warns against Lombok Treaty” refers to a security treaty with Indonesia that potentially restricts Australia’s ability to speak out about human rights abuses. The article goes on to reference the University of Sydney’s Centre for Peace and Conflict Studies report on genocide in the region and quotes that “Australia will be providing training, funding and material aid to Indonesian forces who are engaged in what many Papuans believe is genocide against their people”.

Conclusion
Through widespread violence, killings, torture, disappearance, rape, exploitation of land, transmigration, and the systematic spread of infectious diseases, the West Papuan people are suffering human rights abuses at the hands of the Indonesian military to the extent that the nature of the abuses are consistent with the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. In terms of facing the nature of these human rights abuses and raising the question of genocide directly, the Jakarta Post was more consistent than either The Sydney Morning Heraldor The New Zealand Herald in raising these issues within its content. The New Zealand Herald and The Sydney Morning Herald both had very limited content raising the question of genocide within West Papua. However, The Sydney Morning Herald had a more diverse and relevant spread of content in relation to human rights abuses and the question of genocide within West Papua whereas if it was not for the opinion pieces of Auckland Indonesian Human Rights Committee spokeswomen Maire Leadbeater, The New Zealand Herald would have had next to no content at all on this issue.

Nigel Moffiet researched and wrote this report as an Asia-Pacific Journalism postgraduate assignment at AUT University.

References
Books and journal articles:
Banivanua-Mar, T. (2008). ‘A thousand miles of cannibal lands’: imagining away genocide in the re-colonization of West Papua. Journal of Genocide Research, 10(4), December, 583-602.

Brundige, E.; King, W.; Vahali, P.; Vladeck, S.; Yuan, X. (2004). Indonesian human rights abuses in West Papua: Application of the law of genocide to the history of Indonesian control. Allard K. Lowenstein International Human Rights Clinic, Yale Law School.

Butt, L. (2005). ‘Lipstick girls’ and ‘Fallen women’: AIDS and conspirational thinking in Papua, Indonesia. Cultural Anthropology, 20(3), pp. 412-442.

Kirsch, S. (2010). Ethnographic representations and the Politics of Violence in West Papua. Critique of Anthropology, 30(1), pp. 3-22.

Sautman, B. (2006). Cultural genocide and Asian state peripheries. New York : Palgrave Macmillan

Wing, J. & King, P. (2005). Genocide in West Papua? The role of the Indonesian state apparatus and a current needs assessment of the Papuan people. West Papua Project at the Centre for Peace and Conflict Studies, University of Sydney.

News articles:

  • The Jakarta Post (2000). No letup in security approach spells trouble in Irian Jaya
  • The Jakarta Post (2000). West Papua: Will it become the next East Timor for Indonesia?
  • The Jakarta Post (2001). Is Indonesia becoming a genocidal society?
  • The Jakarta Post (2002). Soeharto and the grand scheme of things
  • The Jakarta Post (2005). RI condemns report by Aussie researchers on genocide in Papua
  • The Jakarta Post (2005). Founding West Irian Jaya province
  • The Jakarta Post (2006). Netherlands ‘respects’ RI territorial integrity
  • The Jakarta Post (2006). How to protect Papuans — and RI-Australia ties
  • The Jakarta Post (2006). RI asks Australia to recognise territorial integrity in treaty
  • The Jakarta Post (2006). More questions for the ICG on Papua issue
  • The Jakarta Post (2007). Papuans greet UN envoy with rallies, demands
  • The Jakarta Post (2007). Indigenous languages in danger of disappearing
  • The Jakarta Post (2008). The possibility of indicting Soeharto after his death
  • The Jakarta Post (2008). On Timor Leste’s present situation
  • The Jakarta Post (2008). New strategy behind separatism in Papua
  • The Jakarta Post (2009). He ain’t heavy, he’s a brother from Papua
  • The Jakarta Post (2009). Munir and the protection of rights defenders
  • The Jakarta Post (2009). Issues: `Who is responsible for poverty in Papua?’
  • The Jakarta Post (2010). Text your say: Gus Dur or Soeharto?
  • The Jakarta Post (2011). RI, int’l public push for civilian court for torture
  • The Jakarta Post (2011). 5000 attend 3rd Papuan people’s congress
  • NZ Herald (n.d.). Maire Leadbeater: On the brink of genocide
  • NZ Herald (n.d.). Maire Leadbeater: West Papuans face masters of terror
  • NZ Herald (1999). A terrible price to pay for freedom
  • NZ Herald (2000). Soldier students to finish studies
  • NZ Herald (2001) Journalists share top environment award
  • The Sydney Morning Herald (2007). Report warns against Lombok Treaty
  • The Sydney Morning Herald (2009). Death in Papua: political intrigue clouds miner’s murder
  • The Sydney Morning Herald (2009). Oil and politics prove fatal mix for the people of West Papua
  • The Sydney Morning Herald (2010). Papuans rally for independence
  • The Sydney Morning Herald (2011). Leaks reveal it’s past time to speak for West Papua

Blood money – Metro magazine

Genocide in West Papua?


Create a website or blog at WordPress.com

Up ↑