Tag: Freeport-McMoRan

How the National Government Is Encouraging Papua to Break Away

Exceptionally powerful article appearing the Jakarta Globe: a must read for all Indonesians who are concerned for Papua, either for or against.
Bramantyo Prijosusilo | November 22, 2011

Transparency and accountability are universally accepted as the cornerstones of good governance. With neither present in Papua, we can be sure that the natural riches of the region will never come to benefit local communities, but will rather bring about the so-called “resource curse” in the form of economic, cultural, social and political strife and ecological disaster.

The massive destruction caused by Freeport-McMoRan, the American mining conglomerate, can now be witnessed by anyone with an Internet connection thanks to Google Earth. The continuous stream of stories of torture and murder that leak out of the region is proof that people are unhappy and that the national government is acting less than honorably there.

What the central government claims about goings-on in Papua cannot be trusted because its claims can be disproved immediately. Since the act of free choice in 1969 (called “the act of no choice” by Papuans resisting Indonesia’s “occupation”), the western half of Guinea island has been covered by a “batik curtain.” Foreign independent journalists are banned from working there freely, as are international NGOs.

However, with the advance of information technologies and the fact that more and more Papuans are receiving modern education, the contemptuous treatment of indigenous people at the hands of the nation’s police and military is becoming more and more difficult to conceal. Gleaning information on Papua from the Internet it becomes obvious that there are powerful forces at play in Papua that are bent on reaching the point of no return — where either all Papuans must be exterminated, or a second and more honest “act of free choice” is conducted, for the world to witness the true aspirations of the people of Papua in terms of their relationship with the Indonesian state.

The powerful forces bent on forcing Papuans to separate from Indonesia are none other than the central government, especially its military and police force.

Since the brutal murder of Papuan leader Theys Eluay a little over 10 years ago, the world has seen how Indonesia has yet to reform its approach to the issue of Papuan independence. As we near Dec. 1 — the date that Papuans consider to be their independence day — the world is fearfully expecting to witness more state violence against Papuans peacefully expressing their aspirations. Indeed, in the past few months we have witnessed attacks on journalists and peaceful protestors, including the still unclear circumstances surrounding the latest fatal shooting of eight gold prospecting civilians in the Paniai district.

On the issue of the Freeport workers on strike demanding better pay, the world witnesses how the central government’s actions toward the Freeport strikers differs from the government of Peru’s reaction toward the same sort of strike at a Freeport mine there. While the government of Peru visibly takes the role of a mediator that holds the interests of its own people foremost, Indonesia appears to unashamedly play the role of Freeport’s guard dog, and without hesitating to release live ammunition on its own people.

The recent armed police and military raids of Papuan students’ dormitories in Java and Bali are an indication of what is likely to come on Dec. 1. The recent Papuan voices that have leaked out thanks to the Internet indicate that there are plans for at least a “Morning Star” flag rising in Papua on that date. Although the government has cracked down hard on similar events in the past, it is unthinkable to imagine that the people of Papua have been cowed into submission by these repressions. Just as Indonesian youth defied the Dutch colonialists in the early 20th century and continued to raise the “Red and White,” so will the youths of Papua. After all, most Papuan youth leaders were educated in Indonesia, so they fully understand that perseverance pays and aspirations for independence cannot be stifled by force. Yhe more Indonesia uses force to keep its hold on Papua, the stronger its independence movement will become.

Papuan activists can also see how Islamists in Indonesia can actively work to destroy the country not only with impunity, but also with the tacit support of the state and members of the government. The Islamist party, Hizbut Tahrir, for example, openly agitates for the fall of the republic to build a global Islamic caliphate in its place, but the authorities tend to aid and support it rather than take action to hinder its activities. Islamists in the country openly work for the resurrection of the age of the Islamic caliphs, or at least work toward their version of Shariah being enshrined as state law, but even though these activities are in blatant contempt of our constitution, the government has never done so much as lift a little finger in defense of the republic and its principles in the face of these orchestrated attacks.

Therefore it is natural that activists from Papua feel that they are being continuously discriminated against, for they receive the harshest treatment for the simple activity of raising a flag.

So who is it that is working hardest to compel Papua break away? Are the people of Papua to blame for objecting to having their sacred lands ripped apart by corporations making profits for shareholders far away? Are they to blame if they do not trust Indonesia’s capacity or intent to develop the country along the lines of the constitution?

If Indonesia wants to keep Papua as part of the family, it needs to clean up its act, especially in curbing Islamist treason and protecting minorities. It also needs to open up Papua to the world and come clean and apologize for the wrongs it has inflicted on the people there. As Dec. 1 approaches, we can expect that the national government will try to further alienate Papuans to a point where the only way forward will be through a sea of blood.

Bramantyo Prijosusilo is a writer, artist and broadcast journalist in East Java.


Related articles
1

Open Letter to President Obama from West Papua Advocacy Team (WPAT) and East Timor and Indonesia Action Network (ETAN)


Contact: John M. Miller, +1-718-596-7668; mobile: +1-917-690-4391, john@etan.org

Ed McWilliams, +1-575-648-2078, edmcw@msn.com

President Barack Obama
1600 Pennsylvania Ave. NW
Washington, DC 20500

November 15, 2011

Dear President Obama,

We urge you to seize the opportunity of your imminent return to Indonesia to consider the challenges and opportunities posed by the U.S.-Indonesia relationship more realistically than you have up to now.  Your Administration urgently needs a policy that addresses the problems created by the Indonesian security forces’ escalating violations of human rights and criminality and its failure to submit to civilian control. The recent 20th anniversary of the 1991 Santa Cruz massacre in Dili. East Timor (Timor-Leste), when hundreds of peaceful protesters were massacred by Indonesian troops wielding U.S. supplied weapons, reminds us that a lack of accountability for past crimes — in Timor-Leste and throughout the archipelago — keeps those affected from moving on with their lives, while contributing to impunity in the present.

Indonesian military and police forces continue to operate without any accountability before the law. Only in rare instances are individual personnel brought before military tribunals for crimes against civilians, often because of international pressure. Prosecution is woefully inadequate and sentencing, in the rare instance of conviction, is not commensurate with the crime.

Indonesia’s security forces, including the Kopassus special forces and U.S.-funded and -trained Detachment (Densus) 88, continue to employ against civilians weaponry supplied by the U.S. and to use tactics developed as result of U.S. training. In West Papua, these security forces have repeatedly attacked civilians, most recently participants in the October 16-19 Congress and striking workers at theFreeport McMoRan mine. Those assaulted were peacefully asserting their right to assemble and freedom of speech. At the Congress, combined forces, including regular military units, Kopassus, the militarized police (Brimob) and Detachment 88, killed at least five civilians, beat scores more, and were responsible for the disappearance of others.

Moreover, in the central highlands of West Papua, these same forces regularly conduct so called “sweeping operations,” purportedly in search of the very small armed Papuan resistance. These operations have led to the deaths of many innocent civilians and driven thousands from their village into forests where they face life threatening conditions due to inadequate access to shelter, food and medical care.

Indonesian military and police forces continue to operate without any accountability before the law. Only in rare instances are individual personnel brought before military tribunals for crimes against civilians, often because of international pressure. Prosecution is woefully inadequate and sentencing, in the rare instance of conviction, is not commensurate with the crime. Several videoed incidents of military torture of civilians — widely discussed during your November 2010 visit to Indonesia — concluded in just such failures of justice. The concept of command responsibility is rarely considered in the military tribunals.

International monitoring of these developments in West Papua is severely hampered by Indonesian government restrictions on access to and travel within West Papua by foreign journalists, diplomats, researchers, and human rights and humanitarian officials. The International Committee of the Red Cross remains barred from operating an office in West Papua. Indonesian journalists and human rights officials face threats and worse when they try to monitor developments there.

Elsewhere in Indonesia, too many times security forces have stood by or actively assisted in attacks on minority religions, including deadly attacks on Ahmadiyah followers.

The Indonesian security forces — especially the military — are largely unreformed: it has failed to fully divest itself of its business empire, its remains unaccountable before the law, and continues to violate human rights. These forces constitute a grave threat to the continued development of Indonesian democracy. The upcoming national elections in Indonesia present a particularly urgent challenge. The Indonesian military is in position to pervert the democratic process as it has in the past. The military has frequently provoked violence at politically sensitive times, such as in 1998 when it kidnapped tortured and murdered democratic activists.  For many years it has relied on its unit commanders, active at the District, sub-District and even village level to influence the selection of party candidates and the elections themselves. The territorial command system is still in place.
In the past, U.S. restrictions and conditions on security assistance have resulted in real rights improvements in Indonesia. Your Administration should learn from this history.

Given this threat to democracy and to individuals posed by Indonesian forces, it is essential that the U.S. employ the significant leverage that comes from Indonesia’s desire for U.S. security assistance and training to insist on real reforms of Indonesian security forces. Rhetorical calls for reforms are clearly insufficient. These exhortations have manifestly not worked and readily brushed aside. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton’s recent expression of “concerns about the violence and the abuse of human rights” in Papua were dismissed by a spokesperson for Indonesia’s President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono , who called the escalating rights violations “only isolated incidents.”

In the past, U.S. restrictions and conditions on security assistance have resulted in real rights improvements in Indonesia. Your Administration should learn from this history and quickly suspend training for those units whose human rights records and impunity are especially egregious, as required by the Leahy law. We specifically urge you to end plans to re-engage with Kopassus and to end assistance to Detachment 88. These actions would demonstrate U.S. Government seriousness in pursuit of real reforms of the security forces in Indonesia.

Sincerely,

Ed McWilliams for WPAT

John M. Miller for ETAN

see also


Related articles
4

Customary communities affirm their rights to land near Freeport Mine

JUBI, 11 November 2011Seven  customary communities living in the location of the Freeport-Indonesia PTFI mine have asserted their rights to land  in the location of the Freeport mine in a press release and called on the company to properly sort out the issue.

In a letter from the seven communities, co-ordinator the group, Markus Timang said:

‘We have read the Memorandum of Understanding between LEMASA (Customary Community of the Amungme people) and PTFI regarding human resources, social-economic resources, human rights, customary rights and the environment which was signed in New Orleans, USA on 13 July, 2000.’

In that agreement, the seven communities acknowledged the contemplations and discussions between the heads of the communities. With particular reference to Article 3 of the MoU regarding the rights and responsibilities of PTFI, the company acknowledged and respected the customary rights of the Amungme and Kamoro communities.

Timang said that  the communities have agreed that it is vital for the NKRI (Republic of Indonesia), the PTFI and the owners of the customary rights to ensure that all problems related to the PTFI should not be manipulated by elements who have no customary rights to the land. ‘It is our opinion that that the PTFI should not start reaching agreements about customary rights with persons who are not connected with the location. With regard to problems arising in connection with this land, the PTFI must make contact with those who are directly involved, including ourselves as customary owners of the land to ensure that the problem is properly, fairly  and justly handled.

In response to this affirmation, several customary community  leaders and social leaders in Timika have questioned why Markus Timang has issued such a statement without  reaching agreement with other, more elderly leaders. ‘We know nothing about all this. We need to have your confirmation whether indeed it was you who issued this statement,’ said Abraham Timang, executive assistant of LPMAK, the group responsible for managing the one-percent contribution from PTFI.

Furthermore, other customary leaders have raised questions with regard to community leaders who were involved in a joint agreement that was reached on 10 November this year.

Related articles
3

SIGHTS AND SOUNDS FROM THE FREEPORT DISPUTE

by Lococonut

via our partners at EngageMedia.org

A snippet of footage and chatters around the Freeport strike in West Papua. The Freeport workers’ union says it is a matter of simple “revenue transparency”, the international trade union says the dispute “has nothing to do with” West Papua politics, and a worker recorded in his video testimony that the walk-out was something “important” and worth keeping.

 05:36
video information
produced by Lococonut
produced Nov 04, 2011
FULL DESCRIPTION

The Geneva-based International Federation of Chemical, Energy, Mine and General Workers’ Unions (ICEM), its Australian affiliated group Australia’s Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union (CFMEU) and the Freeport Indonesia Workers’ Union, SP KEP SPSI, met in Jakarta from October 30 to November 2, 2011.

In this video, SP KEP SPSI was represented by Airan Koibur, ICEM was represented by Information and Campaign OfficerDick Blin, and Wayne McAndrew spoke for the CFMEU.

Related articles
1

West Papua Report November 2011

This is the 90th in a series of monthly reports that focus on developments affecting Papuans. This series is produced by the non-profit West Papua Advocacy Team (WPAT) drawing on media accounts, other NGO assessments, and analysis and reporting from sources within West Papua. This report is co-published with the East Timor and Indonesia Action Network (ETAN). Back issues are posted online at http://etan.org/issues/wpapua/default.htm Questions regarding this report can be addressed to Edmund McWilliams at edmcw@msn.com. If you wish to receive the report via e-mail, send a note to etan@etan.org.

Summary: Indonesian security forces attacked a mass gathering in the Papua capital, Jayapura, and striking workers at the Freeport mine in the southern highlands. At least five people were killed and many more injured in the assaults, which show a renewed pattern of overt violence against peaceful dissent. A brutal and unjustified October 19 attack on thousands of Papuans exercising their rights to assembly and freedom of speech resulted in the death of at least three Papuan civilians, the beating of many, detention of hundreds and arrest of six, reportedly on treason charges. The Obama administration has largely ignored the egregious violation of human rights, instead advancing U.S.-Indonesian military ties. U.S. Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta, who arrived in Indonesia in the immediate wake of the Jayapura attack, avoided criticism of the assault and reaffirmed U.S. support for Indonesia’s territorial integrity, a snub to Papuans quest for self-determination. Panetta also reportedly commended Indonesia’s handling of a weeks-long strike at the U.S.-based Freeport McMoRan mine which has seen eight killings and revealed cash payments by Freeport to the police. Indonesia’s response to the growing crisis in West Papua is to increase the militarization of the territory and to dispatch a special unit that is headed by a notorious former military officer whose record in dealing with Aceh bears ominous implications for the Papuans.

Contents:

Obama Administration Abandons Human Rights Agenda to Advance Military Ties

On October 19, hundreds of Indonesian military and police personnel attacked a peaceful gathering of several thousand Papuans engaged at a congress which had convened to assert Papuans long-denied right to self-determination. The Congress, only the third such event in the last 50 years, sought to exercise rights of free speech and assembly guaranteed by the Indonesian Constitution and international accords, including the International Covenants on Civil and Political Rights and on Economic and Cultural rights and Social rights, the Universal Declaration on Human Rights.
The brutal assault by Indonesian security forces killed at least three Papuans and resulted in the disappearance of others and the detention of approximately 300. At least six leaders were arrested and are expected to be charged with treason. Separate accounts suggest that the number of Papuans killed could be as high as 17 and the number of those detained and beaten while in custody could be as high as 800. Among those arrested were Forkorus Yasboisembut, President of the Papuan Customary Council (DAP). The security force violence and arrests followed the Congress’s declaration of independence for West Papua.

Security forces pursued the peaceful demonstrators, beating participants. One of those killed was reportedly shot in the back. Two other victims were found beaten to death, their bodies dumped behind a police station. An Australian eye witness to the assault, interviewed on Australian television’s ABC on October 28, identified the attacking security forces as including the Indonesian military (TNI), the Indonesian specialized police (BRIMOB), regular police units and the Indonesian “anti-terror” force, Detachment 88. The Detachment 88 team is funded and trained by the U.S. and Australian governments. It has repeatedly been charged with extrajudicial killings and torture.

The Police Commander for Papua publicly defended the assault, as have senior officials in Jakarta who contended that the military operation against civilians was provoked by Congress leaders who sought to declare West Papua’s independence. “The government did not find any abuse of power nor mismanaged approaches by the security officers,” said presidential spokesman, Julian Aldrin Pasha. “Police officers and security forces just accomplished their (as) duties mandated by the state.” Djoko Suyanto, Coordinating Minister for Political Legal and Security Affairs also defended the assault. (See also statements made by the Defense Minister, Purnomo Yusgiantoro: for example, see Made Arya Kencana, Banjir Ambarita and Ulma Haryanto, “ Jakarta Gives US Its Side of Story in Papua Deaths,” The Jakarta Globe, 23 October 2011.

International human rights organizations and some elected officials such as U.S. Congressmember Eni Faleomavaega and Australian Greens Senator Richard Di Natale  immediately and strongly condemned the violence. Faleomavaega urged the release of those detained and specifically raised the assault with U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton when she appeared before the House Foreign Affairs Committee. Senator Di Natale urged dispatch of an investigatory mission to West Papua and that Australia immediately suspend all support for the Indonesian military.

While comments by Faleomavaega and Di Natale echoed the calls of the many international nongovernmental organizations, there was scant word of condemnation from other governments. The silence rendered the international community complicit in the attack.

Particularly egregious, in this regard, was the reaction of the U.S. government. U.S. Ambassador Marciel in Jakarta called for an investigation of the incident. While appropriate, that response was manifestly inadequate. His failure to condemn the assault, conveys to the Indonesian government that use of lethal and military force against peaceful civilians is acceptable.

WPAT Comment: In attempting to understand the rationale for the Obama administration’s abandonment of human rights concerns it is essential to note the presence of U.S. Secretary of Defense Panetta in Jakarta at the time of the assault. Panetta’s visit inaugurated the resumption of full U.S.-Indonesia military to military cooperation. It appears that the Obama administration was not prepared to criticize Indonesian security forces with whom it was announcing a strengthened partnership. This abandonment of principle by the Obama administration is reminiscent of the collusion of previous U.S. administrations in the invasion and occupation of East Timor by the Suharto dictatorship.
see also Tapol, WPAT, ETAN: Indonesian crackdown on Papuan Congress sparks outrage

Indonesia Beefs Up Occupation Forces in West Papua

In the wake of the assault on the Third Papuan Congress (see above), continuing violence associated with police efforts to quell an ongoing strike at Freeport (see below), and the killing of a local police chief in remote Mulia district in the central highlands, the Indonesian government announced the dispatch of hundreds of additional security personnel to augment the existing Indonesian occupation force in West Papua.

The Jakarta Post reported that provincial police spokesman Wachyono saying that “So far 260 [extra] personnel from the police mobile brigade (Brimob) have landed in Papua province to help maintain security in two districts.” Troops were sent to the Puncak Jaya and Paniai highlands in central Papua, he said, adding that they will join an existing force of 14,000 police and paramilitary troops in Papua.

Wachyono said they were still “hunting” the police chief’s killers. Authorities have said that based on preliminary investigations they are believed to be separatists. (WPAT Comment: the launch of “hunting” indicates that security force sweep operations may be underway. These operations routinely displace large numbers of civilians as their villages and gardens are destroyed.)

Numerous Indonesian non-governmental organizations criticized the dispatch of ever greater numbers of military and police elements to West Papua. “The militarization of West Papua has the clear intent of intimidating Papuan civilians who are courageously pursuing a course of peaceful dissent in defense of their rights, including worker rights and the right to self determination” said Edmund McWilliams, a former senior U.S. diplomat who served in Indonesia. “Jakarta authorities,” he added, continue to employ security forces and thug militias to suppress Papuans’ peaceful resistance to ethnic genocide implicit in Jakarta’s support for transmigration-colonization and its denial of vital services to Papuans.”

Notorious Military General to Head Jakarta’s Conflict Resolution Unit in West Papua

On October 29, the Yudhoyono administration announced formation of a special unit tasked with settling the conflict in West Papua. The “Unit to Accelerate the Development in West Papua and Papua”  (UP4B) was actually formed in September.  In mid-October, Yudhoyono signed a decree, appointing Lt. Gen. (ret) Bambang Darmono to the chairman of UP4B. It will report to a board headed by Vice President Boediono. http://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2011/10/30/sby-s-papua-team-ready-roll.html

The announcement aid that the team will be led by Bambang Darmono, the former commander of military operations in Aceh (2002-2005) and a key Indonesian figure in negotiations that produced the 2005 Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) which ended formal conflict between the Acehnese Freedom Movement (GAM) and Indonesia security forces. Darmono is the former Secretary General of the National Defense Council.

Darmono’s record as commander of Indonesian security forces is replete with credible charges of human rights violations including the execution of seven teenage Acehnese on May 21, 2003, thoroughly reported by Tempo magazine. His troops allegedly also executed Muzakkir Abdullah, an Acehnese peasant in the hamlet of Seumirah, Nisam district, in June 2003. Several Indonesian soldiers abducted him earlier that day. Abdullah’s sister was photographed screaming when she saw his body. The photo by a Reuters photographer won a World Press Photo award. Darmono appeared prominently in a documentary, “The Black Road” by William Nessen, in  which Darmono denied the involvement of his troops in the arrest and torture of a human rights defender. He had admitted that his troops had sometimes became abusive and he arrested some of them for shooting chicken.

In a June 26, 2007 interview with the U.S. Public Broadcasting System, Darmono strongly sided with Javanese transmigrants whose government-sponsored resettlement in Aceh mirrored government-sponsored transmigrant settlement of West Papua.  To many Papuans, like many Acehnese, such government-sponsored transmigrant schemes amount to colonization.  Darmono’s past championing of such policies in Aceh raise concerns for Papuans.  Such concerns are particularly strong given predictions by the “ Papua Road Map Project,” a plan by academics to promote peace in West Papua, that the percentage of non-Papuans living in West Papua will rise from 41 percent in 2005 to 53.5 percent by the end of 2011, rendering Papuans a minority in their own homeland.

The Indonesian government’s failure to carry out key elements of the 2005 MOU, including the failure to establish a promised Human Rights Court for Aceh and a “Commission for Justice and Reconciliation,” according to many as a consequence of military opposition to such steps, led in large measure by Darmono.

The appointment of Darmono to the special unit for West Papua is indicative of the manner in which the Yudhoyono administration intends to “settle” the conflict in West Papua.

Indonesian Security Forces Still on The Take from Freeport
Indonesian security forces in West Papua, notably the police, continue to receive extensive direct payments of cash from Freeport McMoRan. National Police chief Timur Pradopo admitted on October 28  that officers had received close to $10 million annually from Freeport. Prominent Indonesian NGO Imparsial puts the annual figure at $14 million. Pradopa described the payments as “lunch money.”  The payments recall even larger payments made by Freeport to Indonesian military forces over the years which, once revealed, prompted a U.S. Security and Exchange Commission investigation of Freeport and questions as to Freeport’s liability under the U.S. law (the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act).

The revelation of payments to the police has prompted widespread criticism in Indonesia. The respected Indonesian NGO KontraS (Commission for Missing Persons and Victims of Violence) accused the police of a conflict of interest in West Papua. KontraS said that based on its investigations, the police had become involved in ongoing labor disputes that have led to violence and interruptions in Freeport operations (see following item). KontraS cited specific examples of police intimidation, including death threats targeting union organizers. It said Sudiro, SPSI’s chief workplace organizer for Freeport’s Grasberg mine, had reported that Timika Police Chief Denny Siregar called him and made a death threat. KontraS also pointed to instances of police verbal harassment of other union leaders. “From the testimonies collected by KontraS [in Timika] on the sidelines of negotiations between workers and Freeport, the police chief pressured the SPSI leader to comply with the company’s wishes” Kontras investigator Haris Azhar told media on October 28.

Police, according to Haris, also accused the striking workers of treason. “All they did was make demands for their improved welfare. How can the police accuse them of being separatists? It makes no sense,” he said.

KontraS said the presumed reason for the police taking the gold and copper mining company’s side was Freeport’s documented direct payments to police officers based in the area. Haris added that the flood of money to police had created a conflict of interest when its people, nominally public servants, handled cases related to the company. “When there’s a problem between Freeport and their workers, of course they choose to support Freeport,” he said. Haris said Kontras would report its findings to the Coordinating Minister for Politics and Security and the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK).

U.S. Secretary of Defense Praise for Indonesian Handling of Freeport Strike

The Jakarta Post reported on October 25 that U.S. Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta, visiting Indonesia, had “praised Indonesia’s handling of the strike at Freeport.” The strike has seen at least 8 killings in October and a partial shutdown of mining operations. The protracted struggle for worker rights has also involved police assaults on demonstrators and, according to the respected Indonesian NGO Kontras, police death threats to a union leader and harassment and intimidation targeting other union officials.

The violence has accompanied renewed reports of police receipt of Freeport cash, according to the national police commander as “lunch money.” The lunch money amounted to at least $10 million (see above report). Freeport’s labor difficulties are compounded by growing calls for a renegotiation of Freeport’s contract and by demonstrations targeting its office in Jakarta and its headquarters in Phoenix, Arizona.

Panetta’s exact comments regarding Indonesian “handling” of the strike were not reported and the U.S. Embassy has not provided text for Panetta’s remarks to his Indonesian hosts. Meanwhile the strike, which began in September largely over wage issues, continues.

see also WPAT/ETAN: Statement on Strike at Freeport McMoran’s Mining Operation in West Papua

Back issues of West Papua Report

Related articles
5

Create a website or blog at WordPress.com

Up ↑