Some say all these factors amount to a "slow-motion genocide" of local West Papuans - mainly of Melanesian background like much of the western Pacific. Others say while the situation is disastrous, it's not a genocide.
Presenter: Sen Lam
Speaker: Jim Elmslie, Co-convenor of the West Papua Project at the Centre for Peace and Conflict Studies at the University of Sydney; Stuart Upton, University of New South Wales PhD thesis on migration in Papua
- Listen:
- Windows Media
LAM: Jim, if I may start with you. You have written what's happened in Papua is a "slow motion genocide." Is that too emotional term, do you think?
ELMSLIE: Well, I have quoted somebody saying that. And the reason I have, is that many Papuan people believe that they are suffering genocide under the control of the Indonesian Government since its takeover in 1963. So the purpose of my research is to try and see how much validity or otherwise, is in that claim. And one of the factors that gives a foundation to this belief is the massive democratic changes that have occurred in Papua since the Indonesian takeover. For instance, in 1971, there was 96 per cent of the population was Melanesian, and four per cent were outsiders. While from the recent census and other figures, the migrant population is now between 32 per cent by some terms and others who believe it is now in the majority. So you have had this massive change. You have also many serious human rights violations, the impunity of the police, persistent rumours of police involvement in prostitution, which leads to the spread of Aids, et cetera. All of which give rise to the feeling on the part of many Papuans, that they are suffering a "genocide" which I believe should be taken seriously and examined.
LAM: Well, the Papuans may have been swamped by newcomers, by outsiders, but does that necessary translate into a systemic genocide, if you like by the centre in Jakarta?
ELMSLIE: No, it doesn't, it doesn't, but it deserves investigation. By definition, a genocide is when there are mass killings and targetted killings of a particular racial or ethnic group, with the intention of the government or authorities, that is not just a random event. The situation is disastrous in Papua, but we don't know if it's genocide. What I am saying is the calls, the claims that it is genocide are quite valid, for people to make those claims and it then becomes incumbent on other people to try and determine whether these claims are true or not.
LAM: Stuart Upton, from the University of New South Wales. You've heard what Jim Elmslie has to say. What's your reply?
UPTON: Yeah, I think that Jim makes some good points. There has been a massive democratic shift in Papua in the last 30 or 40 years, but I think you can also see that happening in other areas of eastern Indonesia. If you look at East Kalimantan, for example, that's got a large number of migrants come in there and I think what is missing is a systemic aim of moving all these migrants.
Of course during the 1980s and 1990s, the trans migration programme itself was quite influential in moving people to Papua, but that stopped in 2000 .. and ... actually for most of the migrants that have come to Papua, most of them, may be two thirds or something like that or economic migrants. They come from eastern Indonesia, also from Java, but mostly people, economic migrants moving to areas of eastern Indonesia as other areas of Indonesia, eastern Indonesia as they do. The same going to Papua. I cannot see that that makes a genocide. Otherwise we would call all these genocides in other areas of eastern Indonesia genocide as well.
LAM: But one might argue though, that the Melanesian culture is very distinct from the rest of Indonesia, and certainly from Javanese culture?
UPTON: Certainly from Javanese culture, but there are other areas of eastern Indonesia where there are Melanesian people living in certain areas of Timor, for example, other areas around there. It's often put as an issue of religion, but if we look at the migrants who are going to this area, well, a third of them are also Christians as well as the Papuans, so I don't see that as a big issue either.
LAM: Well, before we continue this discussion, let's remind our listeners at this point that West Papua was forcibly incorporated into the Republic of Indonesia in 1963 through military aggression and some diplomatic manoeuvring. Stuart Upton, do you deny the 'Tibetisation', if you like, of Papua, that locals are being swamped by newcomers, comparable to what's happening in Tibet - the migration of Han Chinese into Tibet?
UPTON: Absolutely, I think there's definitely a marginalisation of people in this area. I mean if we look at the cities in this area, they are almost mostly controlled and the demographic shows that the cities in the urban areas are mostly migrants who are living there and if you look at employment, that sort of thing, indigenous people are really concentrated still in agriculture. And non-indigenous people are controlling almost all of the employment, something like 16 times more likely to be involved in trade, seven times more in manufacturing. So what we have got is a sort of divided province where the urban areas are really dominated by migrants, and rural areas are still the indigenous people living there. And that obviously creates a lot of frustration for indigenous people. They are not able to improve their lives and give better education to their children and so on, and so in that way, it's a desperate situation for these people.
LAM: On Radio Australia and the world radio network, this is Connect Asia this morning looking at the troubled Indonesian Province of Papua, and whether there is a so-called "slow genocide" of the local Papuan population and our guests are Jim Elmslie, who argues yes and Stuart Upton who says there is no genocidal master plan.
ANNOUNCER : On Radio Australia, this is Connect Asia with Sen Lam.
LAM: Jim Elmslie, internal migration to Papua, both state sponsored and private, means that in about 15 years you say, West Papuans will be a minority in their own land. What will that mean in real terms, do you think?
ELMSLIE: Well, the provincial government statistics indicate that overall that they are already a minority, in the sense that more than 50 per cent of the population is now non-Melanesian. As Stuart pointed out, there is a big divide between the populations in urban areas and rural areas, so the urban areas are now overwhelmingly 70 percent-plus migrant population and in the rural areas, they are overwhelmingly Melanesian. Now this puts into place a sort of Guatemala-type situation, where there seems to be ongoing military operations against separatists or separatist supporters - people trying to break West Papua away from Indonesia - which sort of has become institutionalised and a structural part of the way the province runs. Besides the terror that this inflicts on the village people, it also does no good at all for Indonesia, because the great problem with Indonesia for the last quarter or prior to releasing East Timor was that dragged Indonesia down as a very important Muslim country in the world. Now, if you are getting this entrenched military system going on in West Papua as it is now, which inevitably creates human rights abuses and suffering and environmental catastrophe, which is associated with illegal logging, it has the potential to really harm Indonesia itself, so the problem does go back very much to Indonesia, to try and address the situation directly and resolve it and particularly to hear and sit down seriously with the Papuan leaders, to try to mitigate or resolve these massive problems they face.
LAM: But where the people movement is concerned, what sort of data do we have to work with?
ELMSLIE: Well, the most in depth data comes from the 2000 Indonesian census which identified ethnic groups or where people came from. And it was interrupted, because in 2000, there was a so-called "Papuan Spring" occurring which was in the aftermath of the Suharto regime collapse, where there was a huge movement for independence in West Papua and there were some areas that obviously the census was not conducted in properly. Those figures are also disputed by many Papuans who tend not to believe anything coming from the Indonesian Government and the Papuan Provincial Administration uses its own figures which indicate a much higher percentage of the migrant population. But I'd say all figures from remote areas must be taken with a certain grain of salt, just because the country has some very remote areas that are hard to properly gauge.
LAM: Well, figures are often difficult to grasp. But Stuart Upton, Papuans of course suffer the poorest health standards of Indonesian citizens. Is there some deliberate neglect there do you think, if not under the present government, certainly under the New Order regime of Suharto, who had the backing of the military in the 1980s and 90s?
UPTON: I think it is very hard to tell exactly. I mean I think the health services in the remote areas are very poor, but in a lot of these areas there is very little government control of these areas, government presence at all in a lot of these areas is very slight. I mean, the missions control a lot of the flights, for example, around in the Highland areas and a lot of the education in these areas is run by mission activity. And outside some of the areas where there are military presence, there are very limited government services whatsoever. I am not sure that I see that as a deliberate policy. I think that corruption plays a large role in that. If you look at schooling, for example, a lot of the teachers who are supposed to be teaching in these Highland schools are actually sitting in Jayapura, while still getting paid for their work and I think that's one of the issues that goes along with ... I think there is a bit more.
LAM: But surely the fact that the Indonesian military, the TNI, seize ownership of the region's natural resources, that in itself is not a healthy thing?
UPTON: No, absolutely. And I think the military have a lot to answer for in terms of how these situations ... I think that local military activity has been very important in terms of creating local problems. Military activity has done is the relationship with the indigenous people, there has been obviously there has been human rights abuses by the military, people in different situations and this sort of thing has prevented any trust by indigenous people in the government. Well, I see it as a more local issue between particular interest groups in the military and .. rather than a deliberate overall plan.
LAM: Jim Elmslie, some may argue that forced cultural change might be offensive to the locals, than politics. I take, for instance, the Iban and the Kadazans in East Malaysia. Now they seem, to have peacefully accepted federal rule from Kuala Lumpur. Why not the Papuans, why do you think Jakarta has difficulty winning the trust of the Papuans?
ELMSLIE: I think, this is obviously a huge question and it's perhaps too simplistic to say that independence is at the bottom of it all. But the response I have got from many people is that the Indonesian Government and military have always treated the Papuans as an enemy, as not to be trusted, because of the historical fact that the rest of Indonesia became independent in 1949, there is a 12 year lag before Indonesia managed to gain control over West Papua and the West Papuans were clearly preparing themselves and wanting independence. And so, the relationship if you like, between modern Indonesia and modern Papua started as a military operation and to some extent it has continued as such and the mentality from what I can gather within the military and within the high echelons of the Indonesian government is still to view Papua as a threat and Papuans as potentially, enemies and traders who want to leave. So that is a very negative way to have a foundation of the relationship.
LAM: Stuart Upton, if I may give you the final word, just very briefly. What do you think needs to be done for there to be a peaceful solution?
UPTON: I think the military is part of the problem and I think the more we can give take away reasons for the military to be there, I think that is a very important thing. And the land and peace issue has been an important issue in terms of not providing any reason for a rational for the military to be there. I think there need to be a programme to be set up in terms of providing some sort of way forward for Papuans to turn education and employment, so they have a future in this sense and being able to live in the Papuan urban areas of Papua.
Postingan
0 komentar:
Posting Komentar
Terimaksih atas komentar anda