West Papuans Call For Dialogue With Indonesia

(Note: West Papua Media was a participant in this conference, and a paper calling for development of Papuan media was a key part of this conference also.  Over the next fews weeks, we will be publishing a selection of observations from this conference, and a book will also be forthcoming from CPACS West Papua Project)

 

ABC News/Radio Australia
Friday, February 25, 2011

West Papuans Call For Dialogue With Indonesia

The ramifications of the fast moving events in Libya and the middle
east could be felt as far away as Papua in Indonesia, a Sydney
Conference has been told.

A movement for greater autonomy or even independence from Indonesia has been active since Papua was absorbed by the Muslim state in 1969.

It has been at times ruthlessly suppressed by successive governments
in Jakarta, fearful of the loss of national unity and rich resources.

But observers say with demands for greater democracy reverberating
around the world there might be a new willingness in Jakarta to take
on board the calls for change.

Presenter: Karon Snowdon

Speakers: Peter King, Centre for Peace and Conflict Studies, Sydney
University; Jacob Rumbiak, coordinator of the foreign office of the
West Papua National Authority; John Otto Ondawame, Vice President of
the West Papuan National Coalition for Liberation.

SNOWDON: Indonesia has faced strong resistance to its rule in Papua,
or West Papua, as it’s also known. The complaints include the appalling human rights record of the security forces, lack of development, resource stripping, cultural insensitivity and unwelcome migrants.
Often these complaints have been ignored or dealt with inadequately,
but perhaps this is changing.

KING: The political situation in Jakarta is now being driven by events
in Papua and also international reaction to what’s happening in Papua.

SNOWDON: Peter King is the convenor of the West Papua Project at the Centre for Peace and Conflict Studies at the University of Sydney,
where he spoke at an international conference on Papua.

Peter King says the government of Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono has been embarrassed by the worldwide release of the video showing Papuan men being tortured by Indonesian security.

And by the symbolic return of special autonomy to Jakarta through huge public demonstrations in June last year. Indonesia’s effort at appeasement, special autonomy has been a failure.

KING: Anybody would be encouraged by what’s gone on in the Middle
East. And the Papuans are even more mobilised than those Arab
populations were – it’s a kind of permanent Papuan mobilisation
against Jakarta. And the tactic so far of cultivating an enriched
elite of bureaucrats and politicians, which has been the main
Indonesian strategy to pacify Papuans, plus the influx of migrants
from outside Papua, that’s not going to wash in the post-Tahir Square
milieu that we’re living in.

SNOWDON: And there has been something of a breakthrough.
Jacob Rumbiak was jailed for nine years, part of the time he spent
with East Timor’s Xanana Gusmao. He returned to Jakarta for the first time this month at the invitation of the Indonesian government. He’s now an academic and the coordinator of the foreign office of the West Papua National Authority, which he calls the transitional government of an independent West Papua. He was afforded high level access over two weeks of talks in Jakarta.

RUMBIAK: Visiting Jakarta is part of how to negotiate with Jakarta
about how to build trust between Jakarta and the people of West Papua.

SNOWDON [TO RUMBIAK]: To what end, independence or just more autonomy for Papua?

RUMBIAK: The aim is based on [democracy]. Let Papuans choose. If they want to integrate with Indonesia, it’s OK, but when they want to [be] independent, that’s the right.

SNOWDON: A lack of unity in the past has set back the resistance movement. John Otto Ondawame, the vice president of the West Papuan National Coalition for Liberation based in Vanuatu says a united call for dialogue for the peaceful resolution of issues with Indonesia mean the old divisions have ended.

ONDAWAME: Papuans are united in their aspirations for political change.

SNOWDON [TO ONDAWAME]: Are the groups working together successfully now?

ONDAWAME: Yes, we’re working together both inside West Papua in the
guerilla camp in the jungle and also in the outside world to raise the
voices of the West Papuans to the international community that we are
united.

SNOWDON: And he calls on the Melanesian Spearhead Group and the
Pacific Island Forum to do more to promote reconciliation between
Indonesia and Papua.

ONDAWAME: These two bodies must stand together to address the issue of West Papua and to send a fact finding mission to investigate the human rights situation in West Papua and other related issues.

SNOWDON [TO ONDAWAME]: Given the recent case of torture case against members the Indonesian military do you see any change in Jakarta and in the president’s office towards a better deal for Papua?

ONDAWAME: The culture of torture [by the] military has continued for
the past 54 years after occupation.

SNOWDON: Is there no improvement?

ONDAWAME: No improvement at all.

Vanuatu's sellout to Indonesia disappoints West Papua at PIF

Opinion

August 17, 2010

Peter Woods

The conclusion of the Pacific Islands Forum has left a great sense of disappointment. There was every reason to think that Vanuatu would be the prominent voice in the forum for the West Papuan demand for a seat at the table. As recent as June 19 the Vanuatu Parliament passed a motion to bring the matter of West Papua to the UN this year.

All the public reports leading up to the forum, and the private assurances to the lobbying being done by the Vanuatu Free West Papua Association even up to the Prime Minister, gave every indication that West Papua  would be high on the agenda, and even that the representative West Papua delegates would at least be given observer status.

In his opening speech, incoming forum chairman Vanuatu Prime Minister Edward Nipake Natapei, said: ‘‘We need to be talking much more about how we can bring hope to the Pacific citizens who are struggling to find employment; who are without political freedom . . .’’

What happened? Nothing. Silence. No delegate raised any matter publicly concerning West Papua. All the talk was that politically, the matter of Fiji dominated, and that this shut down any further debate about West Papua. Three questions arise from this: Is this the real reason why West Papua was not promoted? If not what was the reason? Does this failure mean that Vanuatu’s sponsorship is now a lost cause for the West Papuan independence movement?

The real reason West Papua became the elephant in the room at the forum is that Natapei is obviously under great pressure from foreign powers — especially Australia, Papua New Guinea and Indonesia. Australia continues to advocate the territorial integrity of the Indonesian republic and the necessity of Special Autonomy working for West Papua. Australia is also the major development donor for the country, and that must come with some loyalty tag.

PNG, together with Solomon Islands, supports Fiji, contrary to Vanuatu who is taking the Australian/New Zealand stance. Indonesia, for its part, is increasingly muscling into the Pacific – it just supplied Vanuatu with new uniforms for its police force, and increased its presence from the usual six to 48 members at the most recent forum. These came in two waves, on August 1 and August 5, the last delegation including a West Papuan, Dr Felix Wainggai, an adviser to Indonesian President Susilo Bambang  Yudhoyono on development on East Indonesia.

This probably proved too much fire-power for the Vanuatu PM, who afterwards on radio claimed that his silence on West Papua was due to procedural matters to do with the Melanesian Spearhead Group.

Another angle on Vanuatu’s silence may have to do with the internal or external manifestations of the West Papuan independence groups themselves. A delegate to the PIF told Jacob Rumbiak, foreign affairs spokesman for the West Papuan National Authority (WPNA) and myself that the perception from inside the Vanuatu Foreign Office is that the West Papuan independence movement is still divided.

The reality on the ground, however, is that there is a growing consensus from among the majority of activist groups, and more importantly between the Presidium and the WPNA — the transitional government increasingly recognised across West Papua as a credible political next-step to the current frameworks within West Papua.

The ire has been raised, however, of the pro-West Papua council of chiefs and various members of the coalition. They see this as a cave-in and Natapei and his government may not last.

All may not be lost then regarding Vanuatu’s advocacy role for its Melanesian fellow countrymen in West Papua. PIF 2010 may prove a Pyrhhic victory for the countries leaning on Vanuatu. The groundswell of opposition is rising within Vanuatu.  This will either galvanise the Natapei government or replace it with a coalition really dedicated to proceed on the West Papuan issue. Vanuatu’s reluctant neighbours could indeed end up with a little mouse that is roaring in the Pacific.

Peter Woods spent five years in West Papua from 1978 to 1983.

Create a website or blog at WordPress.com

Up ↑