tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-49313826014398104242024-02-20T04:26:47.910-08:00Berita dari PapuaBerita-berita dari Papua yang tidak pernah di beritakanpapuatodayhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14548843079715458975noreply@blogger.comBlogger25125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4931382601439810424.post-82980020959887899232009-10-30T05:13:00.000-07:002009-10-30T05:14:08.560-07:00Perilous Path to Special Autonomy<b>Papuan Fault Lines: Part III</b><br />
By John M. Gorrindo<br />
Indonesian Correspondent<br />
<br />
In the wake of World War II’s ashes Indonesia rose like a Phoenix, blazing forth in the vanguard of the new world order that emerged. It established itself as the first major colony to throw off its age-old yoke of servitude and in many cases, slavery. In doing so Indonesia inspired and became a leader amongst a fast growing number of new, non-aligned nations, most of which like Indonesia had been former European colonies. With the coming of the 1950’s, countries like India and Egypt with large population and ancient cultures now stood together with Indonesia as new and vital members of the international community. <span class="fullpost"> <br />
Indonesia’s brand of nationalism was rooted in a five point philosophy embodied in a state ideology called the Pancasila. Core to defining the new republic’s secular nationalism was the Pancasila’s ethos of Bhinneka Tunggal Ika (Unity in Diversity) which acknowledged and celebrated the archipelago’s multicultural and pluralistic nature. The founding fathers believed that for the nation to succeed, Indonesia had to at once embrace its ethno-linguistic and religious diversity but at the same time seek to unify its vast array of constituent populations. <br />
<br />
Insurrections and separatist movements that continually threatened Indonesia’s first quarter century of existence reflected the country’s vast regional differences in terms of ethnicity, language, religion, customary traditions (adat), geographical displacement, and historical ties to former Dutch rule. Though most parts of Indonesia participated in the independence movement, some regions were much less enthusiastic about the prospects of an Indonesian Republic than were others. <br />
<br />
Indonesia’s struggle for suzerainty was first and foremost spearheaded in Java. Not everyone under the former territorial control of the Dutch was confident that rule in mainly Javanese hands as centralized in that more highly developed island would benefit them. The fear of Javanese hegemony was a deal breaker at times for even entire regions, such as the Malukus. <br />
<br />
In the case of all those peoples subject to the Dutch in what was then called Western New Guinea, there existed split allegiances and significant disagreement as to who should rule the territory. This made the region no different than the neighboring Malukus. What did set West New Guinea apart in terms of common experience was the fact that very few of the island’s peoples- whether indigenous Melanesian or émigrés from outside- ever did participate in the Indonesian revolution. <br />
<br />
Indonesia’s shrewd diplomatic persistence that played one Cold War faction off the other resulted in its successful wresting of control over Western New Guinea, or what Sukarno would rename Irian. In that victory of territorial dispute, Indonesia faced the long term responsibility to both develop and assimilate respectively the vast wilderness tract and its population of over three hundred ethno-lingual groups. <br />
<br />
Four decades after assuming power in West Papua, Indonesia has fallen very short in terms of both these vital missions. And particularly for the thirty years Suharto’s new order prevailed, an isolate cloud both obscured any transparency as to visible progress to the outside world and hid the brutal repression visited upon many of the Papuan people. <br />
<br />
There exists in many cases a gaping black hole as to what actually happened to the peoples of West Papua between “The Act of Free Choice” in 1969 and the passing of a Special Autonomy law in 2001. Even most hard line Indonesian authorities past and present would likely agree to the following observations, though: <br />
The OPM, or Operasi Papua Merdeka, was formed in 1964 and began a sustained campaign of armed struggle against Indonesian security forces for an independent Papua. <br />
<br />
After two decades of often violent resistance to Indonesian rule, Papua was declared a “daerah militer” (militarized region), and Indonesian security forces were given even greater authority to plan and execute military attacks against those Papuan groups considered treasonous, rebellious, armed, or otherwise threatening and dangerous. Military reprisals were taken against not only alleged freedom fighters but often by extension their home villages and families. <br />
Human rights abuses committed by Indonesian security forces- including illegal detention, torture, murder (often indiscriminant and including women and children), rape, extra-judicial killing, and wholesale destruction of villages- have been widely documented since West Papua’s incorporation in Indonesia in May 1963. Legally they amount at least to a collective case of Crimes Against Humanity as defined by the United Nations in its landmark Law of Genocide (1948). That these large scale crimes have been committed with impunity and absence of accountability is even admitted to- at least in part- by the Indonesian government itself. President Megawati’s official apology to the Papuan people for abuses made it clear that many of the allegations made by numerous human rights groups such as Amnesty International, TAPOL, and the United Nations Commission on Human Rights were at least in part true. <br />
<br />
Through powers of eminent domain the Indonesian state appropriated land from indigenous groups without honoring or considering customary land laws and traditions that had been in effect for in many cases, thousands of years. The mineral, gas, and logging rights of large tracts of government appropriated land have been leased to mainly foreign development interest. A fair return of revenues on profits was never distributed to local peoples. As in the case of the Freeport Mine, some tribal groups- much like many American Indians- were displaced entirely off their land and resettled in unsuitable and often unhealthy surroundings. Unfair compensation for natural resource extraction was a key negotiated term in the Special Autonomy law of 2001. <br />
<br />
The rush to develop West Papua economically benefited only the Jakarta power elite, the Indonesian security forces stationed in West Papua, a small administrative Papuan elite in place, foreign business interests, and to some degree, transmigration populations. Leading indicators measuring quality of life for the vast majority of the one million indigenous Melanesian Papuans have in many cases suffered a reversal. This includes levels of income, health, nutrition, education, and job opportunity. On the whole, the original peoples of Papua have been discriminated against and treated as second class citizens. There has been very limited attempt to prepare them for assimilation as Indonesian citizens. <br />
<br />
Irresponsible development leading to environmental degradation- especially in the forms of mining, logging, and palm oil plantation development- has been an ongoing reality of life in West Papua. For example, many countries- including China, several in Europe and the U.S.- have glutted themselves on cheap and rare Papuan lumber without giving proper attention to certifying whether forestry yields have been legal or not. <br />
<br />
Unaccountability for the trillions of lost rupiahs in developmental funds the central government has poured into West Papua is due to negligence, cronyism, patronage, and corruption. Papuans themselves have participated in such activities, including elected officials. <br />
<br />
Almost all humanitarian aid and monitoring organizations have been barred from entrance into West Papua. This includes the foreign press, the United Nations Commission on Human Rights, and the International Red Cross. <br />
<br />
One historical twist of Indonesia’s sixty-four year existence as a nation is that its inherent fragility when combined with its recent emergence as a democratic state has served to often shield it from human rights accountability in West Papua. Neither the United Nations nor most democratic nations around the world were eager to hold Indonesia’s feet to the fire on human rights when the country was attempting to throw off its militarism in favor of democratic principles. While a collective blind eye had been cast towards West Papua, East Timor was able to escape the same fate. But given twenty-five years of tacit U.S. support for Indonesia’s militarism in Timor it is doubtful the East Timorese could have gained international recognition and gain independence without the intervention of Australian troops which helped document the horrible civilian casualties and create a bridge of access for UN inspectors. Active international response made all the difference in East Timor. <br />
<br />
As real politik gave greater priority to the Cold War between the Free World and the Sino-Soviet bloc rather than the nationalist struggle of West Papua during the years of negotiation leading to the 1962 New York Agreement, the West Papuan cause has continued to suffer low international recognition. Overshadowing has been the rise of democracy in greater Indonesia. <br />
<br />
Internationally, with the Cold War having become an historical footnote, Indonesia could no longer take advantage and draw upon knee-jerk support from world powers such as the United States. Suharto’s fervent anti-communism was no longer a calling card that served as a blank check for military and economic aid from former Cold War allies. Indonesia’s rapid economic development had been made possible by a real politik that no loner existed. Once this modus operandi had been made void, the very foundation of New Order political economics shattered, the rupiah crashed, and a radical reformation was given birth. Suharto along with his New Order policies had run their historical course- or at least so it seemed.<br />
<br />
State disintegration appeared on the brink as separatist struggles in Aceh, the Malukus, West Papua, and East Timor coincided with an economic-political crisis that toppled Suharto in 1998. In the face of these tumultuous events, the international community has been careful to help shepherd Indonesia’s turn to democratic governance and has participated in brokering agreements as successful in Aceh and East Timor. This includes forbearance of Indonesia’s human rights record on the part of the UN, and aid or loans of various types from the U.S., the IMF, and the World Bank. <br />
<br />
Under great international pressure during the wake of Suharto’s fall, Indonesia conceded to East Timorese independence and suffered its first real blow to its self-perceived territorial integrity. Post-Suharto, the sudden democratic opening provided an unprecedented political space which was quickly crowded with long-suppressed demands from a bewildering array of interest groups from around Indonesia. <br />
<br />
President Habibie, Suharto’s immediate and short-lived successor, ushered in this era of sudden liberalization as the Indonesian government felt compelled to redress many grievances on the part of not only limited interest groups but entire regions of the nation. In many cases good faith, successful efforts were made to initialize democratization in Indonesia. Aceh and West Papua were of special concern as both provinces had long standing histories of disaffection and armed independence struggle against the Indonesian state. <br />
<br />
The fall of Suharto meant the fall of some key New Order policies- at least temporarily. The harsh repression Suharto used to counter separatism in both Aceh and West Papua had only served to further polarize- creating growing body counts and exacerbating hostilities. Shaken by the loss of a twenty-five year old war in East Timor, Indonesia’s government began to contemplate more peaceful alternatives in both Aceh and West Papua. The loss of East Timor resurrected Jakarta’s greatest fear- balkanization of the archipelago. With little show for it, military means had unilaterally failed, having left some 200,000 dead in East Timor (most of them civilian), 35,000 fatalities in Aceh, and undetermined thousands swept away in West Papuan violence. For the first time in its short history, a shell-shocked Indonesia began to show signs of shirking off a uniform militarist approach to regional separatism as it finally began mounting peace initiatives through diplomacy.<br />
<br />
Following Suharto, the three brief presidencies of Habibie, Abdurrahman Wahid (Gus Dur), and Megawati Sukarnoputri struggled with pacification of separatist forces within the country and Special Autonomy was offered both Aceh and West Papua. The 2004 tsunami dealt such large scale destruction that Acehnese separatists and the Indonesian government were mutually compelled to come to terms. The implementation of that agreement has moved forward in significant degree satisfactorily for the Acehnese. During Megawati’s presidency, the West Papuans were handed their own version of Special Autonomy, known as the OTUS agreement of 2001. <br />
<br />
In principle and on paper, OTUS initially held out great hope. The main provisions as follows coincide in most part to the list of grievances already previously enumerated: <br />
1. Revenue Sharing: Seventy to eighty percent of revenues generated from natural resource extraction will be given back to the province. <br />
2. A truth and reconciliation process will be established in order to clarify the grievances surrounding West Papua’s incorporation into the state of Indonesia. <br />
3. The Indonesian government will establish special courts and a provincial rights commission to review human rights policies and grievances. <br />
4. The Indonesian government will recognize customary land rights as practiced by the Papuans and oblige land use operators to negotiate terms of use with traditional landowners. <br />
5. Comprised of adat communities, women’s organizations, and religious institutions in equal number to be representatively elected, OTUS mandates the establishment of the Papuan People’s Assembly (MRP). MRP will be legally granted the power to review and hold veto authority over the selection of candidates for governor as well as reviewing government policy that effect indigenous communities. <br />
<br />
Ethnic and indigenous rights were finally given official recognition by Jakarta, but Indonesia was not willing to concede maintaining a strong security apparatus in the province. Most pro-independence activities were still to be considered illegal if not treasonous. This included seditious acts such as raising the Morning Glory flag. <br />
<br />
Jakarta also conceded the need for creating new Papuan institutions which would better involve discrete Papuan interests, including intellectuals, political officials, and even some activists. <br />
<br />
But seven years after the signing into law of the OTUS agreement, few concerned observers in Jakarta, Papua or the greater international community consider the thrust of OTUS to have made any substantial beneficial difference in West Papuan’s lives. Many of the same grievances are on the table, especially concerning fair compensation for natural resource development and human rights. <br />
<br />
In Part IV of this series, a closer look at current conditions inside West Papua as referenced by the OTUS agreement will be explored. <br />
<br />
NOTE: This article is part of a series. Part IV is soon to follow <br />
<br />
Source: theseoultimes.com<br />
</span>papuatodayhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14548843079715458975noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4931382601439810424.post-39913685348224400962009-10-30T05:10:00.000-07:002009-10-30T05:10:18.324-07:00Congress Demands Action on West Papua Political Prisoners as Human Rights Violations Persist<b>For Immediate Release</b><br />
<br />
Contact: Tom Ricker, 301-922-8909 <br />
John M. Miller, National Coordinator, +1/718-596-7668 <br />
<br />
August 7 - The East Timor and Indonesia Action Network (ETAN) today congratulated U.S. congressmembers for their letter to Indonesian president, Dr. H. Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono urging him to work for the “immediate and unconditional” release of West Papuan political prisoners Filep Karma and Yusak Pakage. <br />
<span class="fullpost"> <br />
“We are pleased that Congress is taking this important stand for human rights in Indonesia. Karma and Pakage have been in prison for three and half long years for merely exercising their right of political expression. We hope the letter coupled with increasing pressure from the human rights community will gain their release,” said Tom Ricker, advocacy coordinator for ETAN <br />
<br />
The letter was signed by 40 members of the U.S. House of Representatives. The letter with a complete list of signers can be found below.<br />
<br />
Karma and Pakage are serving 10 and 15 years respectively for raising the Morning Star flag during a peaceful protest in December of 2004 in Jayapura, Papua. According to Amnesty International and other reports, Indonesian police who arrested . Karma at the site of the demonstration subsequently beat him en route to the police station. Karma and Pakage were sentenced in May 2005 and have been in prison since. Amnesty International has declared Karma and Pakage to be prisoners of conscience. <br />
<br />
The letter also points to the deteriorating human right situation in Papua: “The unjust imprisonment of Mr. Karma and Mr. Pakage occurs in the context of a crackdown on Papuan human rights defenders, which has included general public threats by senior military officials and intimidation directed at individuals by anonymous figures.” <br />
<br />
“This letter from Congress comes at a crucial time. Peaceful protesters continue to be arrested in West Papua. Just two weeks ago nearly 40 people were arrested for demonstrating. Six of the organizers now face the same prison terms as Karma and Pakage,” said Ricker. <br />
<br />
“The U.S. government has once again become a major supplier of military assistance to Indonesia despite the deteriorating circumstances in West Papua. We hope this action by members of Congress signals a renewed willingness to promote respect for human rights as a condition of any future assistance,” he added. <br />
<br />
The congressional letter was coordinated by Rep. Patrick Kennedy (D-RI) <br />
ETAN was formed in 1991. The U.S.-based organization advocates for democracy, justice and human rights for Timor-Leste and Indonesia. For more information, see ETAN's web site: http://www.etan.org.<br />
<br />
</span>papuatodayhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14548843079715458975noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4931382601439810424.post-27769722001879344312009-10-30T04:59:00.000-07:002009-10-30T04:59:59.178-07:00Sebuah Lampu Kuning Bagi Indonesiaoleh Professor Donald E. Weatherbee<br />
<br />
Selama enam tahun pemerintahannya, George W. Bush telah mendorong pemulihan hubungan dengan Indonesia. Amerika Serikat memandang Indonesia sebagai mitra utamanya dalam berurusan dengan masalah yang menjadi prioritas yakni counter-terrorism. Lebih penting lagi, Amerika Serikat melihat peranan besar Indonesia dalam membentuk terjaminnya wilayah Asia Tenggara yang stabil dan damai dalam jangka panjang di mana Amerika Serikat akan berpartisipasi sepenuhnya. <span class="fullpost"> <br />
<br />
Titik balik kritis hubungan USA - Indonesia, pasca-Timor Timur, dan pasca-Clinton terjadi pada November 2005 ketika dicabutnya semua pembatasan legislatif yang tersisa atas bantuan militer Amerika Serikat kepada Indonesia. Bagi Amerika Serikat, inilah waktunya untuk melihat ke depan pada kerja sama dengan Indonesia yang demokratik dan bukannya menempatkan hubungan-hubungan dalam konteks masa lalu. Pada tahun 2006, kedua pemerintah pada tingkat tertinggi bisa berbicara tentang kemitraan strategis.<br />
<br />
Namun, hasil pemilihan kongresional Amerika Serikat November 2006, memberi lampu kuning bagi hubungan bilateral kedua negara di masa datang. Penguasaan Partai Demokrat atas dua lembaga perwakilan telah membawa kembali kursi-kursi komite penting, anggota (dan staf) yang mungkin tidak memiliki tingkat perasaan yang sama nyamannya dengan Jakarta, seperti yang dirasakan Presiden Bush dan pembantu-pembantunya. Isu-isu HAM, reformasi militer dan Papua akan muncul lagi ke permukaan. Seandainya isu-isu tersebut tidak membuahkan aksi, mencuatnya masalah-masalah itu tetap akan mengganggu ketenangan hubungan bilateral di saat Presiden Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono sedang mempersiapkan diri menghadapi kampanye pemilihan kembali 2009.<br />
<br />
Ketua baru dari the Sub-komite Kepantasan Senate Amerika Serikat mengenai Negara, Operasi Luar Negeri dan Badan-badan Sejawat adalah Senator Patrick Leahy yang mewakili wilayah Vermont. Leahy adalah salah seorang yang paling gigih mengritik militer Indonesia. Amendemen Leahy pada tahun 1999 berhasil membekukan hubungan militer Amerika Serikat dan Indonesia. Sebagai anggota golongan minoritas dari subcommittee itu, pada tahun 2005, dia sangat marah atas pencarian kembali hubungan militer tersebut, ia menyebut hal ini sebagai penyimpangan atas keputusan yang baik dan penghinaan terhadap Kongres dan berkata bahwa hal itu telah mempermainkan proses dan mengirimkan pesan yang sangat buruk. Matanya juga tertuju pada pembunuhan aktivis HAM Munir Said Thalib pada tahun 2004. Leahy menyuarakan kecurigaan, sebagaimana yang juga disuarakan banyak pihak, bahwa badan intelijen nasional Indonesia terlibat. Dia menyusun amendment bagi rancangan undang-undang operasi luar negeri FY 2007 yang meminta laporan HAM termasuk tentang pembunuhan Munir. Penutup-nutupan yang terus terjadi, dalam kata-kata Leahy, menunjukkan bahwa budaya kebal hukum masih sangat melekat pada masyarakat Indonesia. Dapat diharapkan bahwa ketika tiba pada appropriations FY 2008, Leahy akan mengirim pesan berbeda dari apa yang pernah dikirim oleh mayoritas Republikan.<br />
<br />
Di sisi Dewan Perwakilan Rakyat, ketua baru Subkomite Hubungan Luar Negeri urusan Asia, Pasifik dan Lingkungan Global adalah Rep. Eni Faleomavaega, perwakilan dari American Samoa sejak 1989 dan anggota penuh keempat yang paling senior dari Komite Urusan Luar Negeri DPR AS. Subkomite ini memiliki pengawasan yang luas atas kebijakan luar negeri Amerika Serikat di wilayah Asia-Pasifik. Faleomavaega telah menunjukkan bahwa pengawasannya yang terus menerus atas Indonesia. Dalam sebuah pernyataan tanggal 23 Januari, dia mengumumkan bahwa dia bermaksud meninjau kembali Hak Asasi Manusia dan usaha-usaha demokrasi di Indonesia.<br />
<br />
Lebih lanjut, dia menyatakan bahwa "Aku terus prihatin dengan situasi di Papua Barat dan berusaha mencari solusi baik yang bisa mewujudkan perdamaian." Sebagai anggota dari Kelompok HAM di DPR Amerika Serikat, anggota kongres ini memiliki kepentingan pribadi di Papua; dia memiliki sanak-keluarga yang melaksanakan karya misionari Kristen di sana. Pesannya tentang perdamaian di Papua dinyatakannya lebih terperinci dalam sebuah wawancara di mana ia berkata, "Jika anda ingin berbicara tentang keadilan, berikan pada rakyat Papua Barat hak menentukan nasib sendiri." Dia merencanakan dengar pendapat umum mengenai tindakan-tindakan Indonesia di Papua yang akan menyorot dukungan-dukungan terhadap kemerdekaan Papua Barat.<br />
<br />
Maksud-maksud dan perilaku Faleomavaega telah dicatat di Jakarta di mana signal luar apa saja yang mempertanyakan kedaulatan Indonesia atas provinsi-provinsi Papua Baratnya akan menaikan bendera merah. Hal ini merupakan topik yang sangat sensitif bagi hubungan bilateral. Australia mendapati hal itu pada bulan Maret 2006 ketika Indonesia memanggil kembali duta besarnya di Canberra karena masalah 42 orang Papua pencari suaka. Isu ini tidak membuahkan kepuasan Indonesia hingga Australia pada November 2006 memberikan komitmen tertulis pada pakta keamanan Lombok yang akan menghormati integritas teritorial Indonesia. Pemerintahan Bush secara kategoris telah selalu menyatakan posisi yang sama. Hal ini akan dipertanyakan oleh seorang anggota kongres Demokratik yang senior yang mendukung jaringan ORNOP-ORNOP yang pro-kemerdekaan Papua dan merupakan alarm bagi Jakarta. Posisinya dapat mempengaruhi kebijakan pemerintah Amerika Serikat, jika dihadapkan pada konteks presiden dari Partai Republik yang sudah lemah dan kemungkinan naiknya presiden dari partai Demokrat pada tahun 2008.<br />
<br />
Sebagai seorang nasionalis, serangan baru dari anggota kongres Amerika Serikat, akan memaksa Presiden Yudhoyono untuk berada pada posisi defensif berhadapan dengan Amerika Serikat. Dia sudah bersiap-siap menghadapi ekonom-ekonom nasionalis, dengan menyatakan pembubaran Consultative Group on Indonesia. Dia juga telah mencegah tokoh-tokoh Islam radikal yang menuduhnya mendukung perang Amerika pada kaum Muslim. Postur publiknya yang berpihak pada Amerika Serikat setidak-tidaknya akan berpengaruh pada lingkungan politik dalam negeri Indonesia, yang akan berubah ketika lawan-lawan politiknya menyudutkannya atas hubungan Amerika. Kita hanya bisa berharap agar lampu tidak berubah menjadi merah, mengganggu kerjasama bilateral, dan hubungan ekonomi, keamanan dan politik yang produktif, yang sejauh ini sudah terjalin selama menjabatnya Presiden Yudhoyono. <br />
<br />
Professor Donald Weatherbee is a Donald S. Russell Distinguished<br />
Professor Emeritus, University of South Carolina.<br />
Diterjemahkan oleh a West Papuan citizen.<br />
<br />
Source: WestPapua.ca<br />
</span>papuatodayhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14548843079715458975noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4931382601439810424.post-80367648628014955182009-10-30T04:56:00.000-07:002009-10-30T04:56:31.020-07:00Australia bends over for the ‘Indonesia Solution’by Damien Kingsbury<br />
<br />
As we learned from foreign minister Stephen Smith last night, there is now an agreement between the Prime Minister, Kevin Rudd, and Indonesia’s President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono for Indonesia’s to accept asylum seekers bound for Australia. Move over John Howard’s “Pacific Solution”, and make way for Rudd’s “Indonesia Solution”.<span class="fullpost"> <br />
<br />
Rudd will take considerable satisfaction from his visit, formally to mark Yudhoyono’s swearing in for a second term, producing what he will no doubt regard as a diplomatic coup.<br />
<br />
Australia’s sometimes difficult relations with Indonesia are travelling fairly well at the moment, in large part due to Yudhoyono’s democratic reformist tendencies. That Rudd is also comfortable with regional leaders, and has taken an active interest in Indonesia since at least 1997, further assists the relationship.<br />
<br />
Smith hesitated to put a dollar figure on Australia paying for this new arrangement, but there is little doubt that funds will be diverted from existing humanitarian projects to help support Indonesia holding the asylum seekers.<br />
<br />
Smith indicated this when he discussed the range of humanitarian projects that Australia currently supports in Indonesia, identifying the government’s new Indonesia Solution as also based on humanitarian principles.<br />
<br />
The second “price” issue for Australia will be what diplomatic concessions will have been granted in order to secure Indonesia’s co-operation. In this, there is little doubt that the Lombok Treaty will have been invoked, in particular that part that refers to non-interference in Indonesia’s internal affairs.<br />
<br />
For this, read that Australia has been told to butt out of any lingering concerns about the continuing abysmal human rights situation in West Papua and not to accept any further West Papuan refugees. Oh, and the Australian government might want to reconsider its approach to the Australian Federal Police investigation into the 1975 Balibo murders while we’re at it.<br />
<br />
Australia, always more than a little obsequious to Indonesia, has prostrated itself even further.<br />
<br />
Given that this Indonesia Solution reflects Australia’s much-vaunted humanitarian concerns, as a third issue, one wonders why Smith has put so little effort into the humanitarian crisis in Sri Lanka, which is pushing so many people into boats.<br />
<br />
Not only has the predominantly ethnic Sinhalese Sri Lankan government won the war against its Tamil separatists, it is keeping a quarter of a million Tamils in concentration camps, from which outside access is barred.<br />
<br />
The reports that do filter out from the camps tell of regular extrajudicial murders, rape and torture. And then there is the expropriation of tens of thousands of Tamils from their homes. The Palk Straights with India, too, are heavily patrolled, so the Indian Ocean and Australia is the safer option.<br />
<br />
In short, the “sailing season” combined with “push” pressures in Australia’s part of the world have led to an increase in asylum seekers getting into boats. Compared to the early 1980s, however, and certainly by current international standards, the number of asylum seekers remains small. This, then, is not an issue of border control or illegal immigration, which is far more taxed at Australia’s airports.<br />
<br />
The fourth, domestic political issue, then, is that the motivating factor for this Indonesia Solution is not the government’s supposed humanitarian concerns, but the “dog-whistle politics” of racism in the immigration debate.<br />
<br />
Australia’s politicians arguing about who is the toughest on immigration is simply code for who will sink to this lowest common denominator.<br />
<br />
Labor promised a more humanitarian approach to asylum seekers. What we now have is just a shift of its geographic focus.<br />
<br />
Associate Professor Damien Kingsbury is with the school of International and Political Studies at Deakin University. <br />
<br />
Source: www.crikey.com.au<br />
</span>papuatodayhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14548843079715458975noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4931382601439810424.post-42370629908891339722009-10-30T04:54:00.000-07:002009-10-30T04:54:21.021-07:00Indonesia: Police and soldiers burn houses and destroy resources in Papua's Bolakme districtDear friends, <br />
<br />
The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) continues to receive reports of violence being wrought by soldiers and police against civilians in remote West Papuan villages. In the latest case a joint operation responded to an illegal flag raising by the banned Free Papua Movement with indiscriminate violence against civilians. Soldiers have reportedly burned 30 houses, killed livestock and shot threateningly around local residents, many of whom took refuge in the forest for a few weeks out of fear. In another case a man was shot in the stomach and died before reaching the hospital. Complaints to the local and central offices of the national human rights commission have not been taken up. <span class="fullpost"> <br />
<br />
<b>CASE DETAILS: </b><br />
In July members of the Free Papua Movement (OPM) reportedly raised the West Papuan flag and the United Nations (UN) flag in the yard of a house in Jugum village, which is in the Bolakme district of the Jaya Wijaya Regency. The Papuan flag is known as the Morning Star (pictured here) and is banned in Indonesia due to its association with pro-Independence resistance groups (see more on this below). <br />
On 3 August local OPM members were approached by representatives of the government, religious leaders and the Jaya Wijaya district police to discuss lowering the flag, and a meeting was held with members of local human rights NGOs and the local tribal council. However no compromise was reached. <br />
<br />
On 5 September at around 5am, armed soldiers and police officers arrived in the village from Wamena to conduct a 'sweeping operation' (a targeted operation to intimidate, usually involving the destruction of property) against the OPM, but they found neither the members nor the flags. However according to witnesses they proceeded to set 30 houses alight (pictured above, right and here), seemingly at random, and shot four pigs. They then threatened villagers with bursts of gunfire, scaring many of them into the surrounding forest. Some of the residents remained in the forest for two weeks out of fear, and many fell sick due to the lack of food and medical treatment. The bullets were later collected by the residents as evidence.<br />
<br />
The AHRC has recorded various violations that have occurred during these kinds of sweeps, and continues to hear of others. On 11 July 2009 in Mantembu and Yapen villages (Yapen regency) civilian houses were also reportedly burned, and one local resident was shot in the stomach. Yawan Wayeni (39) was suspected of being involved in a ceremony in which the Morning Star was raised, and he died before reaching the hospital. <br />
<br />
Several local human right organisations have protested and submitted complaints to the National Commission for Human Rights (Komnas HAM) and the Papuan Branch of the Commission for Human Rights. However no thorough investigations have been conducted into any of these incidents. <br />
<br />
<b>BACKGROUND INFORMATION: </b><br />
Tens of thousands Papuans are reported to have died in military operations since the province was annexed by Indonesia the sixties (some sources claim up to 200,000 have been killed – around 10% of the Papuan population), and there is a widespread fear of soldiers among indigenous villagers. Papuan villages are remote and their residents enjoy little access to institutions of justice. However violations are also taking place in towns and cities. On 16 March 2006 a sweeping operation was carried out against university students in Abepura by police and the military and students from several Pegunungan Tengah regencies were evicted from their dormitory because they were suspected of being involved in an attack against a local police office. Operations were conducted in 2003 and 2005 in several districts (Tinginambut, Yamo, Mapenduma, Kywagi, Bolakme and Serui) resulting in the burning of homes and churches and the destruction of crops. <br />
<br />
These kinds of actions lead to chronic food shortages and other hardships and have resulted in increased calls for autonomy - and independence - in this resource-rich province. Inequality remains a pressing issue. The autonomy law has been in effect since 2001 but has not resulted in an improvement of living conditions or political freedoms for Papuans. Efforts by the administration in Jakarta to better the situation tend to flounder due to the strong grip the military holds on the area's resources, and because of corruption on the local government level. <br />
<br />
<b>ADDITIONAL COMMENTS: </b><br />
It is evident from the cases above that the Indonesian government is not following through with its guarantees to protect human rights in West Papua. As a member of the UN, Indonesia is committed to respecting the international human right instruments, including the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR: particularly article 3, article 8, article 9) and the International Convention on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), to which it is a state party. Article 2.3 entitles everyone to effective remedy, while the AHRC would like to highlight article 6, the right to life; article 7, freedom from torture; article 15, presumption of innocence; article 16, equality before the law; and article 18, freedom of expression, freedom of religion and freedom of choice. <br />
On a national level, the right to protection is protected by the constitution, especially in article 28 B p.2 and article 28 G p.1, and in domestic legislation such as article 29 p.1 and article 30 of law no. 39 of 1999. <br />
<br />
Furthermore, earlier this year the Chief of the Indonesian National Police enacted the new Regulation of the Chief of Indonesian National Police Number 8 of 2009 which deals with the implementation of human rights principles and standards in the discharge of the duties of the Indonesian National Police. Indonesia also has Law number 34 of 2004 for the Indonesian National Army (TNI), particularly article 2 p.d (on TNI professionalism and respecting of democracy, civil supremacy and human rights) and article 5 (on the roles, functions and duties of the army). <br />
<br />
Furthermore it should be noted that for a short time in 1961 and 62 the Morning Star was the national flag of West Papua, and has emotional significance for many Papuans. Under international law the expression of political opinions – in the display of a flag or any other non violent form – should not be considered a crime. The AHRC condemn the imprisonment of political activists and their continued persecution, as reported in previous appeals: <a href="http://www.ahrchk.net/ua/mainfile.php/2009/3117/_">UAU-004-2009</a>, FUA-008-2009 and UAU-071-2008. <br />
<br />
<b>SUGGESTED ACTION:</b> <br />
Please send letters to the authorities listed below to call for an immediate investigation regarding TNI and police violence during raids, urging disciplinary and legal action against those found to be involved. <br />
The AHRC has written to the UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights and fundamental freedoms of indigenous peoples, UN Special Rapporteur on the right to housing and the UN Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression <br />
To support this appeal, please <a href="http://www.ahrchk.net/ua/support.php?ua=UAC-143-2009">click hereAbout</a> AHRC: The Asian Human Rights Commission is a regional non-governmental organisation monitoring and lobbying human rights issues in Asia. The Hong Kong-based group was founded in 1984 <br />
<br />
Source: <a href="http://www.ahrchk.net/">Asian Human Rights Commission</a><br />
</span>papuatodayhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14548843079715458975noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4931382601439810424.post-10662608766023221932009-10-30T04:46:00.000-07:002009-10-30T04:46:35.158-07:00Two shot in mine ambushGUNMEN have shot and wounded two employees of US company Freeport as their bus travelled along a road to the world's largest gold mine in eastern Indonesia.<span class="fullpost"> <br />
The two miners were hit yesterday when the security-escorted bus carrying 60 employees was attacked in restive West Papua province, police spokesman Agus Rianto said. The injured men were in stable condition after being taken to a hospital.<br />
<br />
''A group of unidentified men ambushed Freeport's bus,'' said Mr Rianto.<br />
<br />
''Police are still searching for the perpetrators who ran into the dense jungle.''<br />
<br />
Freeport has been targeted in a string of shootings since mid-July that have left three dead.<br />
<br />
On July 11, gunmen using military-issue weapons killed Freeport's Australian project manager, 29-year-old Melbourne man Drew Grant. <br />
<br />
Source: AP<br />
<br />
</span>papuatodayhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14548843079715458975noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4931382601439810424.post-79131107036613960932009-10-24T07:38:00.000-07:002009-10-30T05:03:12.659-07:00Giliran Anggota TNI Ditembaki di Freeport<p class="MsoPlainText"><strong><span style=";font-family:Georgia;font-size:11;" ><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Armada </span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Freeport</span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"> Mulai Beroperasi Lagi </span></span></strong></p><img src="http://bintangpapua.com/images/stories/area%20pt%20freeport.jpg" align="left" border="0" /><p class="MsoPlainText"><span style=";font-family:'Times New Roman';font-size:11;" ><strong>JAYAPURA</strong>–Aksi penembakan orang tidak dikenal (OTK) di areal PT Freeport Indonesia, masih terus terjadi. Setelah sebelumnya, iring-iringan kendaraan yang pengangkut karyawan ditembaki, mangakibatkan 2 karyawan tertembak, kini giliran salah satu anggota TNI menjadi sasaran penembakan.</span></p><p class="MsoPlainText"><span style=";font-family:'Times New Roman';font-size:11;" >Penembakan itu terjadi Rabu (22/10) sekitar pukul 15.00 WP di mile 38 dan mile 39 Kali Kopi Timika, Papua.</span></p><p class="MsoPlainText"><span style=";font-family:'Times New Roman';font-size:11;" >Kali ini penembakan diarahkan pada truk milik TNI Angkatan Darat seusai mengantar logistik bagi Satgas TNI AD yang sedang berjaga di areal tersebut. </span></p><p class="MsoPlainText"><span style=";font-family:'Times New Roman';font-size:11;" >Kabid Humas Polda Papua, Kombes Polisi Drs Agus Rianto, mengatakan, penembakan yang dilakukan orang tidak dikenal itu, mengenai salah satu anggota TNI, hanya saja<span> </span>tidak sampai mengancam nyawa korban.</span></p><p class="MsoPlainText"><span style=";font-family:'Times New Roman';font-size:11;" >Pasca penembakan tersebut, kata Rianto, polisi bersama aparat gabungan dari TNI langsung melakukan penyisiran di sekitar lokasi.” Hanya saja pelaku sangat menguasai medan,” ungkapnya kepada wartawan </span></p><p class="MsoPlainText"><span style=";font-family:'Times New Roman';font-size:11;" >Ditambahkan, pelaku penembakan diduga memiliki keterkaitan dengan kasus penembakan lainnya yang terjadi beberapa waktu lalu di areal PT Freeport. Pasalnya motif penembakan yang dilakukan tidak jauh berbeda dengan kejadian sebelumnya. </span></p><p class="MsoPlainText"><span style=";font-family:'Times New Roman';font-size:11;" >Hal senada diungkapkan Kapolda Papua Irjen Pol FE Bagus Ekodanto. </span></p><p class="MsoPlainText"><span style=";font-family:'Times New Roman';font-size:11;" >"Memang ada insiden tersebut dan dari laporan, saat korban terkena tembakan di bagian paha dan saat ini masih dirawat di RS Mitra Masyarakat, Timika," ujar Kapolda Papua kepada wartawan, Kamis. </span></p><p class="MsoPlainText"><span style=";font-family:'Times New Roman';font-size:11;" >Dikatakan, dari laporan yang diperoleh, terungkap bahwa insiden itu terjadi saat korban bersama rombongan kembali dari Kali Kopi seusai berpatroli. </span></p><p class="MsoPlainText"><span style=";font-family:'Times New Roman';font-size:11;" >Ketika ditanya tentang meningkatnya penyerangan yang dilakukan OTK, Kapolda Papua menduga itu dilakukan kelompok OTK guna menunjukkan keberadaan mereka apalagi saat ini menjelang 1 Desember. </span></p><p class="MsoPlainText"><span style=";font-family:'Times New Roman';font-size:11;" >Walaupun terjadi peningkatan penyerangan yang dilakukan OTK, belum berencana menambah pasukan. Pasukan yang ada masih dirasa dirasa cukup, apalagi dalam melaksanakan operasi Polri didukung TNI. </span></p><p class="MsoPlainText"><span style=";font-family:'Times New Roman';font-size:11;" >"Kami terus melakukan patroli gabungan, dan menambah pos-pos di sepanjang ruas jalan Timika-Tembagapura terutama kawasan yang dianggap rawan namun karena medan yang cukup sulit menyebabkan OTK masih dapat melakukan penyerangan," ungkap Kapolda Bagus Ekodanto. </span></p><p class="MsoPlainText"><span style=";font-family:'Times New Roman';font-size:11;" >Kasus penembakan di kawasan PT Freeport terjadi sejak 11 Juli itu telah menewasakan empat orang, dua di antaranya karyawan PT Freeport dan dua anggota Polri, serta mencederai puluhan orang baik anggota Polri, TNI maupun karyawan PT.Freeport. Kendaraan Freeport sendiri dibatasi hanya boleh melintas di siang hari mulai pukul 06.00 WIT hingga 18.00 WIT, itupun harus berkonvoi dan dikawal aparat. </span></p><p class="MsoPlainText"><span style=";font-family:'Times New Roman';font-size:11;" >Sementara itu, setelah dua hari pascainsiden penembakan terhadap bus karyawan PT Freeport Indonesia di Mile 42 ruas jalan Timika-Tembagapura, pada Selasa (20/10), hari ini ratusan karyawan kembali ke tempat kerja mereka di Tembagapura. </span></p><p class="MsoPlainText"><span style=";font-family:'Times New Roman';font-size:11;" >Yanus Msen selaku perwakilan manajemen Freeport mengatakan, hari ini karyawan yang berangkat ke Tembagapura dari terminal Gorong-gorong Timika mencapai lebih dari 500 orang. </span></p><p class="MsoPlainText"><span style=";font-family:'Times New Roman';font-size:11;" >Para karyawan menumpang 21 bus, 9 bus berangkat pukul 08.00 WIT dan 12 bus lainnya baru berangkat siang hari sekitar pukul 14.00 WIT dengan pengawalan ketat aparat keamanan. </span></p><p class="MsoPlainText"><span style=";font-family:'Times New Roman';font-size:11;" >Pada saat bersamaan, karyawan dengan jumlah yang sama bertolak dari Tembagapura menuju Timika untuk istirahat kerja (off).<span> </span>"Mobilitas karyawan yang naik maupun turun dari Tembagapura disesuaikan dengan situasi keamanan. Jika kondisi keamanan rawan, maka operasional bus karyawan dihentikan sementara waktu sampai situasi pulih," jelas Yanus saat berdialog dengan anggota DPRD Mimika dan perwakilan isteri karyawan Freeport, Kamis siang. </span></p><p class="MsoPlainText"><span style=";font-family:'Times New Roman';font-size:11;" >Rekan Yanus, Adolf Ansaka mengatakan selama insiden penembakan terhadap kendaraan perusahaan sejak Juli-September operasional perusahaan tambang emas dan tembaga itu tetap berjalan seperti biasa. </span></p><p class="MsoPlainText"><span style=";font-family:'Times New Roman';font-size:11;" >Sementara itu para isteri karyawan Freeport menuntut DPRD Mimika menghadirkan Presiden Direktur & CEO PT Freeport, Armando Mahler dalam pertemuan lanjutan membahas situasi keamanan di areal Freeport, Senin pekan depan. </span></p><p class="MsoPlainText"><span style=";font-family:'Times New Roman';font-size:11;" >"Kami minta Pak Armando harus hadir untuk memberi jaminan kepada kami istri-istri dan anak karyawan Freeport yang selama ini turut menjadi korban aksi kekerasan di areal perusahaan," kata Lilik K Abbas. </span></p><p class="MsoPlainText"><span style=";font-family:'Times New Roman';font-size:11;" >Rekannya, Yosefina Wosiri mendesak SPSI dan Tongoi Papua agar meminta manajemen Freeport menghentikan sementara aktivitas perusahaan jika situasi keamanan masih rawan. </span></p><p class="MsoPlainText"><span style=";font-family:'Times New Roman';font-size:11;" >Ia mengatakan, aksi teror yang terjadi selama empat bulan di areal Freeport seharusnya bisa ditangani aparat keamanan lantaran lokasi penembakan hanya di sekitar Mile 40-50. </span></p><p class="MsoPlainText"><span style=";font-family:'Times New Roman';font-size:11;" >Di sisi lain, kata Yosefina, jumlah aparat keamanan sudah sangat banyak yang mencapai 1.320 personel dan pos-pos aparat gabungan TNI dan Polri telah dibangun di sepanjang ruas jalan Timika-Tembagapura. </span></p><p class="MsoPlainText"><span style=";font-family:'Times New Roman';font-size:11;" >Namun ironisnya, aksi penembakan terus terjadi hingga saat ini dengan target para karyawan Freeport. <em><strong>(cr4/ant)<br />
</strong></em></span></p>beritapapuahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05371896394868411645noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4931382601439810424.post-68840357334280517252009-10-24T07:06:00.000-07:002009-10-30T05:03:55.772-07:00DISTRIK TINGGINAMBUT BERGEJOLAK<span class="fullpost"><br />
Jayapura - Ratusan masyarakat di distrik Tingginambut kabupaten Puncak Jaya jumat (23/10) dilaporkan telah mengungsi ke hutan-hutan setelah gabungan aparat TNI/Polri melakukan penyisiran.<br />
Dilaporkan operasi yang dilakukan aparat gabungan dari satuan Angkatan Darat (AD) Tentara Nasional Indonesia dan Kepolisian Republik Indonesia menyebabkan puluhan keluarga mengungsi pasalnya rumah mereka di bakar serta sweping aparat yang membuat warga ketakutan.<br />
Diricinkan, sejumlah Honai (rumah) dibakar aparat, empat tempat ibadah ikut hangus terbakar, serta puluhan ternak milik warga setempat di bunuh. sementara jumlah korban jiwa yang diperkirakan meninggal dalam aksi tersebut belum diketahui secara pasti.<br />
Sementara berdasarkan data korban terakhir yang diterima, menyebutkan bahwa korban tewas akibat aksi tersebut berjumlah 3 orang, satu korban merupakan pemimpin gereja yang oleh masyarakat setempat di panggil bapa.(lis)<br />
</span>beritapapuahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05371896394868411645noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4931382601439810424.post-48099443294187642652009-10-22T00:49:00.000-07:002009-10-30T05:04:57.102-07:00Enembe Minta Semua Pasukan Ditarik dari Puncak JayaJAYAPURA-Munculnya kembali kasus penembakan dan penyerangan terhadap warga sipil di wilayah Tingginambut, <br />
<br />
Kabupaten Puncak Jaya, Papua yang diduga dilakukan oleh kelompok TPN/OPM dan mengakibatkan seorang warga sipil bernama Thamrin (45) meninggal dunia, rupanya membuat gerah orang nomor satu di Kabupaten Puncak Jaya.Terkait hal ini, Bupati Puncak Jaya Lukas Enembe,S.IP menegaskan, semua pasukan keamanan yang selama ini <br />
bertugas di Kabupaten Puncak Jaya supaya ditarik dan meninggalkan daerah Puncak Jaya, sebab pihaknya menilai bahwa pihak keamanan baik TNI maupun Polri sudah tidak memberikan jaminan keamanan kepada rakyat dan pemerintah.<span class="fullpost"> <br />
<br />
Pihaknya selaku pemerintah sangat menyayangkan peristiwa tersebut, karena yang menjadi korban adalah seorang pekerja yang tidak mengetahui apa-apa, bahkan hanya mencari nafkah kemudian berniat membantu proses pembangunan di Kabupaten Puncak Jaya. "Ya, pada dasarnya saya sangat menyesalkan adanya peristiwa ini, sebab yang menjadi korban adalah seorang pekerja yang tidak tahu apa-apa, tapi kemudian ditembak oleh orang tidak dikenal. Ini membuktikan bahwa sudah tidak ada lagi jaminan keamanan di Kabupaten Puncak Jaya, sehingga semua pasukan keamanan yang berada di Kabupaten Puncak Jaya supaya ditarik dan meninggalkan Puncak Jaya,"tegasnya saat dikonfirmasi Cenderawasih Pos melalui telepon selulernya, tadi malam.<br />
<br />
Enembe mengungkapkan, dalam kasus ini sebaiknya tidak perlu langsung menuduh pelaku penembakan itu dari kelompok TPN/OPM yang selama ini ada di Puncak Jaya, sebab belum ada keterangan resmi dari pihak keamanan terutama dari kepolisian. "Setelah dilakukan olah TKP (tempat kejadian perkara) mungkin kita baru bisa mengetahuinya," ujarnya.<br />
<br />
Pihaknya menilai ada orang atau oknum tertentu yang ingin mengganggu stabilitas dan pembangunan yang dilakukan di Kabupaten Puncak Jaya sehingga setiap pemerintah ingin melakukan pembangunan maka selalu ada hambatan yang luar biasa. "Jadi kira-kira kita mau pergi kemana meminta jaminan keamanan untuk membangun daerah Puncak Jaya dan itu menjadi pertanyaan besar tentang legalitas dan wewenang pengamanan daerah Puncak Jaya. Apakah TNI atau Polri, karena setiap kita membangun selalu ada hambatan yang sangat luar biasa," tandasnya.<br />
<br />
Lebih jauh Enembe mengatakan, pemerintah dan rakyat Puncak Jaya sudah mengalami kesulitan tapi masih saja ada orang yang ingin menjatuhkan stabilitas pemerintah. "Kami sudah merasa jenuh dan bosan dengan skenario yang buruk dari oknum tertentu yang dilakukan selama ini. Untuk itu, kami berencana meminta supaya semua pasukan baik TNI maupun Polri yang bertugas di Kabupaten Puncak Jaya supaya ditarik, karena sudah tidak ada jaminan keamanan sehingga percuma saja bertugas di daerah tapi tidak bisa memberikan keselamatan," paparnya.<br />
<br />
"Yang pemerintah harapkan sudah jelas, yaitu kita menginginkan kedamaian, sehingga semua pembangunan bisa berjalan dan rakyat tertolong dari semua kesusahan. Semua petugas kemanan baik TNI/Polri harus bertanggungjawab untuk menjaga keamanan, bukan menciptakan suatu masalah," tandasnya lagi.<br />
<br />
Sementara itu, Kapolres Puncak Jaya, AKBP. B Chris Rihulay didampingi Wakapolres Puncak Jaya, Kompol Marselis S mengatakan, untuk mengungkap kasus ini, pihaknya saat ini tengah memeriksa 5 orang saksi dari jumlah keseluruhan sebanyak 7 orang saksi. Sedangkan 2 orang saksi lagi akan diperiksa kemudian.<br />
<br />
Diungkapkan, dari 7 orang saksi itu, 4 orang saksi merupakan teman kerja korban Thamrin, sedangkan satu orang saksi merupakan masyarakat asli yang ikut bekerja pada saat peristiwa tersebut terjadi.<br />
<br />
Sedangkan Kabid Humas Polda Papua Kombes Pol. Drs. Agus Rianto mengatakan, aparat kepolisian kini tengah memburu para pelaku penembakan itu.<br />
<br />
"Kami masih melakukan pengejaran terhadap pelaku penyerangan tersebut," kata Kepala Bidang Hubungan Masyarakat Polda Papua, Kombes Pol Drs Agus Rianto ketika dikonfirmasi Cenderawasih Pos di Mapolda Papua, Rabu (21/10) kemarin.<br />
<br />
"Kami masih mengumpulkan bukti-bukti pendukung untuk menindaklanjuti kasus penyerangan yang menewaskan 1 warga dan melukai seorang gembala gereja<br />
di Puncak Jaya itu," katanya.<br />
<br />
Usai penyerangan terhadap para pekerja proyek pembangunan jembatan Kali Kalome itu, pihaknya langsung melakukan olah tempat kejadian perkara (TKP)untuk mengumpulkan bukti-bukti guna proses penyelidikan lebih lanjut. Hanya saja, dalam olah TKP, pihaknya belum menemukan selongsong peluru yang diduga digunakan untuk menembak korban, sehingga belum bisa diperkirakan pelaku menggunakan jenis senjata apa. "Namun informasinya, pelaku menggunakan senjatanya panjang, tetapi belum tahu jenis senjatanya," ujarnya.<br />
<br />
Sementara itu, setelah sempat disemayamkan di Rumah Sakit (RS) Mulia, Puncak Jaya, korban penembakan bernama Thamrin (45) warga Pati, Jawa Tengah, yang tewas di Jembatan Kali Kalome, Distrik Tingginambut Puncak Jaya, Selasa (20/10), akhirnya diterbangkan menuju kampung halamannya di Pati, Jawa Tengah, Rabu (21/10) sekitar pukul 16.00 WIT. Jenazah korban tiba di Bandara Sentani sekitar pukul 13.00 WIT menggunakan pesawat Susi Air dari Mulia, Puncak Jaya. Setelah tiba di Bandara Sentani, jasad korban langsung dimasukkan ke mobil jenazah. Selanjutnya, jasad korban dibawa ke kantor kesehatan pelabuhan udara di Kompleks Bandara Sentani untuk menunggu pesawat yang akan membawanya ke Pati via Surabaya.<br />
<br />
Kakak Ipar korban yang juga saksi mata, Kusiyanto menuturkan, peristiwa penembakan itu terjadi saat dirinya bersama 9 orang pekerja jembatan di Kali Kalome sedang istirahat. Tiba-tiba, berondongan tembakan datang dari arah atas gunung.<br />
<br />
"Pokoknya saat terdengar suara tembakan, semua pekerja langsung lari mengamankan diri ke arah Pos Satgas 756/WMS yang jaraknya sekitar 1 kilometer dari lokasi pembangunan jembatan. Tapi, saat itu saya sempat mendengar korban berteriak suara aduh," tuturnya kepada Cenderawasih Pos, kemarin.<br />
<br />
Dikatakan, karena terkena tembakan, sehingga dia tidak bisa berlari lagi untuk menyelamatkan diri. Selain menembak, dia menyakini kelompok tersebut juga turun ke lokasi pembangunan jembatan. Sebab, saat anggota TNI datang ke lokasi untuk menolong korban, di tubuhnya terdapat luka bekas bacokan parang, dan saat itu sudah <br />
dalam kondisi tidak bernyawa.<br />
<br />
Kusiyanto menambahkan, selain adik iparnya yang terkena tembakan, ada dua lagi pekerja juga terkena luka tembakan, namun hanya mengenai telinga dan tangan. Kedua pekerja tersebut, saat ini masih menjalani perawatan di RS Mulia. "Jadi saat kejadian, kita ada 10 orang, 5 orang pendatang dan 5 orang warga asli Mulia. 2 orang pekerja yang terkena tembakan ini semuanya merupakan warga Mulia. Saya tidak tahu, apakah pengerjaan jembatan itu berlanjut atau tidak," ujarnya yang mengaku masih shock atas kejadian yang muncul secara tiba-tiba tersebut.(nal/bat/mud/fud)<br />
<br />
Sumber: Cenderawasih Pos<br />
</span>papuatodayhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14548843079715458975noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4931382601439810424.post-19130280529436043122009-10-22T00:45:00.000-07:002009-10-22T00:45:43.738-07:00Anggota TNI, Pelaku Pembunuhan di Elmo DitahanJAYAPURA-Kasus pembunuhan seorang pemuda warga Padan Bulan, Jackson Memberi (23) oleh seorang anggota TNI di Lokalisasi Tanjung Elmo, terus ditindaklanjuti. Mengingat tersangkanya seorang anggota TNI, maka kasus sudah dilimpahkan ke penyidik Pomdam XVII/Cenderawasih. <span class="fullpost"> <br />
Komandan POM (Danpom) Kodam XVII Cenderawasih Kolonel CPM Muhammad Gultan SE membenarkan, pihaknya telah <br />
<br />
menerima pelimpahan kasus pembunuhan terhadap Jackson Membri (23) yang diduga dilakukan Pratu S, dari aparat penyidik Polres Jayapura.<br />
<br />
Pratu S adalah anggota Satgas Yonif 725/Woroagi yang kini bertugas di perbatasan RI-PNG. Gultan yang ditemui Bintang Papua di ruang kerjanya, Rabu (21/10) mengatakan, pihaknya telah mengamankan pelaku Pratu S dan barang bukti berupa mobil pick up DS B 9212. Pelaku Pratu S diamankan untuk dimintai keterangannya. Sedangkan mobil tersebut digunakan pelaku dan rekan rekannya.<br />
<br />
“Anggota saya masih ke TKP untuk menemui orang-orang yang saat kejadian sedang berada di TKP untuk dijadikan saksi,” katanya.<br />
<br />
Korban Jackson Mebri adalah anak seorang anggota polisi yang tinggal di Perumahan Organda Padang Bulan, Distrik Abepura, ditemukan tewas dengan luka tusuk di sekujur tubuhnya di Tanjung Elmo, Sabtu (17/10) pukul 02.30 WIT. <br />
<br />
Kronologisnya, berawal dari korban bersama rekan- rekanya meneguk miras di Pangkalan Ojek Organda Jumat (16/10) sekitar pukul 21.00 WIT. <br />
<br />
Setelah itu korban pergi menggunakan sepeda motor ke arah jalan Raya Abepura—Sentani. Di tengah jalan korban menutuskan untuk menyinggahi lokalisasi Tanjung Elmo, Kampung Asei Kecil, Distrik Sentani Timur. Dalam keadaan mabuk berat korban akhirnya tertidur menutup jalan di depan pos penagihan retribusi lokalisasi di Tanjung Elmo.<br />
<br />
Pelaku Pratu S kebetulan saat itu bersama rekannya yang semenjak siang hari berada disitu hendak kembali ke Jayapura. Namun saat di tempat penagihan restribusi mereka menemui korban sedang tidur seakan memalang jalan.<br />
<br />
Akhirnya Pratu S berinisiatif untuk memindahkan korban sehingga kendaraan yang mereka tumpangi dapat melewati jalan tersebut. Maksud baik tersebut ternyata ditanggapi korban katanya pelaku menyakiti hatinya. Timbul pertengkaran hebat antara korban dan pelaku Pratu S. Pelaku Pratu S mencabut badik dari kantong celananya dan menusuknya ke korban, menyebabkan korban mengalami luka tusuk di bagian dada, perut dan lengan kanan. <br />
<br />
Pelaku Pratu S dan rekan rekannya kemudian meninggalkan korban seorang diri. Warga yang berada di sekitar TKP langsung melarikan korban ke RSUD Dok II Jayapura. Namun sayangnya korban tewas dalam perjalanan akibat pendarahan hebat. (mdc)<br />
<br />
Sumber: Bintang Papua<br />
</span>papuatodayhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14548843079715458975noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4931382601439810424.post-75743494548391573232009-10-22T00:41:00.000-07:002009-10-22T00:41:47.976-07:00Rumah Sakit Dok II Semakin SakitDEMO: Pegawai dan Perawat RSUD Dok II saat berunjuk rasa menuju Kantor Gubernur Provinsi Papua JAYAPURA (PAPOS)– Rumah sakit umum Dok II, semakin hari semakin sakit. Manajemen Rumaha sakit ini sepertinya tidak pernah sembuh dari penyakitnya, hingga terjadi demo dari kalangan perawatnya. Demo itu terpaksa dilakukan karena menurut para perawat sudah 9 bulan ini intensif mereka tidak dibayarkan.<span class="fullpost"> <br />
Para perawat dan bidan itu berarak dari RSU Dok II Jayapura menuju Kantor Gubernur Provinsi Papua yang terletak di Jalan Soa Siu dengan membawa berbagai spanduk bertuliskan tuntutan pembayaran insentif.<br />
<br />
Setibanya di Kantor Gubernur Papua, para pendemo diterima Sekretaris Daerah (Sekda) Papua, Drs.Tedjo Soeprapto,MM.<br />
<br />
Pada kesempatan itu mereka membacakan pernyataan sikap para perawat antara lain meminta agar Pemprov Papua dalam kurun waktu tiga hari sudah membayar insentif sesuai peraturan yang berlaku.<br />
<br />
Menurut para pendemo, sejak 1 Maret 2009, Pemprov Papua telah mencanangkan program pengobatan gratis untuk masyarakat asli Papua. Namun pada April 2009 dana program pengobatan gratis diberikan tanpa disertai petunjuk teknis pengelolaan dana tersebut.<br />
<br />
"Kami menolak Perda Nomor 103 Tahun 2009 tentang Retribusi Pengelolaan dana Kesehatan. Apabila penolakan ini tidak diindahkan oleh Pemprov Papua maka para perawat dan bidan yang bekerja di RSU Dok II Jayapura akan melakukan mogok kerja," kata seorang perawat yang dipercayakan membaca pernyataan sikap tersebut.<br />
<br />
Para pengunjuk rasa pun memimta Pemprov Papua agar segera membentuk tim khusus untuk memantau penggunaan dana kesehatan di RSU Jayapura itu.<br />
<br />
Menanggapi pernyataan sikap tersebut, Sekda Papua Drs.Tedjo Soeprapto,MM mengatakan, pihaknya menyambut baik pernyataan sikap ini dan akan secepatnya disampaikan kepada Gubernur Provinsi Papua untuk ditindaklanjuti sesuai peraturan yang berlaku.<br />
<br />
"Kami akan segera membahas persoalan ini dengan Gubernur Papua," kata Tedjo Soeprapto.<br />
<br />
Kegiatan unjuk rasa tersebut dikawal aparat kepolisian dari Polresta Jayapura. Unjuk rasa itu berlangsung aman dan tertib. Usai menyampaikan pernyataan sikap dan mendengar jawaban Sekda Papua, para pengunjuk rasa kembali secara tertib.<br />
<br />
Aktivitas masyarakat Kota Jayapura berlangsung normal. Arus lalu lintas berjalan lancar tanpa terpengaruh dengan unjuk rasa tersebut. (loi/ant)<br />
<br />
Sumber: Papua Pos<br />
</span>papuatodayhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14548843079715458975noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4931382601439810424.post-7395602804426396892009-10-14T04:34:00.000-07:002009-10-30T05:02:14.462-07:00Many voices, many stories, and a shared missionNATALIE PUCHALSKI<br />
<br />
THEY'RE an unlikely bunch of cub reporters with a common aim. They include former refugees from war-torn Sudan, a former Chinese diplomat, and a West Papuan who came to Australia on a wooden canoe.<span class="fullpost"> <br />
What they share is an address, a passion for telling stories and a sense of gratitude that they have been given a voice.<br />
<br />
They are all a part of a unique Melbourne project called Yarra Reporter, a journalism training program run by Infoxchange Australia that equips public housing residents with the basic skills needed to report on the issues affecting them.<br />
<br />
Project director Setyo Budi is an Indonesian-born journalist who worked in East Timor and is now passing on his skills to aspiring reporters from housing estates in Richmond, Atherton Gardens and Collingwood.<br />
<br />
He said the project, which began in October last year, aimed to help individuals combat the ''isolation they feel due to cultural and language barriers''.<br />
<br />
''There are voices hardly being represented by the media and I thought they have great stories to tell and, because of this under-representation, I think it would be great for them to do it themselves and be active citizens.''<br />
<br />
Gilius Kogoya is one of 43 West Papuan asylum seekers who arrived in Cape York in 2006.<br />
<br />
''I attended this training because I like to tell stories and write them to people who don't know what's going on.<br />
<br />
''The situation in West Papua is in trouble because at the moment West Papuans try to separate themselves from Indonesian rule or occupation … and when people get involved in murder nobody knows, it's like a mystery,'' he said.<br />
<br />
''If I were there I'd love to maybe write a story but it's too difficult because they block the media … and it's dangerous for journalists.''<br />
<br />
Frank Lin has worked as a diplomat for the Chinese government in Washington, Afghanistan and Belgium and was among the first group of reporters to join the Yarra Reporter.<br />
<br />
''What interests me is the community events and also problems, such as corruption, racial discrimination and prostitution.''<br />
<br />
Since coming to Australia from Sudan in 2004, Yarra Reporter participant Akech Manyiel has been involved in organising Sudanese interstate basketball competitions, and he also has a strong interest in writing about the community.<br />
<br />
''I saw the advertisement in the housing estate and I always wanted to learn how to write because I myself am studying sports science.<br />
<br />
''In 2006 when minister Kevin Andrews went on TV and said things about Sudanese people, I was really hurt - not only me but the entire community was hurt and they wanted to tell their side of the story,'' he said.<br />
<br />
Mr Manyiel said the initiative also gave them an opportunity to hold those in power accountable.<br />
<br />
''The city councils and ministers, they now know some people in the housing estates can actually report what they say or what they do,'' he said. ''Like I reported on the sewage collection and now there is a policy that there's no sewage around.''<br />
<br />
Swinburne student Anya Trybala was also drawn to help out with the project after seeing her Polish parents ''struggle so much with English and their skills'' after immigrating.<br />
<br />
Setyo Budi said he hoped Yarra Reporter would prove a sustainable and beneficial project for the community and the reporters. ''It's a way for them to have a better future''.<br />
<br />
Source: theage.com.au<br />
</span>papuatodayhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14548843079715458975noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4931382601439810424.post-843234779881910332009-10-14T04:33:00.000-07:002009-10-14T04:33:03.935-07:00Al Jazeera accused of censoring doco about West Papuan strugglePacific.Scoop<br />
Opinion – By Jason MacLeod of Truthout<br />
<br />
Recently, I watched Pride of Warriors, a documentary about resistance in West Papua. The filmmaker, Jono Van Hest, had asked me to comment on the film’s content as he prepared it for public broadcast on Al Jazeera’s English language channel.<span class="fullpost"> <br />
Then, after an article about the film, which quoted Indonesian government sources, appeared in the Jakarta Post, Pride of Warriors was pulled from the broadcaster’s schedule.<br />
<br />
Van Hest’s documentary was inspired by the arrival of 43 West Papuan refugees in Australia in January 2006.<br />
<br />
Faced with an Indonesian ban on foreign media, van Hest smuggled six video cameras into West Papua.<br />
<br />
The territory, which is located on the western rim of the Pacific and shares a land border with independent Papua New Guinea, has been controlled by Indonesia since a sham referendum in 1969.<br />
<br />
Since then, West Papuans have been working to enlarge the prospects of freedom.<br />
<br />
Two things about the film stand out to me. The first is the filmmaker’s decision to portray unarmed civilian-based opposition to the Indonesian government’s rule in West Papua.<br />
<br />
Van Hest highlights four separate stories: of Yani, the daughter of an independence leader, who was kidnapped and tortured because of her father’s political activity; of Matias Bunai, a customary leader from Paniai who is fighting to keep his culture alive; of the rebel leader Tadius Yogi who has put down his guns and now advocates a peaceful solution to the conflict; and of Sampari, a group of young dancers who were interrogated by the Indonesian security forces for performing a dance.<br />
<br />
These are stories that the Indonesian government does not want you to hear. These are stories that West Papuans want to be told.<br />
<br />
These are stories that Al Jazeera has silenced. And because Al Jazeera has bought the rights to Pride of Warriors, refusal to air the film means Al Jazeera has not only silenced stories of civil resistance, it has acted to kill the film’s distribution.<br />
<br />
Matias and the Sampari dancers are struggling for fundamental freedoms: the right to display Papuan symbols like the banned Morning Star flag; the ability to practise their own cultural traditions in peace. These demands could be realised under the framework of an enlightened Indonesian state. Instead they are met with harsh repression from the Indonesian security forces and central government.<br />
<br />
Such bullying and intransigence is exactly the type of behaviour that pushes Papuans towards the conviction that freedom will only be realised in an independent state.<br />
<br />
The second thing that stands out for me is that the Indonesian government’s alleged response to Pride of Warriors appears to be part of a sophisticated pattern of repression and control to maintain rule in West Papua.<br />
<br />
Brian Martin from the University of Wollongong has developed a framework for understanding how powerholders attempt to inhibit outrage to injustice. This framework is useful for describing the Indonesian government’s response to dissent in West Papua.<br />
<br />
The government’s strategy has five mutually reinforcing elements: cover-up; devaluation and stigmatisation of Papuan identity and culture; reinterpretation of reality; the use of policy and procedures to give the appearance of justice, and intimidation.<br />
<br />
# Firstly, the Indonesian government effectively restricts international media and independent scrutiny of what is happening in its restive Pacific periphery. The recent banning of Red Cross visits to West Papua and the apparent attempt to prevent the broadcast of van Hest’s film are the latest instances in a long sequence of silencing and marginalising critical voices.<br />
<br />
# Secondly, the Indonesian government stigmatises Papuan dissent and devalues Papuan identities. Oswald Iten, a Swiss journalist who was jailed in West Papua in 2000 after recording a nonviolent demonstration, observed this dynamic while in prison. Iten witnessed Indonesian police taunting Papuan students and political prisoners in detention: “You eat pig meat which is why you look like pigs.”<br />
<br />
# Thirdly, the Indonesian government reinterprets what happens, expressing more concern about a film made by an undercover filmmaker than the root political causes of Papuan grievances.<br />
<br />
# Fourthly, formal procedures are used to give a veneer of legitimacy to what Papuans privately say amounts to an occupation. The far-reaching Special Autonomy Law of 2001 was designed to address many of the root causes of Papua’s problems, but has been ineffective because the regulations that enable the law to be implemented have never been passed. This allows the Indonesian government to give the appearance of responding to Papuan concerns and satisfying the international community while doing precisely nothing.<br />
<br />
# Finally, the Indonesian government will use threats and intimidation to silence dissent. This is certainly what happens to Papuan political leaders and their families, including Edison Waromi and his daughter Yani, whose story of abduction and assault is featured in van Hest’s film. While Papuans like Filep Karma receive a 15-year jail sentence for organising a nonviolent flag raising, few Indonesian police and soldiers are brought to justice for human rights violations.<br />
<br />
Of course, Papuans are not passive or silent in the face of this repression. They expose cover-ups and emphasise the overwhelmingly peaceful nature of the resistance and the courage and humanity of those involved. They reinterpret their experience under occupation as an injustice, mobilise public concern (rather than relying on formal procedures), and resist intimidation and bribery.<br />
<br />
Van Hest has recorded the stories of West Papuans and brought them to a wider international audience. That is what the Indonesian government truly fears. By refusing to screen his film, Al Jazeera has come down on the side of hardliners in Indonesia.<br />
<br />
Jason MacLeod is based at the Australian Centre for Peace and Conflict Studies at the University of Queensland, where he lectures in nonviolent political change and researches West Papuan resistance movements.<br />
<br />
Source: pacific.scoop.co.nz<br />
</span>papuatodayhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14548843079715458975noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4931382601439810424.post-59175654072133459922009-10-11T07:12:00.000-07:002009-10-11T07:14:27.698-07:00Investasi dan Transparansi Perusahaan Tambang Sebuah ImpianOleh : Dominggus A Mampioper <br />
<br />
KabarIndonesia - Grasberg, sebuah puncak gunung di tengah rimba tropis Papua ternyata menyimpan kekayaan mineral yang kelak ternyata berharga lebih dari US $ 77 milyar. Gunung penyimpan mas dan tembaga itu telah digali terus menerus hingga menyisakan lubang raksasa di Ertsberg dan sebentar lagi Grasberg menanti gilirannya untuk menjadi danau diketinggian empat ribuan.<span class="fullpost"> <br />
Namun yang jelas pengalaman selama ini hampir kebanyakan perusahaan baik asing mau pun nasional selalu berhubungan langsung dengan pemerintah pusat dan daerah. Ironinya masyarakat di sekitar sumber daya alam (SDA) tidak mengetahui kalau arealnya mengandung potensi yang akan dikelola. Bahkan terkadang mereka sangat miskin padahal mereka sebagai pemilik dan bukan korban. Faktanya hampir 80% warga Papua berada dalam jeratan kemiskinan dengan urutan pertama daerah miskin di Indonesia.<br />
“Ada filosofi dari para orang tua di Papua kalau seseorang berada didekat api berarti dia merasa panas terlebih dulu, tetapi kenyataannya tidak terjadi seperti itu. Karena biasanya orang asli Papua pemilik hak ulayat justru dipindahkan jauh dari lokasi pertambangan yang kemudian tidak diperhatikan,” ujar Lindon Pangkali mantan aktivis Forest Wacht Indonesia (FWI) Regio Papua dalam Seminar dan Lokakarya Mendorong Transparansi Pengelolaan Industri Extraktif (digali) di Papua,” sebuah upaya mencari bentuk keterlibatan yang efektif pemerintahan daerah dan organisasi-organisasi masyarakat sipil di Jayapura belum lama ini.<br />
<br />
Jadi tak heran kalau orang Papua sejak dulu sudah menjadi korban lanjut Pangkali pasalnya warga Papua di sekitar hutan bertahun tahun melihat logging lewat di depan batang hidung mereka. “Begitu juga mereka yang hidup di sekitar lokasi pertambangan, sama saja nasibnya,”ujar Pangkali seraya menyebut setiap ada eksploitasi tambang, gas dan sumber daya alam lainnya mereka tak pernah merasa hangat nya atau nikmatnya hasil investasi. “Saat itu kutukan terhadap sumber daya alam justru berlaku pada mereka sebagai pemilik sumber daya alam,”tegas Pangkali.<br />
Kini di jaman UU Otsus dan transparansi harapan masyarakat agar bisa terbebas dari kutukan sumber daya alam semakin mengecil ataukah tambah besar dan merambah ke segala sektor?<br />
Meski sudah ada UU Otsus Papua dan Majelis Rakyat Papua (MRP) tetapi kasus kasus pertambangan di Kabupaten Raja Ampat Provinsi Papua justru mengorbankan masyarakat adat setempat. Masyarakat pemilik tambang ditangkap karena mengelola tambang dan tidak diberi ijin.<br />
<br />
Ibu Ani Sabami anggota MRP dari Pokja perempuan MRP menyebutkan ada banyak pelanggaran terhadap SDA di Papua seperti Nikel di Raja Ampat, Gas Alam Cair di Bintuni.<br />
“Perlu ada sinkronisasi antara Undang-undang No. 4 tahun 2009 dan Undang-undang No. 21 Tahun 2001. Usulan saya perlu ada pertimbangan tetang transparansi karena itu harus ada keberpihakan terhadap orang Papua,” ujar Sabami.<br />
<br />
Selanjutnya kata dia terkait pemerintah Indonesia sebagai anggota PBB (Perserikatan Bangsa-Bangsa) namun realita yang ditemui MRP , pemerintah selalu megacu kepada kebijakan sektoral, padahal Indonesia adalah anggota PBB yang seharusnya mengambil referensi dari dunia Internasional<br />
harapan terhadap UU Otsus Papua ternyata tak semudah membalikan telapak tangan untuk memperoleh semua kemudahaan agar terhindar dari sebuah kutukan sumber daya alam.<br />
<br />
Pemerintah dan DPRP belum secara tuntas membicarakan pelaksanaan UU Otsus Papua beserta perangkat perangkat lainnya seperti Perdasus dan Perdasi. Kini investasi pertambangan berjalan seiring dengan pemekatan provinsi dan kabupaten. “perlu dilakukan studi kelayakan dari Pemda,” ujar Lemok Mabel Dewan Adat Wilayah Baliem. Bagi Mabel masalah investasi sangat sulit sebab kepentingan pemerintah lebih besar dari pada masyarakat. “Harus ada proteksi terhadap orang Papua dulu baru kemudian berbicara investasi di Papua,”kata Mabel. Menurut dia semua pihak harus menyepakati perlindungan terhadap masyarakat asli Papua, pasalnya penduduk Papua sedikit dan siapa yang mau bekerja. “UU Otsus Papua juga harus memiliki pasal pasal rujukan yang melindungi atau memrotek penduduk asli Papua,” tegas Lemok.<br />
<br />
Terkait dengan masalah investasi mau pun transparansi, Abraham Fonataba Direktur Bank Perkreditan Rakyat (BPR) menanyakan hampir sebagian besar masyarakat di Papua tidak mengetahui untuk apa dana royalti dari PT Freeport digunakan. Menurut dia masyarakat berhak mengetahui dana dana dari perusahaan yang berinvestasi di Papua dipakai untuk kepentingan apa dan bagaimana bentuk pertanggungan jawabannya. Memang selama ini Pemprov Papua memperoleh royalty sekitar 80 persen sedangkan pemerintah pusat 20 persen.<br />
<br />
Sekitar lima tahun lalu sebanyak, 80 persen bagian untuk Pemprov Papua adalah senilai Rp 120-150 miliar. Dana itu digunakan untuk pembangunan di Papua serta daerah-daerah sekitarnya.<br />
Sedangkan bagi masyarakat Amungme dan Suku Kamoro di Kabupaten Mimika memperoleh dana satu persen. Bagi Markus Haluk sangat mengherankan karena dana satu persen tidak jelas asal usulnya dan baru diberikan sekitar 1998 lalu. “Mengapa sejak kontrak karya 1967 tidak dibayarkan kepada masyarakat,”ujar Markus Haluk Sekjen Mahasiswa Pegunungan Tengah Papua.<br />
<br />
Tidak Transparan<br />
<br />
Budi Setyanto Direktur ICS Papua mengatakan tidak adanya transparansi yang memadai terhadap kontrak-kontrak investasi di Papua. “Artinya kalau kita mereview kembali dari investasi-investasi yang sebenarnya hampir semua kontrak-kontark itu tidak pernah diketahui atau tidak ada informasi baik itu oleh pemerintah provinsi, pemkab dan pemkot,” ujar Budi.<br />
<br />
Lebih lanjut urai Budi hal ini sangat tidak memadai terlebih dengan masyarakat pemilik konsesi sehingga menyulitkan semua elemen yang ada di Papua mengetahui secara persis, bagaimana bentuknya investasi dalam konteks industri-industri ekstraktif.<br />
<br />
“Saya kira masalah ini tidak hanya di Papua saja tetapi juga di Kalimantan, Sumtera, hak kepemilikan adat yang menjadi wilayah konsensi ini juga tidak pernah diakui,”tegas Budi Setyanto.<br />
<br />
Menurut dia hal ini sangat jelas sekali baik di PT.Freeport Indonesia, LNG Tangguh maupun yang lainnya pasti tidak ada perundingan terlebih dahulu. “Secara legalitas ini juga tidak ada pengakuan sama, bahwa ini adalah atau klaim dari negara bahwa penguasaan ditangan pemerintah yang kemudian merujuk kepada pasal 33 UUD 1945, dimana yang bersifat umum itu dikuasai negara yang ujung-ujungnya berwarna abu-abu atau tidak jelas,” ujar Budi Setyanto.<br />
Masalah selanjutnya yang sangat krusial kata Budi Setyanto pihak investor tidak pernah memberikan ruang kepada masyarakat adat pemilik konsesi untuk terlibat sebagai pemegang saham dalam perusahaan. Misalnya saja masyarakat adat yang memiliki Gunung Grasberg yang kini ditambang PT Freeport dengan SDA yang melimpah, seharusnya masyarakat bisa ikut andil sebagai pemilik saham.<br />
<br />
“ Tetapi memang sekali lagi tidak ada ruang yang diinformasikan atau diberitahukan kepada masyarakat terhadap apa yang menjadi kekayaannya itu,“ ujarnya seraya menambahkan pemerintah Indonesia juga menegaskan tidak perlu dibicarakan dalam kontrak karya II.<br />
Tidak adanya keterbukaan dana bagi hasil antara pemerintah pusat, daerah dan masyarakat pemilik wilayah konsesi. Misalnya saja pada saat kita tanya tentang berapa jumlah persentase pendapatan yan diperoleh pemerintah pusat, daerah dan masyarakat adat dari hasil PT.FI, sehingga tidak ada rasa keadilan bagi masyarakat adat dan pemerintah di Papua. “Tetapi sayangnya kami belum bisa menggali data yang lebih banyak lagi,” ujar Budi Setyanto dalam pemaparan makalahnya.<br />
<br />
Menurut dia soal pengembangan SDM lokal masih bersifat politis dan belum menjadi tanggung jawab perusahaan. Artinya bahwa tenaga kerja yang diakomodir dari masyarakat Lokal, ini nuansanya politis karena bukan merupakan tanggung jawab perusahaan tetapi merupakan kewajiban yang memang harus dilakukan.<br />
Hal ini bisa terlihat dengan perjuangan Tongoi Papua sebuah organisasi karyawan asli Papua di PT Freeport memperjuangkan hak hak mereka antara lain membentuk Departemen Papua Affair. Sebuah departemen yang khusus menangani karyawan asal Papua.<br />
<br />
Kemudian yang berikutnya, industri ekstraktif menimbulkan ekses/pencemaran lingkungan, pelanggaran HAM dan marginalisasi yang tidak tertangani secara baik. Ada perbedaan yang terjadi pada LNG Tangguh di Bintuni. Di mana pihak LNG Tangguh membangun pemukiman baru bagi masyarakat setempat sebelum perusahaan beroperasi telah diangun perumahan yang harganya sekitar 200 – 400 juta rupiah.<br />
<br />
Industri ekstraktif pertama di Tanah Papua, menutur Ir N Maidepa adalah industri minyak oleh Bataafs Petrolium Maatshappey (BPM) di Babo di Teluk Bintuni sekitar tahun 1930-an. “Diatas bekas-bekas industri minyak ini diabad ke-21 ini berdiri pula industri gas pertama dibuka dengan nama LNG-Tangguh oleh Beyond Petrolium (BP),” ujar Maydepa yang juga anggota MRP.<br />
<br />
Bersamaan dengan industri itu lanjut Maydepa beberapa pemuda di sekitar Babo dan Bintuni melahirkan banyak putra Papua di wilayah itu termasuk dirinya untukk dididik menjadi tenaga kerja di bidang gas dan minyak. “Saya belajar geologi ke luar negeri,” ujar Maydepa geolog pertama orang Papua. Namun kata Maydepa industri terbaru yang muncul dimuka Bumi Cenderawasih ialah LNG-Tangguh yang kepalanya dipegang Pusat, kekuasaan NKRI dan jari kelingkingnya dipegang oleh Gubernur Provinsi Papua dan Papua Barat, DPRP Provinsi Papua dan DPRP Papua Barat.<br />
<br />
“Pendapatan daerah pada zaman kolonial dari industri minyak yang dipungut pemerintah menjadi pendapatan resmi Provinsi West New Guinea karena berstatus Otonomi,” kata Maydepa mantan Bupati Manokwari.<br />
<br />
Namun yang jelas menurut Maydepa peluang untuk berkembangnya industri ekstraktif tetap ada dan cukup besar untuk MIGAS maupun pertambangan umum di Tanah Papua.<br />
Walau demikian lanjut Maydepa peluang ini belum memberi manfaat, jika tetap didukung dengan regulasi yang melancarkan investasi dan demi kesejahteraan rakyat yang notabane memiliki hak ulayat .<br />
<br />
Hal ini merupakan peluang besar jika industri ekstraktif berkembang pesat di tanah ini, walaupun sekarang disaat ini masih menjadi sebuah tantangan. Menurut Maydepa karena ada sharing pendapatan antara pusat pendapatan dan daerah penghasil. Tantangan yang lebih besar bagi daerah ialah presentase sharing dari revenue atau pendapatan asli. “Untuk demi kebaikan bersama perlu adanya regulasi yang baik dan demokrasi serta tingkat transparansi yang tulus iklas antara kedua belah pihak karena ada promo di Papua. “Jangan kitorang baku bohong terus,” ujar Maydepa.<br />
<br />
KONTRAK KARYA DI PROVINSI PAPUA<br />
Nama Perusahaan Luas/Jenis Lokasi/Kab/kota Keterangan<br />
1 PT. Freeport Indonesia BLOK A 10.000 ha. Kabupaten: Mimika, Paniai,<br />
Puncak Jaya, Tolikara Blok A : Eksploitasi,<br />
Blok B : 202.950 ha Blok B : Eksplorasi<br />
2 PT. Iriana Mutiara Idenburg 108.600 ha Emas dmp <br />
Kabupaten: Keerom, Pegunungan Bintang <br />
Perpanjangan Eksplorasi Tahap II<br />
3 PT. Irja Eastern Minerals Blok I;228.760 ha <br />
Kabupaten: Kaima, Nabire, Mimika, Waropen, Paniai, Puncak Jaya, <br />
Tolikara Perpanjangan Eksplorasi<br />
Blok II1;73.300 ha <br />
Blok III;91.990 ha Emas dmp (Dan mineral Pengikut) <br />
4 PT. Iriana Mutiara Mining 16.470 ha Emas dmp <br />
Kabupaten Sarmi Perpanjangan Eksplorasi<br />
5 PT. Kumamba mining 211.800 ha. Logam Dasar (pasir besi, dll) <br />
Kabupaten Sarmi Perpanjangan Eksplorasi Tahap II<br />
6 PT. Nabire Bakti Mining Blok I; 159.247 ha. <br />
Kabupaten Paniai, Fakfak Perpanjangan Eksplorasi<br />
Blok II; 30.320 ha <br />
Blok III; 9.937 ha <br />
<br />
Tabel Kuasa Pertambangan(KP) Penyelidikan Umum<br />
<br />
Nama Perusahaan Tahap Kegiatan Luas dan Jenis Bahan Galian <br />
Kabupaten/Kota<br />
1. PT. Benliz Pacific Penyelidikan Umum 45.680 Ha, Emas dmp <br />
Kabupaten Paniai<br />
45.340 Ha <br />
10.566 Ha <br />
16.867 Ha <br />
2. PT. Antam Tbk Penyelidikan Umum 37.588 Ha Tembaga, Emas dmp <br />
Kabupaten Pegunungan Bintang<br />
49.740 Ha <br />
49.920 Ha <br />
49.830 Ha <br />
<br />
Tabel Kuasa Pertambangan (KP) Eksplorasi<br />
<br />
Nama perusahaan/ Kep.gub.no.kp/ tgl/Tahap/jenis/Luas Lokasi Kab/kota Masaberlaku<br />
1. PT. Anugerah Sentani Nikel 51/2007 (02-04-2007) KP. Eksplorasi<br />
Nikel 25.537 ha Kabupaten Jayapura 3 Tahun<br />
2. PT. Bumi Teknik Mandiri 57/2007 (02-04-2007)<br />
KP. Eksplorasi Emas dmp19.600 ha Kabupaten Nabire, Kab. Paniai, <br />
Kab. Waropen 3 Tahun<br />
3. PT. Sinar Indah Persada 158/2007(10-09-2007)<br />
KP. Eksplorasi Nikel Blok I :10.580<br />
Blok II : 5.396 Kabupaten Jayapura 3 Tahun<br />
4. PT. Sinar Indah Persada 159/2007 (10-09-2007)<br />
KP. Eksplorasi Nikel 100.000 ha Kabupaten Keerom 3 Tahun<br />
5. PT. Sinar Indah Persada 158/2007 (10-09-2007)<br />
KP. Eksplorasi Nikel Blok I :10.580<br />
Blok II :5.396 Kabupaten Jayapura 3 Tahun<br />
6. PT. Sinar Indah Persada 159/2007 (10-09-2007)<br />
KP. Eksplorasi Nikel 100.000 ha Kabupaten Keerom 3 Tahun<br />
7. PT. Karya Manunggal 166/2007 (21-9-2007) KP. Eksplorasi <br />
Batubara 50.000 ha Kabupaten Mamberamo Raya 3 Tahun<br />
8. PT. Papua Inti Energi 167/2007 (21-9-2007)KP. Eksplorasi<br />
Batubara 50.000 ha Kabupaten Mamberamo Raya 3 Tahun<br />
<br />
Sumber: Kabar Indonesia<br />
</span>papuatodayhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14548843079715458975noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4931382601439810424.post-19480319359220382232009-10-11T06:13:00.000-07:002009-10-11T06:13:02.506-07:00WPNCL Anggap Tanah Papua Tidak AmanJAYAPURA-Koalisi Nasional Papua Barat untuk Pembebasan atau West Papua National Coalition for Liberation (WPNCL) kembali mendesak Presiden Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono melakukan perundingan dengan rakyat Papua untuk menyelesaikan masalah di Tanah Papua. "Kami tetap meminta perundingan harus melibatkan pihak ke tiga sebagai mediator dan berlangsung di tempat yang netral," kata Paiki selaku Ketua Komite Pelaksanaan Kemerdekaan dan Kedaulatan Malanesia Barat saat jumpa pers di P3W Padang Bulan, Rabu (7/10) kemarin.<span class="fullpost"> <br />
"Sampai saat ini, kondisi kedamaian di Tanah Papua tidak dirasakan oleh Rakyat Papua, bahkan kondisi di Papua malah semakin tidak aman. Ini dibuktikan dengan terjadinya penembakan di Timika," tuturnya.<br />
<br />
Begitu juga dengan penangkapan terhadap juru bicara Dewan Militer Tentara Pembebasan Nasional Papua Barat (DM TPN-PB) Jonah Wenda, yang juga sebagai aktivis WPNCL, pada 6 september 2009 di Klamono Sorong oleh aparat Polda Papua, juga penangkapan terhadap sejumlah aktivis Papua selama ini, sehingga dengan jelas telah membuktikan bahwa kondisi kedamaian sulit diwujudkan di Tanah Papua.<br />
<br />
"Kami mendesak agar Presiden SBY segera menggelar perundingan dengan kami, hanya itu saja yang bisa menyelesaikan konflik di Tanah Papua," ujar Drs.S.M.Paiki.<br />
<br />
Pihaknya sudah pernah melanyangkan surat secara resmi atas nama WPNCL kepada Presiden SBY sejak tahun 2007 dan 2008, sayangnya sampai saat ini belum juga ada jawaban dari SBY, sehingga pihaknya menilai pemerintah pusat hanya sengaja mengulur-ulur waktu untuk memperparah konflik di Tanah Papua.<br />
<br />
"Jika Pemerintah Pusat mengingingkan Papua ini aman, maka segera membuka diri untuk melakukan perundingan dengan kami, sehingga masalah sebenarnya yang diminta oleh rakyat Papua yakni kedamaian secara politik dapat tercapai," tuturnya.<br />
<br />
Sementara Jonah Wenda, juru bicara Dewan Milter Tentara Pembebasan Nasional Papua barat, yang sementara ini masih berstatus wajib lapor di Polda Papua, mengatakan, pihaknya akan tetap memperjuangkan agar ada perundingan dengan masyarakat Papua. "Gula-gula politik yang diberikan oleh pemerintah pusat seperti Otonomi Khusus tidak akan mempengaruhi tekad kami untuk memperjuangkan agar ada perundingan internasional," tuturnya.<br />
<br />
"Kami tidak tahu apa yang disebut dengan Otsus, sebab itu bukan permintaan orang Papua. Kami hanya ingin agar ada perundingan di tempat yang netral, bukan di Indonesia," sambungnya.<br />
<br />
Sementara itu saat disinggung apakah WPNCL sudah mendapat mandat dari berbagai organisasi sipil di Tanah Papua, yang selama ini memperjuangkan masalah Papua? Jonah mengatakan bahwa WPNCL telah mendapatkan mandat untuk memperjuangkan kedamaian secara politik di Tanah Papua. Pasalnya WPNCL lahir berdasarkan kesepakatan-kesepakatan dari berbagai komponen rakyat sipil di tanah Papua.<br />
<br />
"Misalnya pertemuan tanggal 28 November 2005 di Papua New Guinea yang mana menetapkan WPNCL sebagai satu wadah organisasi, dengan sekretariat berkedudukan di Port Villa-Vanuatu. Ini dalam rangka perjuangan yang selama ini dibilang berbeda-beda bisa tertata rapi dibawah naungan WPNCL," katanya.<br />
<br />
"Jadi, kami ini mewakili berbagai organisasi masyarakat sipil di Tanah Papua, termasuk juga dari Dewan Aadat Papua. Kini kami meminta agar SBY segera membuka diri untuk melakukan perundingan dengan kami, dalam waktu yang tidak terlalu lama," pintanya.(cak/jop/aj)<br />
<br />
Sumber: jpnn.com<br />
</span>papuatodayhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14548843079715458975noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4931382601439810424.post-89364683901359618052009-10-08T23:27:00.000-07:002009-10-08T23:27:37.816-07:00WPNCL CALLS ON THE GOVERNMENT OF INDONESIAN TO DIALOGUE WITH THE PAPUAN PEOPLEWest Papua National Coalition for Liberation (WPNCL) had written twice to the President of the Republic of Indonesian Dr. Haji Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono, in 2007 and again in 2008 requesting him to dialogue with the Papuan people. But until now there is still no response from him or his government.<span class="fullpost"> <br />
<br />
Since its’ establishment WPNCL was committed to the use of peaceful means as the dominant principle to resolve the conflict between the Papuan people and the government of Indonesia. WPNCL considers a mutually beneficial Summit/dialogue with Indonesia the first priority in the process of resolving the issue of West Papua. Such dialogue or Summit must be facilitated by a Third Party or Mediator, endorsed by both parties, the Papuan people and the government of Indonesia.<br />
<br />
WPNCL viewed the recent incident involving the arrest and detention of Mr. Jonah Wenda, Spokesman of the Military Council of the West Papuan National Liberation Army (TPN PB) and peace Activist of WPNCL on 6 September 2009 in Klamono/Sorong as a provocative act that could undermine the on going efforts to maintain peace and tolerance in the land of Papua. Mr. Jonah Wenda was transferred to Jayapura for further interrogation then released on … September and placed under house arrest. It is important to keep in mind that peace and tolerance in the land of Papua could be maintained because of the hard work of peace activists of the land including Mr. Jonah Wenda. He had worked tirelessly together with members of WPNCL to make sure that TPN remain committed to peace. WPNCL considers this as confidence boosting effort to pave the way for peace negotiation with the government of Indonesia. After all there must be genuine good will efforts shown by both parties before any negotiation.<br />
<br />
Mr. Jonah Wenda and the other peace activists are conducting themselves in the open and known to members of the public. They cannot be considered as a threat to any one. All their activities are manifestations of the undertaking in 2002 where POLDA PAPUA (Regional Police Force of Papua) had agreed to work together with the Papuan Peoples Representative Council (DPRP) and Stakeholder in the Society to maintain peace in the land of Papua. The details of commitment of Stakeholders in the form of Recommendations could be ascertained in the Report of the Peace Conference of the Papuan people held in Jayapura from 15-16 October 2002.<br />
<br />
Since that Conference, a Task Force for Peace was established by members of the Civil Society. The main task was to disseminate information and engage Civil Society about the recommendations. The Task Force had also facilitated consultations and reconciliation with groups that potentially could hinder or endangered the peace efforts. It facilitated parallel meetings with different stakeholders in the Society including the different regional commands of TPN.<br />
The Task Force for Peace in Papua had also facilitated combined meetings with Papuans in the country and those in Diaspora. From 16-20 June 2003 a Think Tank Group meeting was held in Utrecht, Netherlands. Some 23 Papuan intellectuals participated. The 3 main agenda items of the meetings were Human Rights and Justice, Development, and Politics. Because of the absence of some important Stakeholders including the TPN it was recommended that another meeting be organized some where closer to West Papua. Such meeting must be inclusive to allow for full participation of Stakeholders of the whole resistance movement.<br />
<br />
All these meetings realized the need for workshops tor the purpose of dissemination of the basic recommendations and more importantly to allow for wider participation and input by all sectors who want the realization of peace in West Papua. Two Workshops were facilitated in the country. The first Workshop held in Jayapura on 27 October 2004 recommended that a high level meeting of National leaders must be convened to seriously consider all the criteria and options in the process to resolve the conflict in West Papua. The second workshop held on 20 November 2004 agreed to organize a meeting for the leaders of all the Papuan organizations in the Civil Society. The workshop also discussed technical matters involved including, agenda, venue, participants and cost involved in convening such a meeting.<br />
<br />
Considering the recommendations from the workshops many diverse groups in the Civil Society decided to go ahead to convene the proposed National meeting/Summit involving Stakeholders in the country and also in Diaspora. This meeting/Summit was held in Papua New Guinea from 28 November to 1st December 2005. This Summit was able to make a number of interim decisions: The establishment of a National Coordinating body called, West Papua National Coalition for Liberation (WPNCL). The Summit decided that the Secretariat of WPNCL be based in Port Vila, the Capital of the Republic of Vanuatu. The Summit also decided that concerted efforts must be made to consult widely on unity and maximize consolidation between different factions of the Resistance movement in West Papua. From the invited 28 Resistance organizations only 18 were able to attend. The remaining 10 organizations sent their apologies and endorsed the purpose of the Summit.<br />
<br />
Based on the recommendations from the above Summit an important meeting was convened for the Commanders of the West Papuan National Liberation Army, the TPN PB. PNG was also the venue for this meeting which was held from 22-24 July 2006 and was attended by all the regional Commands of TPN. A number of important agreements were made in the meeting including, the duty and function of TPN as a Revolutionary Army that must protect all West Papuans; separation of TPN from the OPM structure, further more the role and responsibility of TPN during the revolution; the formation of TPN Military Council as the highest Coordinating body of TPN; during the same meeting a declaration of commitment by all the Commanders to work together in the efforts to liberate Papuan people and the land of West Papua; urging all the Commanders within the TPN Command to unify their perceptions whether in programming, strategy and action to accomplish the objective of the revolution; acknowledge and respect the universal principles of humanity; endorse the efforts to establish West Papua as land of peace; urging unity between all the resistance groups in West Papua; urging all West Papuans to work together to maintain National unity.<br />
<br />
Another follow up meeting by TPN was held at Victoria HQ from 5-7 April 2007. This meeting had reached a number of agreements to merge, Arfai 1965 Command, Marvic Command and Pemka Command into one Command to be known as West Papua National Liberation Army Command. This new Command comes under the responsibility and direct Command of the Military Council of the West Papua National Liberation Army; Henceforth, the Military Council of TPN PB becomes the highest decision making body or Command of TPN PB; confirming a new Command structure and designation of regional Commands for each HQ; the appointment of ranking officers in the Military Council of TPN PB including the other rankings further down the structure of Command. A communiqué was issued at the end of the meeting to declare or affirm the above decisions: a unity process within the rank and file of TPN PB, the merging of Arfai ’65 Command, Marvic Command and Pemka Command into one Command structure. Commitment by all parties within TPN PB to foster bilateral and international cooperation to combat the traffic of narcotics, to stem terrorist networks and above all the creation of a National Command of TPN PB encompassing all regions of West Papua which was divided into 6 Regional Commands. <br />
<br />
Next WPNCL convened its Second Summit in Malaysia from 22-25 September 2007. A number of decisions were made here: WPNCL will establish its Secretariat in Port Vila, Vanuatnu; the adoption of Bylaws of WPNCL that also cover rules on the TPN PB and other functions of the Coalition. The Summit established a negotiating team and agreed on the strategy for negotiation with Indonesia through a Third Party. The Summit had also approved the existence and the on going work of the West Papua Peace Working Group that had networks in 4 major regions, Asia, Pacific, America and Europe. Because of the absence of some stakeholders including TPN PB it was decided to have the final Leaders Summit in Vanuatu.<br />
<br />
The third and final West Papuan leaders Summit was held in Vanuatu from 2-10 April 2008. This Summit was endorsed by the Government of Vanuatu. The Summit issued a major resolution calling on Indonesia to agree to resolve the West Papuan conflict peacefully through International negotiation facilitated by a Third Party. The Summit also called on the International community to encourage Indonesia to open West Papua for International access by Journalists and other International agencies.<br />
TPN PB has been one of the important supporting pillars of WPNCL. But since its Commander was elected as Chairman of the Coalition during the Summit in Vanuatu the position of Commander became vacant. Unfortunately it is a technical matter and was referred to the Military Council of TPN PB to decide. This matter was resolved when all the Commanders met near the PNG border from 29-31 October 2008. This was also the first National Planning meeting of the new Military Council of TPN PB. <br />
WPNCL had also held its first National Planning meeting near the PNG border from 4-8 April 2009 to finalize its programs with clear directions and targets including one of the options of negotiating with Indonesia through a Third Party facilitation. <br />
<br />
To conclude, WPNCL believes the new government of Dr. Haji Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono has the commitment to resolve the West Papuan issue. We encourage SBY’s government to establish communication with us as we previously requested in order to commence the process for negotiation. We hope, God willing this will lead to a mutually beneficial result for both our two peoples, Papuans and Indonesians of this generation and those yet to come.<br />
<br />
For more details contact,<b> Rex Rumakiek</b>, the Secretary General on +61 414247468 or the Vice Chairman <b>Dr. John Ondawame</b> on +678 439759026 or the Vanuatu Mission <b>Mr. Andy Ayamiseba</b> on + 678 40808 or 60651.<br />
<br />
For general information on Human Rights issues contact <b>Ms. Paula Makabory</b>, the International Representative of Papua Institute of Human Rights Study and Advocacy, on: +61 402547517<br />
<br />
</span>papuatodayhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14548843079715458975noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4931382601439810424.post-31990830949789829132009-10-08T23:24:00.001-07:002009-10-08T23:24:35.046-07:00Sparatis Papua Barat Desak Jakarta Buka PerundinganJAYAPURA-Koalisi Nasional Papua Barat untuk Pembebasan atau West Papua National Coalition for Liberation (WPNCL) kembali mendesak Presiden Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono melakukan perundingan dengan rakyat Papua untuk menyelesaikan masalah di Tanah Papua. “Kami tetap meminta perundingan harus melibatkan pihak ke tiga sebagai mediator dan berlangsung di tempat yang netral,” kata Paiki selaku Ketua Komite Pelaksanaan Kemerdekaan dan Kedaulatan Malanesia Barat saat jumpa pers di P3W Padang Bulan, Rabu (7/10) kemarin.<span class="fullpost"> <br />
“Sampai saat ini, kondisi kedamaian di Tanah Papua tidak dirasakan oleh Rakyat Papua, bahkan kondisi di Papua malah semakin tidak aman. Ini dibuktikan dengan terjadinya penembakan di Timika,” tuturnya.<br />
<br />
Begitu juga dengan penangkapan terhadap juru bicara Dewan Militer Tentara Pembebasan Nasional Papua Barat (DM TPN-PB) Jonah Wenda, yang juga sebagai aktivis WPNCL, pada 6 september 2009 di Klamono Sorong oleh aparat Polda Papua, juga penangkapan terhadap sejumlah aktivis Papua selama ini, sehingga dengan jelas telah membuktikan bahwa kondisi kedamaian sulit diwujudkan di Tanah Papua.<br />
<br />
“Kami mendesak agar Presiden SBY segera menggelar perundingan dengan kami, hanya itu saja yang bisa menyelesaikan konflik di Tanah Papua,” ujar Drs.S.M.Paiki.<br />
<br />
Pihaknya sudah pernah melanyangkan surat secara resmi atas nama WPNCL kepada Presiden SBY sejak tahun 2007 dan 2008, sayangnya sampai saat ini belum juga ada jawaban dari SBY, sehingga pihaknya menilai pemerintah pusat hanya sengaja mengulur-ulur waktu untuk memperparah konflik di Tanah Papua.<br />
<br />
“Jika Pemerintah Pusat mengingingkan Papua ini aman, maka segera membuka diri untuk melakukan perundingan dengan kami, sehingga masalah sebenarnya yang diminta oleh rakyat Papua yakni kedamaian secara politik dapat tercapai,” tuturnya.<br />
<br />
Sementara Jonah Wenda, juru bicara Dewan Milter Tentara Pembebasan Nasional Papua barat, yang sementara ini masih berstatus wajib lapor di Polda Papua, mengatakan, pihaknya akan tetap memperjuangkan agar ada perundingan dengan masyarakat Papua. “Gula-gula politik yang diberikan oleh pemerintah pusat seperti Otonomi Khusus tidak akan mempengaruhi tekad kami untuk memperjuangkan agar ada perundingan internasional,” tuturnya.<br />
<br />
“Kami tidak tahu apa yang disebut dengan Otsus, sebab itu bukan permintaan orang Papua. Kami hanya ingin agar ada perundingan di tempat yang netral, bukan di Indonesia,” sambungnya.<br />
<br />
Sementara itu saat disinggung apakah WPNCL sudah mendapat mandat dari berbagai organisasi sipil di Tanah Papua, yang selama ini memperjuangkan masalah Papua? Jonah mengatakan bahwa WPNCL telah mendapatkan mandat untuk memperjuangkan kedamaian secara politik di Tanah Papua. Pasalnya WPNCL lahir berdasarkan kesepakatan-kesepakatan dari berbagai komponen rakyat sipil di tanah Papua.<br />
<br />
“Misalnya pertemuan tanggal 28 November 2005 di Papua New Guinea yang mana menetapkan WPNCL sebagai satu wadah organisasi, dengan sekretariat berkedudukan di Port Villa-Vanuatu. Ini dalam rangka perjuangan yang selama ini dibilang berbeda-beda bisa tertata rapi dibawah naungan WPNCL,” katanya.<br />
<br />
“Jadi, kami ini mewakili berbagai organisasi masyarakat sipil di Tanah Papua, termasuk juga dari Dewan Aadat Papua. Kini kami meminta agar SBY segera membuka diri untuk melakukan perundingan dengan kami, dalam waktu yang tidak terlalu lama,” pintanya.(cak/jop/aj)<br />
<br />
Sumber: jpnn.com<br />
</span>papuatodayhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14548843079715458975noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4931382601439810424.post-26397943283444052572009-10-08T23:23:00.000-07:002009-10-08T23:23:48.347-07:00PILAR-PILAR WPNCL HIMBAU PEMERINTAH INDONESIARabu, 7 Oktober 2009<br />
<br />
Media Release<br />
<br />
PILAR-PILAR WPNCL HIMBAU PEMERINTAH INDONESIA<br />
BERUNDING DENGAN RAKYAT PAPUA<br />
<br />
WPNCL (West Papua Nasional Coalition For Liberation) atau “Koalisi Nasional Papua Barat Untuk Pembebasan”, telah dua kali melayangkan surat kepada Presiden Republik Indonesia pada tahun 2007 dan 2008, dalam rangka mengajak pemerintah Indonesia agar berunding dengan rakyat Papua. Namun hingga saat ini Presiden Dr. Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono belum menanggapinya. Sejak awal WPNCL telah berkomitmen untuk menggunakan cara-cara damai sebagai prinsip utama dalam menyelesaikan persoalan antara rakyat Papua dan pemerintah Indonesia. WPNCL mengganggap bahwa suatu perundingan yang setara dengan pemerintah Indonesia adalah salah satu langkah prioritas dalam menyelesaikan masalah Papua. Perundingan tersebut harus melibatkan pihak ketiga sebagai mediator, yang disetujui bersama oleh pemerintah Indonesia dan rakyat Papua.<span class="fullpost"> <br />
Insiden penangkapan Sdr. Jonah Wenda selaku juru bicara Dewan Militer Tentara Pembebasan Nasional Papua Barat (DM TPN-PB) dan sebagai aktivis WPNCL pada 6 September 2009 di Klamono Sorong, dan dipindahkan untuk ditahan di Kepolisian Daerah (Polda) Papua adalah suatu tindakan yang dapat menghambat upaya untuk mewujudkan perdamaian di Tanah Papua. Sdr. Jonah Wenda yang kemudian dibebaskan oleh Polda Papua itu sesungguhnya sedang melakukan aktivitas yang berkaitan erat dengan upaya konsolidasi dengan jaringan TPN-PB untuk mendorong proses penyelesaian damai konflik di Tanah Papua.<br />
<br />
Sejak tahun 2002, Polda Papua telah bersepakat untuk bekerja sama dengan Dewan Perwakilan Rakyat Papua (DPRP) dan komponen masyarakat sipil di Papua untuk mewujudkan perdamaian di Tanah Papua. Komitmen tersebut tertuang dalam Rekomendasi Konferensi Perdamaian untuk Papua yang diselenggarakan di Jayapura pada 15 – 16 Oktober 2002.<br />
<br />
Sejak Konferensi tersebut, komponen rakyat sipil telah membantuk gugus tugas (task force) perdamaian untuk Papua, yang melakukan sosialisasi dan rekonsiliasi dengan kelompok-kelompok rakyat sipil di Papua yang potensial menghambat upaya mewujudkan Papua sebagai Tanah Damai. Task force telah melakukan serangkaian pertemuan paralel dengan berbagai kelompok-kelompok rakyat sipil di Papua, termasuk kelompok Tentara Pembebasan Nasional (TPN) pada beberapa wilayah di Tanah Papua.<br />
<br />
Selanjutnya dilakukan pertemuan kelompok “think-tank” yang melibatkan tokoh-tokoh Papua. Pertemuan tersebut dilaksanakan pada 16 – 20 Juni 2003 di Belanda, dan dihadiri oleh 23 intelektual Papua Barat. Pertemuan ini membahas tiga agenda utama, yaitu Hak Asasi Manusia (HAM) dan Keadilan, Pembangunan dan Politik. Pertemuan ini dianggap belum mencerminkan representasi dari keseluruhan kelompok perlawanan rakyat Papua, sehingga direkomendasikan suatu pertemuan lebih luas agar dapat melibatkan seluruh pemimpin kelompok perlawanan, baik yang berada di Papua maupun di luar Papua.<br />
<br />
Pertemuan-pertemuan paralel telah mendorong dilaksanakannya lokakarya untuk menghimpun seluruh masukan dari berbagai komponen rakyat yang menginginkan terwujudnya perdamaian di Tanah Papua. Lokakarya diselenggarakan di Jayapura sebanyak 2 kali. Lokakarya pertama pada 27 Oktober 2004, melahirkan kesepakatan tentang pentingnya suatu pertemuan tingkat tinggi para pemimpin Papua guna membicarakan kendala-kendala yang dihadapi dalam menyelesaikan konflik di Papua. Sedangkan lokakarya kedua pada 20 November 2004, memandang perlu diselenggarakan pertemuan bagi seluruh pemimpin organisasi sipil di Papua, sekaligus membahas masalah-masalah teknis yang meliputi agenda, tempat, peserta dan pembiayaan tentang pertemuan para pemimpin organisasi rakyat Papua.<br />
<br />
Rekomendasi dari kedua lokakarya dimaksud, berbagai komponen rayat sipil di Tanah Papua memandang penting untuk melaksanakan pertemuan besar rakyat Papua yang meliputi komponen rakyat sipil di Tanah Papua dan di luar Tanah Papua. Pertemuan dimaksud dilaksanakan pada 28 November – 1 Desember 2005 di Papua New Guinea (PNG), yang melahirkan sejumlah keputusan, diantaranya: Membentuk wadah koordinasi nasional yang dinamakan Koalisi Nasional Papua Barat untuk Pembebasan atau West Papua National Coalition for Liberation (WPNCL); Menetapkan kedudukan Sekretariat WPNCL di Port Villa – Vanuatu; menetapkan proses konsolidasi dan rekonsiliasi bagi faksi-faksi perlawanan rakyat Papua Barat. Dari 28 perwakilan organisasi perlawanan rakyat Papua Barat yang direncanakan hadir, hanya 18 organisasi yang berpartisipasi dalam pertemuan dimaksud.<br />
<br />
Merujuk pada rekomendasi di atas, diselenggarakan pertemuan para Panglima Tentara Pembebasan Nasional pada 22 – 24 Juli 2006 di PNG, yang melahirkan sejumlah kesepakatan, diantaranya menegaskan tugas dan fungsi TPN-PB sebagai tentara revolusi yang melindungi segenap komponen Bangsa Papua Barat; memisahkan secara struktural TPN dari OPM, selanjutnya TPN hanya menjalankan peran dan tanggung jawab militer dalam masa revolusi; membentuk Dewan Militer sebagai Badan Koordinasi Tertinggi TPN-PB. Dalam pertemuan yang sama dideklarasikan komitmen untuk bekerja sama dalam membebaskan Bangsa dan Tanah Air Papua Barat; ajakan kepada setiap Panglima Komando TPN-PB untuk menyatukan pandangan, baik dalam hal program, strategi dan aksi, demi mencapai tujuan revolusi; mengakui dan menghargai prinsip-prinsip kemanusiaan yang berlaku secara universal; mendukung upaya menciptakan Papua sebagai Tanah Damai; menghimbau kepada para pemimpin organisasi perlawanan rakyat Papua Barat untuk bersatu; dan mengajak rakyat Papua Barat agar bekerja sama dalam mendukung proses persatuan Nasional.<br />
<br />
Pertemuan lanjutan TPN-PB diselenggarakan 5 – 7 April 2007 di Markas Victoria, PNG. Pertemuan ini melahirkan sejumlah kesepakatan untuk meleburkan Komando TPN-PB yang meliputi Komando “Arfai 1965”, Komando “Marvic” dan Komando “Pemka” menjadi satu Komando yang disebut Komando Tentara Pembebasan Nasional Papua Barat, di bawah pengawasan dan tanggung jawab Dewan Militer TPN-PB; membentuk Dewan Militer Tentara Pembebasan Nasional Papua Barat sebagai suatu forum pengambilan keputusan tertinggi bagi Komando TPN-PB; menetapkan Struktur Komando, dan pembagian wilayah kerja dari masing-masing Markas Komando Daerah TPN-PB; memilih dan memutuskan pejabat Dewan Militer TPN-PB beserta pejabat dalam perangkat struktur lainnya dibawah Dewan Militer TPN-PB. Dalam pertemuan yang sama dideklarasikan himbauan kepada rakyat Papua dan pihak lainnya tentang proses persatuan di lingkungan TPN-PB; peleburan Komando “Arfai 65”, Komando “Marvic” dan Komando “Pemka” ke dalam satu sistem Komando; tekad untuk menjalin kerja sama bilateral dan internasional guna menghambat perluasan jaringan kejahatan terorganisir seperti narkotika dan terorisme; sekaligus membentuk Dewan Militer Tentara Pembebasan Nasional Papua Barat (DM TPN-PB) sebagai wadah representatif yang membawahi 6 Markas Komando TPN-PB yang tersebar di seluruh wilayah Papua Barat.<br />
<br />
WPNCL selanjutnya melaksanakan Summit I pada 22 – 25 September 2007 di Malaysia yang melahirkan sejumlah kesepakatan, diantaranya WPNCL akan mengelola sebuah Sekretariat General yang berkedudukan di Port Villa – Vanuatu. Ditetapkan pula beberapa perangkat organisasi WPNCL yang meliputi Peraturan Dasar WPNCL, Peraturan Organisasi tentang Tentara Pembebasan Nasional Papua Barat, Peraturan Organisasi lainnya. Di samping itu, diputuskan juga satu delegasi Tim Negosiasi dengan mandat melakukan sosialisasi, mengajukan proposal perundingan kepada pemerintah Indonesia, termasuk melakukan perundingan dengan pemerintah Indonesia, yang dimediasi oleh pihak ketiga. Kemudian untuk menunjang kinerja dari WPNCL dan dalam upaya-upaya pengembangan perdamaian dan pencegahan konflik, dibentuk sebuah West Papua Peace Working Group (WPPWG) yang tersebar pada 4 region yaitu Asia, Eropa, Amerika dan Pasifik.<br />
<br />
WPNCL melanjutkan Summit II pada 2 – 10 April 2008 di Port Vila – Vanuatu, yang mendapat dukungan politik resmi dari pemerintah Vanuatu. Summit II WPNCL melahirkan sebuah resolusi diantaranya mendesak pemerintah Indonesia untuk segera mengadakan perundingan internasional guna menyelesaikan konflik Papua Barat secara damai dan dimediasi oleh pihak ketiga yang netral, menghimbau masyarakat internasional agar mendesak pemerintah Indonesia supaya membuka akses jurnalis dan organisasi-organisasi internasional untuk masuk ke Papua.<br />
<br />
TPN-PB sebagai salah satu pilar pendukung WPNCL berhasil menyelenggarakan Rapat Kerja Nasional I pada 29 – 31 Oktober 2008 di PNG, yang melahirkan sejumlah program bagi DM TPN-PB. Kemudian dilanjutkan dengan Rapat Kerja Nasional I WPNCL pada 4 – 8 Juni 2009 yang melahirkan sejumlah program dan arah kerja bagi WPNCL untuk periode kerja pertama.<br />
<br />
Akhirnya kami percaya bahwa pemerintahan Dr. Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono (SBY), memiliki komitmen yang baik untuk menyelesaikan masalah Papua secara damai. Oleh karenanya, SBY dapat segera membuka komunikasi politik dengan WPNCL dalam rangka menyiapkan langkah-langkah menuju perundingan damai yang setara, bermartabat dan demokratis.<br />
<br />
Untuk penjelasan lebih rinci, hubungi Rex Rumakiek, Sekretaris Jenderal lewat +61 414247468<br />
<br />
atau Wakil Ketua WPNCL, Dr. John Ondawame on +678 439759026 atau Vanuatu Mission, Saudara Andy Ayamiseba, melalui: + 678 40808 or 60651.<br />
<br />
Untuk hal-hal tentang hak-hak asasi secara umum bisa hubungi Ms. Paula Makabory, Perwakilan Internasional Papua Institute of Human Rights Study and Advocacy, melalui: +61 402547517.<br />
</span>papuatodayhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14548843079715458975noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4931382601439810424.post-60770412797614949472009-10-03T04:17:00.000-07:002009-10-03T04:20:40.427-07:00Papuan Fault Lines: Part II:Nationalist Dreams<br />By John M. Gorrindo<br />Indonesian Correspondent<br /><br />1969’s Act of Free Choice was only the more obvious betrayal suffered by Papuan nationalists. The expectation of self-determination as inspired by the Dutch was in many ways more damaging, for the Papuans were to feed on dreams the Dutch could never materialize. <span class="fullpost"> <br /><br />During the interim between Indonesian independence and the 1962 signing of the New York Agreement, those few Papuan tribes who interacted with their Dutch colonialists in all manner of exchange were put on the fast track headed for Papuan independence. For those West Papuans drawn into the impending but unforeseen historical shift about to transform Papua forever, Dutch support and preparations fueled both a nationalist hope, and maybe more importantly- a nationalist identity. With the notion of a nationalist identity, so arose a Papuan elite as well. Amongst the elite, there wasn’t unanimity as concerns taking up the responsibility for becoming a new nation state. Some Papuan leaders favored incorporation into Indonesia. As such, tribal divides existed. But internal differences between the few coastal peoples caught-up in the independence movement were very different in kind as compared with the dynamics of the coastal versus highland tribal groups. Nonetheless, direct Dutch involvement in making ready a transition to statehood prompted a growing sense of a "Papuan identity" amongst both coastal and some highland tribes.<br /><br />Midwife to the birth of Papuan Nationalism, the Dutch not only encouraged but nearly charged the West Papuans to politically ready themselves for decolonization. By the time the Act of Free Choice quashed these hopes, several homegrown political organizations had been formed and their plans for independence circulated throughout much of the territory for a decade. Nationalist dreams and aspirations were freely being discussed in Papuan meeting halls as presided over by Papuan-created and controlled political councils.<br /><br />The First “Papuans”<br /><br />From the turn of the 20th century until the outbreak of World War II and the Japanese invasion, the territorial administration of what was still known as Dutch New Guinea was composed of three factions- a top echelon of Dutch appointed by the government in the Netherlands, and a mix of both Indonesian and indigenous Papuan civil servants. For decades the Dutch had trained and transferred Indonesians from places such as the nearby Mulukas into Papua to take up administrative duties. As the concerted missionary work that had long been at work in Papua had succeeded in converting and educating select tribes, Papuans themselves began to step forward and take a place in the governance or their own land. These few individuals and their families constituted the first Papuan elite.<br /><br />But just who were the "Papuan elite” exactly, and what were the ethnic, lingual, and tribal fault lines that distinguished and potentially divided them from other Papuans? Papuans from three areas dominated the group hand picked by the Dutch and who would become the first to receive transfer of power. They originated from the small coastal city of Hollandia (the Dutch’s main territorial administrative center and later renamed Jayapura) and two small islands- Biak and Yapen (including the important town and area of Serui). Both of these offshore islands are located in the northwest, just east of the Bird's Head peninsula and west of Hollandia. Because of their coastal proximity to Hollandia, all three areas and their inhabitants had long histories of contact with the Dutch and other foreign trade powers, including Asians such as the Chinese and Japanese. A significant number of these people were the sons and daughters of literate parents, had been educated in Dutch schools, were conversant in the Dutch language, had either been converted into Christianity or had had contact with Dutch missionaries, and generally understood much about European ways.<br /><br />Interestingly, the two islands very much saw the future of Papua differently. Biak was strongly supportive of Papuan independence whereas Serui thought it better to incorporate into the Indonesia republic. Despite this substantial difference, the two groups together embodied those tribes in Papua best suited to participate in Papua’s administration, no matter who would be in control. They saw themselves as important stakeholders, no matter the outcome of the decolonization process. Above and beyond their own fault lines, they acted more in mutual cooperation than not.<br /><br />After General MacArthur’s 1944 invasion of Hollandia, the Japanese occupation of West Papua came to an end. The Dutch quickly reestablished themselves and their new Dutch Resident, J.P.K. van Eechoud, a former policeman, immediately set to work establishing the special schools for training young Papuans to become teachers, police, nurses, and civil officials. These schools were built mainly in the coastal communities already mentioned. Only 40,000 Papuans inhabited the communities so-effected and that out of a total West Papuan population of 700,000. To insure inclusion, Van Eechoud did his best to seek out young candidates for his training centers from all around the territory “so as to broaden local identities into a Papuan one.” Despite his best recruiting efforts, one-half of all qualified candidates came from the ranks of those very few tribes living along the coast and close to the schools themselves.<br /><br />Van Eechoud’s students understood the essentially political purpose of his policies. He told them as early as 1945 that they had to study diligently because they were “the new Papuans for a new New Guinea.” The Papuan graduates of Van Eechoud’s schools were in some senses the “first” Papuans as well as the first generation of Papuan nationalists in that they were the ones that began to think of themselves as being members of a broader pan-Papuan society, not merely a member of a particular ethno-linguistic group.<br /><br />For his dedication to the Papuan people and their aspirations for self-determination, Van Eechoud was revered as a father figure by the Papuans. He was honored by his students with the name “Bapak Papua”- Father of Papua. Van Eechoud may be the sole honoree and occupant of an otherwise empty pantheon of those Dutchman lionized in their lifetime by any significant group of indigenous peoples in the greater archipelago.<br /><br />Van Eechoud’s mission to prepare West Papuans for ultimate decolonization was fully incorporated into Dutch territorial policy in1952 when the Dutch officially recognized the right of Papuans to self-determination and systematically put the territory on a full-blown independence track. Van Eechoud’s like-minded successor, Th. H. Bot, directed policy towards political objectives. He ordered Dutch officials to recruit Papuans qualified to become potential candidates for representative councils, government advisors, and given a political science education in general. Arrangements were made to send these candidates abroad to Holland and other places as well.<br /><br />Like Van Eechoud, Bot recognized that the rugged terrain and ethnic diversity of West Papua hadn’t ever allowed for a national awareness amongst the hundreds of tribes, and he moved to address the issue head-on. Along with the educational institutions already set into motion, Bot promoted a Papuan Volunteers Corps (PVC) and the landmark New Guinea Council which was, in effect, the first Papuan deliberative body made up almost exclusively of indigenous Papuans. Bot also believed it necessary that in order for Papuans to establish a national identity, they must come to see themselves belonging to the same peoples as indigenous to the Australian-administered territories, and not to any Malay Indonesian race or ethnicity. This would be a Melanesian identification, belonging to an independent state, but linked in all important ways to the West. A greater geostrategic sense was factored into Bot’s modus operandi. Of paramount importance was to insure not only a free Papua, but a Papuan identity free from any sense of belonging to Indonesia.<br /><br />These developments irked the Indonesian government to no end, and it stepped up its international protests. After a dozen years of growing tension over West Papuan territory, things came to a head with the election of President John F. Kennedy in November 1960. A change of American administrations provided the catalyst for both a flurry of Dutch diplomatic proposals and insurgencies by the Indonesian military. Aggressions into Papuan territorial land and waters took place in November 1960, September 1961, and most significantly in January 1962 under the new operational name of Mandala headed by Brigadier General Suharto.<br /><br />The uptick of Indonesian violence in 1961-1962 was the direct result of at least two major events. First, in September 1961 Dutch Foreign Minister Luns presented a proposal to the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) on West New Guinea’s future. The “Luns Plan” proposed an end to Dutch sovereignty and the establishment of a UN administration in “West New Guinea” to supervise and organize a plebiscite to decide the territory’s final status. In November the proposal came to a UNGA floor vote and passed, but did not garner the two-thirds vote required, so it failed. Indonesia was determined that the vote would not be raised in the UN again.<br /><br />Second- and even more alarming to President Sukarno- was the growing projected power of newly formed nationalist organizations in West Papua presided over by indigenous Papuans themselves. This was perhaps the most ominous sign for the Indonesians that the Dutch were doing everything possible to make a success of handing over colonial control.<br /><br />One of the most important of these political groups was the already mentioned West New Guinea Council. The council was just as alarmed by the Luns plan as was Sukarno. As Luns never conferred with the Papuans over his plan, there was resentment given their exclusion from political proposals deeply affecting their future. In rapid response to the proposal, members of West New Guinea Council and another prominent Papuan political organization, PARMA, convened jointly in Hollandia on October 19, 1961. The delegates were drawn from most regions of the territory, they included both Christians and Muslims, and all but one of them was Papuan. They elected seventeen people to form a Komite Nasional Papua. The Komite knew they must be proactive in asserting the Papuan preference for self-determination. They immediately issued a Manifest Politik making demands to the Dutch that Papuan voices be heard in the decolonization process.<br /><br />The Manifest asked that the Netherlands New Guinea be renamed West Papua, and it called for the immediate use of Papuan national symbols alongside the Dutch ones. As addressed to the New Guinea Council and the government of the Netherlands, the core of the document stated:<br /><br />"On the basis of the desire of our people for independence, we urge through the mediation of the Komite Nasional and our popular representative body, the New Guinea Council, that the governments of Netherlands New Guinea and the Netherlands take action to ensure that, as of November 1st, our flag be flown beside the Netherlands flag; our national anthem, Hai Tanahku Papua, be sung along with the Wilhelmus; the name of our land become West Papua; the name of our people become Papuan.<br /><br />On this basis we the Papuan people demand to obtain our own place among the other free peoples and nations. In addition, we, the Papuan people, wish to contribute to the maintenance of the freedom of the world."<br /><br />The Manifest asked that the Netherlands New Guinea be renamed West Papua. The Manifest Politik was the first assertion of the Papuan demand to establish a new nation state.<br /><br />But the raising of what would be known as the “Morning Star” flag did not mean that the Komite Nasional intended to declare the actual transfer of sovereignty. To that symbolic end, the flag was to be flown not alone but alongside the Dutch tricolors. So too, the decision to raise the flag was not unanimously supported. Some council members were concerned that ordinary Papuans would interpret a flag-raising as a declaration of independence and were not in support. Neither did the Manifest demand nor declare outright independence- only that Papuans be given a voice in the terms of decolonization.<br /><br />Raising of the Morning Star Flag<br /><br />The first raising of the flag was organized by the Komite Nasional and took place in front of the New Guinea Council building in Hollandia on December 1, 1961. Flag raising ceremonies took place throughout the territory as well. There was substantial interest shown by the Papuan people both in areas of strong support (such as Biak) or where support for Indonesia had deep roots (Serui & Yapen).<br /><br />Sukarno’s retaliation was swift. On December 19, 1961 and less than three weeks after the flag raising, he gave his important TRIKORA speech (peoples’ triple command). It called for the total mobilization of the Indonesian people to “liberate” West Irian. Quickly following he ordered Suharto to organize Operasi Mandala and begin a new wave of military insurgencies.<br /><br />This wave of insurgencies was in total a military failure. The first assault of Operasi Mandala occurred on January 15, 1962. Having disembarked from Jakarta and consisting of four torpedo boats and one hundred fifteen insurgents, the group was intercepted by Dutch in the Arafura Sea and more than half were killed including the operational commander, Commodore Yous Sudarso, Deputy Chief of the Indonesian naval staff. Known as the Battle of Arafura Sea, this insurgency was the third consecutive attack against the Dutch in West Papua to fail miserably since the September previous.<br /><br />Sukarno’s military aggression constituted both a tactical failure and strategic success to the extent it signaled the international community Indonesian willingness to engage the Dutch in all-out war over the Papuan question.<br /><br />The United Nations and the Kennedy administration were soon to respond all to Indonesia’s liking.<br /><br />NOTE: This article is part of a series. Part III is soon to follow<br /><br />Source: theseoultimes.com<br /></span>papuatodayhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14548843079715458975noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4931382601439810424.post-81690845199994996772009-10-03T04:03:00.000-07:002009-10-03T04:28:46.680-07:00Fault Lines in Papua: Part INationalist Dreams<br />By John M. Gorrindo<br />Indonesian Correspondent<br /><br />The long list of names Papua has been given over the past one hundred years is testament to the interminable struggle and territorial chaos that has plagued the easternmost part of Indonesia. Under Dutch colonial rule, the territory was called Dutch New Guinea or West New Guinea. Once wrested from the Dutch by the emerging republic of Indonesia some sixteen years after World War II, Indonesia’s founding father and first president Sukarno renamed it Irian Barat (West Irian). After deposing Sukarno in 1965, Indonesia’s second president, Suharto, found Irian Jaya (Victorious Irian) a more glorious name lending itself to a greater sense of Indonesian territorial integrity. With the fall of Suharto’s thirty-two year New Order regime- and with some deference to the Papuan people in mind- a successor to Suharto, Indonesian President Wahid, recast the name to simply Papua. And finally, subsequent to Special Autonomy being granted the region by Jakarta in 2002, some members of the homegrown Papuan nationalist movement finally took matters into their own hands, and in an act of defiance, claimed a name of its own- West Papua.<span class="fullpost"> <br /><br />Though the historically convoluted turmoil in West Papua is well understood and amply documented in international bodies such as the United Nations, academic circles around the world, and inside the state departments of the world’s leading capitals, the island’s agonized peoples have received scant attention or support from the international community. Realpolitik determines the world’s crisis agenda, and since World War II, Papua’s struggle to simply avoid annihilation let alone achieve a small measure of autonomy has yet to be put on anybody’s overburdened triage list.<br /><br />In part this is a measure of how conflicted the world truly is as full-blown wars and fears of nuclear proliferation have put a vice-like grip on those leading actors who populate the world’s diplomatic stage and captured the attention of everyone else whose mission it is to seek peaceful resolution to the world’s greatest problems. But that doesn’t begin to explain anything about West Papua itself, or its history.<br /><br />The hands-off policy towards West Papua on behalf of the United Nations as well as world and Southeast Asian regional superpowers has been much to the advantage of Indonesia’s domestic policies, its nationalist economic development, and most ironically even to its emerging democracy. Even though gross human rights violations, economic and racial discrimination, and rampant inequalities significantly characterize Indonesia’s treatment of the indigenous population of Papua’s black, Austro-Melanesians, the world has been content to look the other way, choosing rather to celebrate Indonesia’s vaunted modern progress. It has been a conscious choice on the part of the international community.<br /><br />The saga surrounding the incorporation of West Papua into greater Indonesia provides a profound lesson for any student of 20th century geopolitics. But prior to opening that Pandora’s box of intrigue any serious investigation has to contemplate a question more fundamental to understanding the current fate of the remote region- how does a scattered population of three hundred ethno-lingual groups living in one of the world’s most intractable wildernesses take the forced journey required to bridge the chasm from the Stone Age to the 21st century in the span of a few decades and survive?<br /><br />Consider this: Recent scientific expeditions into the remote mountainous interior of West Papua continue to discover still untouched environments where the unique animal life found there are approachable and can actually be handled. The terrestrial fauna experience no fear because they have never even been hunted by a human being. Pictures of biologists cuddling docile giant rats or endemic egg-laying echidnas would otherwise be thought of as having been staged, the animals so-darted with tranquilizers. Then, of course, there is the elusive hunt to photograph the some four dozen or so species of Birds of Paradise and Bowery birds that constitute the most beautiful related collection of winged creatures in the world. “Lost World” is a term often used to describe these only recently chartered wildernesses.<br /><br />There are equally amazing reports of solitary individuals appearing from out of the swamps or jungles of West Papua who belong to tribes whose existence is still unbeknownst to even the other tribes in the area.<br /><br />The answer to the survival question of an isolated collection of small tribes in a vast wilderness rich in natural resources lies in the fact that some of those tribes have not been as isolated as one might think. Coastal Papuans have had significant contact over periods of hundreds of years with several European and Asian powers- both in trade and as colonial subjects. They have learned foreign languages, been educated according to Western practice, and have adapted to the ways of invading colonial powers. Tribes of the interior were much more removed from the rest of the world. This profound difference in terms of historical contact with outsiders has created a fault line of its own in the history of Papuan Nationalism.<br /><br />Geographically, West Papua occupies only the western half of a greater island, its eastern portion being the independent nation of Papua New Guinea (PNG). With no thought given to ethno or geographic boundaries, their shared border lies along the 141st parallel, and virtually splits the island- which is the second largest in the world- in half. Along West Papua’s one thousand meter spine runs the nearly unbroken chain of densely forested mountains known to the locals as the Pegunungan Maoke, or Snow Mountains. The Maoke’s grandest glacial covered palisades are the tallest peaks to be found between the Americas and the Himalayas, some reaching altitudes of over 5,000 meters. Once reaching sea level, the labyrinthine river drainage flowing down the Maoke’s steep southwestern facing escarpment on route to the Arafura Sea deposits its muddy load into vast deltas, creating the largest area of lowland swamps on the planet.<br /><br />From snow-covered summits to mosquito-ridden swamp, such environmental extremes were considered impenetrable for hundreds of years by European explorers and colonial interlopers. Even though the Dutch had established themselves in the territory nearly four hundred years ago, it was only in few very small port settlements scattered along the coast that served as trading posts to other colonial holdings such as the nearby Malukus to the west. Missionaries and anthropologists made the first foyers into the wilds of Papua, but it wasn’t until the early 20th century that explorations into the interior were organized, and only in 1938 that the now-famous tourist destination of the Baliem Valley, home to the Grand Valley Dani, was first encountered by the Western world. It is in the greater highland areas like the Baliem Valley that to this day the largest percentage of indigenous Papuans still lives.<br /><br />Indonesia’s proclaimed independence in 1945 nearly coincided with the discovery of the Baliem Valley. West Papua soon found itself caught up in the revolution of decolonization that was sweeping across Africa and Asia, with Indonesia being in the vanguard. The Dutch were finally forced both militarily and by means of international pressure to cede the bulk of their East Indies holding over to the newly formed Indonesian Republic- all except for West Papua. In 1949 at the Hague, Netherlands, the Dutch and Indonesian governments signed The Round Table Council Agreement and as a concession to “Netherlands nationalist feeling,” Indonesia agreed to leave Papua under Dutch occupation. Indonesia continued to fight hard against the provision, though, resurrecting the argument vociferously and to growing effect throughout the 1950’s.<br /><br />Indonesia’s claim to Papua was based on the legal principle of “Uti possidetis juris”. Originating with Roman law, the principle was picked up again with the 19th century rise of nationalism in Europe and consequently both during the negotiation of the Versailles Treaty after World War I , the Yalta Treaty after World War II (though the Soviet Union did not abide by it), and the formation of the United Nations in 1945. “Uti possidetis” declares that new states would adopt the boundaries of their colonial predecessors. The United Nations helped administer this boundary-shaping principle during the sweeping decolonization that followed directly after World War II. During that revolutionary period which reshaped the geopolitical map of the world order, independence leaders such as Sukarno, Nasser, and Nehru seized upon the principle in their struggles to secure national boundaries for their new nation states.<br /><br />After the signing of the Round Table Council Agreement, President Sukarno was quick to draw upon this rationale in his repeated calls for the incorporation of Papua. In addition, Sukarno declared Papua as part of Indonesia as historically defined by the sphere of influence established by ancient empires of maritime Java and Sumatra, most importantly those of Srivijaya and Majapahit. Not stopping there, Sukarno added divine justification:<br /><br />“The Indonesia nation is the totality of all the human beings who, according to geopolitics ordained by God Almighty, live throughout the unity of the entire archipelago of Indonesia from the northern tip of Sumatra to Irian.”<br /><br />There also existed the geopolitical fear on Indonesia’s part that the Dutch would use Papua as a base from which it would do everything it could to subvert Indonesia’s territorial integrity by sowing seeds of separatism for instance in the nearby Malukan islands, where significant portions of the people were resistant of being incorporated into Indonesia and still held sympathies for the Dutch.<br /><br />Territorial integrity became Indonesia’s highest priority during the country’s fledgling years. Sukarno never ceased to press the international community on the Papuan issue and made it a centerpiece of his agenda as advanced to all world leaders he contacted. It became evident to the world’s powers that Indonesia was willing to go to war with the Dutch over territorial possession of Papua if the Dutch could not be otherwise persuaded to cede their last holdings in the archipelago.<br /><br />With the rise of a new global nationalism based on the principle of self-determinism, history was on the side of the Indonesian Republic. The Dutch struggled to hold on to Papua but by the mid-1950’s had quietly self-conceded that it had to choose between handing over Papua to the Indonesians, or help the Papuans to become independent and sovereign. Time was of the essence. Those elite Papuans who had been given education and civil service positions in local Dutch administration were further primed for leadership of a free Papua. But this gesture toward the Papuans was more mercenary than not. First and foremost, the Dutch in no way wished for West Papua to fall into Indonesian hands. There was not unanimity of support for Papuan independence amongst the Dutch themselves, though, as Dutch business interests were fearful of losing their existing and future contracts with the Indonesian government. Indonesia was adverse to the Dutch as colonialists, but hadn’t gone as far as to turn away their investments.<br /><br />The Netherland’s push to prepare Papuans for self-governance came too little, too late. Cold War politics would intervene to evacuate the Dutch and seal Papua’s fate. In 1961, the Dutch were pressured by the newly elected Kennedy administration of the United States to virtually hand over Papua to the Indonesians. By the time Dutch preparation for Papuan independence had begun in earnest, the Cold War had quickly evolved into a worldwide struggle between the United States and the communist blocs of the Soviet Union and Communist China.<br /><br />Compounding this was Indonesia’s strategic place in the greater conflict. The geopolitical repercussions had an overriding affect on the Papuan situation. The Kennedy administration was concerned that siding with the colonial Dutch in the struggle over West Papua would alienate President Sukarno, helping to deliver Indonesia into the communist sphere of influence. Kennedy demanded the Dutch take heed to Cold War priorities and fall in line with American foreign policy objectives. A free Papua was not in the offing, Kennedy signaled in a now declassified letter to the Dutch government. Indonesia would declare war over anything less than full incorporation of the vast territory, and Kennedy didn’t want any further destabilization in greater South East Asia than already existed in neighboring Indo China as the Viet Nam war was in its nascent stages.<br /><br />Isolated internationally and not willing to go to war with Indonesia alone, the Dutch were forced to accede to the U.S. negotiated New York Agreement and became signatories with Indonesia in August of 1962. The agreement transferred responsibility for the territory to Indonesia following a brief transitional period under the United Nations Temporary Executive Authority (UNTEA). The plan also provided for “an ascertainment” of the will of the Papuans on their future political status to be held under UN supervision. Implementation of the plan and the handing over of Papua into co-administrative hands of the Indonesian government was made in May of 1963.<br /><br />The UN’s position as overseer turned out to be one of inherent political weakness. They were powerless to prevent the sham elections of 1969- ironically known as “Act of Free Choice”- where a small cadre of some one thousand hand-picked Papuans was given the power to choose on behalf of the greater population of Papuan people between self-determination and becoming a part of the Republic of Indonesia. This in lieu of a true plebiscite- and it is reported that those Papuans who actually voted in the “Act of Free Choice” did so at Indonesian gun point. Incredulously, the electoral results were unanimous save one vote in support of incorporation into Indonesia. Even more striking was that no one in the international community- including the United Nations- filed any complaint as per this final and deciding phase of the New York Agreement.<br /><br />Suharto was Indonesian president during the “Act of Free Choice” elections, and it was his administration that designed, arranged for, and supervised over them. No checks and balances were in put in place as the Indonesians were in full control. Firmly supported in the West for his anti-communist leanings, Suharto was given free license to proceed in West Papua as he so chose. The fate of West Papua was a fait de complet, and the “Act of Free Choice” just so much pro forma protocol whose outcome had been predetermined.<br /><br />In the form of “Act of Free Choice,” the international community had betrayed the only opportunity Papua has yet to have in becoming an independent state. Not a single nation protested the sham elections. Nor did the UN. And to have the greatest democratic force in the world, the United States, be the determinate factor behind the betrayal fully exacerbated the treachery. Realpolitik had determined the victor and the vanquished.<br /><br />(NOTE: this article is part one in a series and is to be continued)<br /><br />Source: theseoultimes.com<br /></span>papuatodayhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14548843079715458975noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4931382601439810424.post-48267827768273514472009-10-03T03:58:00.000-07:002009-10-03T04:29:20.974-07:00Melanesian suffering in Indonesia's Papua provinceo the Pacific's near neighbours and Melanesian family now, where violence around the Freeport mine is just one of the problems in Indonesia's Papua province. Others include high HIV rates and the ongoing conflict between the Free Papua Movement - known as OPM - and Indonesian security forces.<span class="fullpost"> <br /><br />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.<br /><br /><i>Presenter: Sen Lam<br />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 </i> <ul class="storyMedia"><li class="first"><strong>Listen:</strong></li><li><a href="http://www.abc.net.au/ra/pacbeat/stories/m1794362.asx">Windows Media</a></li></ul> <p>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?<br /><br />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.<br /><br />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?<br /><br />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.<br /><br />LAM: Stuart Upton, from the University of New South Wales. You've heard what Jim Elmslie has to say. What's your reply?<br /><br />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.<br /><br />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.<br /><br />LAM: But one might argue though, that the Melanesian culture is very distinct from the rest of Indonesia, and certainly from Javanese culture?<br /><br />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.<br /><br />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?<br /><br />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.<br /><br />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.<br /><br />ANNOUNCER : On Radio Australia, this is Connect Asia with Sen Lam.<br /><br />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?<br /><br />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.<br /><br />LAM: But where the people movement is concerned, what sort of data do we have to work with?<br /><br />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.<br /><br />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?<br /><br />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.<br /><br />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?<br /><br />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.<br /><br />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?<br /><br />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.<br /><br />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?<br /><br />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.</p>Source :www.radioaustralia.net.au<br /><br /></span>papuatodayhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14548843079715458975noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4931382601439810424.post-69081627198209078292009-10-03T03:46:00.000-07:002009-10-03T04:02:46.048-07:00PerajamINI sebuah cerita yang telah lama beredar, sebuah kisah yang termasyhur dalam Injil, yang dimulai di sebuah pagi di pelataran Baitullah, ketika Yesus duduk mengajar.<span class="fullpost"><br /><br />Orang-orang mendengarkan. Tiba-tiba guru Taurat dan orang Farisi datang. Mereka membawa seorang perempuan yang langsung mereka paksa berdiri di tengah orang banyak.<br /><br />Perempuan itu tertangkap basah berzina, kata mereka. ”Hukum Taurat Musa memerintahkan kita untuk melempari perempuan-perempuan yang demikian dengan batu,” kata para pemimpin Yahudi itu pula. Mereka tampak mengetahui hukum itu, tapi toh mereka bertanya: ”Apa yang harus kami lakukan?”<br /><br />Bagi Yohanes, yang mencatat kejadian ini, guru Taurat dan orang Farisi itu memang berniat ”menjebak” Yesus. Mereka ingin agar sosok yang mereka panggil ”Guru” itu (mungkin dengan cemooh?) mengucapkan sesuatu yang salah.<br /><br />Saya seorang muslim, bukan penafsir Injil. Saya hanya mengira-ngira latar belakang kejadian ini: para pakar Taurat dan kaum Farisi agaknya curiga, Yesus telah mengajarkan sikap beragama yang keliru. Diduga bahwa ia tak mempedulikan hukum yang tercantum di Kitab Suci; bukankah ia berani melanggar larangan bekerja di ladang di hari Sabbath? Mungkin telah mereka dengar, bagi Yesus iman tak bisa diatur pakar hukum. Beriman adalah menghayati hidup yang terus-menerus diciptakan Tuhan dan dirawat dengan cinta-kasih.<br /><br />Tapi bagi para pemimpin Yahudi itu sikap meremehkan hukum Taurat tak bisa dibiarkan. Terutama di mata kaum Farisi yang, di antara kelompok penganut Yudaisme lain, paling gigih ingin memurnikan hidup sehari-hari dengan menjaga konsistensi akidah.<br /><br />Maka pagi itu mereka ingin ”menjebak” Yesus.<br /><br />Tapi Yesus tak menjawab. Ia hanya membungkuk dan menuliskan sesuatu dengan jari-jarinya di tanah. Dan ketika ”pemimpin Yahudi itu terus-menerus bertanya,” demikian menurut Yohanes, Yesus pun berdiri. Ia berkata, ”Barangsiapa di antara kamu yang tidak berdosa, hendaklah ia yang pertama melemparkan batu kepada perempuan itu.” Lalu Yesus membungkuk lagi dan menulis di tanah.<br /><br />Suasana mendadak senyap. Tak ada yang bertindak. Tak seorang pun siap melemparkan batu, memulai rajam itu. Bahkan ”satu demi satu orang-orang itu pergi, didahului oleh yang tertua.” Akhirnya di sana tinggal Yesus dan perempuan yang dituduh pezina itu, kepada siapa ia berkata: ”Aku pun tak menghukum engkau. Pergilah, dan jangan berbuat dosa lagi mulai dari sekarang.”<br /><br />Tak ada rajam. Tak ada hukuman. Kejadian pagi itu kemudian jadi tauladan: menghukum habis-habisan seorang pendosa tak akan mengubah apa-apa; sebaliknya empati, uluran hati, dan pengampunan adalah laku yang transformatif.<br /><br />Tapi bagi saya yang lebih menarik adalah momen ketika Yesus membungkuk dan menuliskan sesuatu dengan jarinya ke atas tanah. Apa yang digoreskannya?<br /><br />Tak ada yang tahu. Saya hanya mengkhayalkan: itu sebuah isyarat. Jika dengan jarinya Yesus menuliskan sejumlah huruf pada pasir, ia hendak menunjukkan bahwa pada tiap konstruksi harfiah niscaya ada elemen yang tak menetap. Kata-kata—juga dalam hukum Taurat—tak pernah lepas dari bumi, meskipun bukan dibentuk oleh bumi. Kata-kata disusun oleh tubuh (”jari-jari”), meskipun bukan perpanjangan tubuh. Pasir itu akan diinjak para pejalan: di atas permukaan bumi, memang akan selalu melintas makna, tapi ada yang niscaya berubah atau hilang dari makna itu.<br /><br />Di pelataran Bait itu, Yesus memang tampak tak menampik ketentuan Taurat. Ia tak meniadakan sanksi rajam itu. Tapi secara radikal ia ubah hukum jadi sebuah unsur dalam pengalaman, jadi satu bagian dari hidup orang per orang di sebuah saat di sebuah tempat. Hukum tak lagi dituliskan untuk siapa saja, di mana saja, kapan saja. Ketika Yesus berbicara ”barangsiapa di antara kamu yang tak berdosa”, hukum serta-merta bersentuhan dengan ”siapa”, bukan ”apa”—dengan jiwa, hasrat, ingatan tiap orang yang hadir di pelataran Bait di pagi itu.<br /><br />Para calon perajam itu bukan lagi mesin pendukung akidah. Mendadak mereka melihat diri masing-masing. Aku sendiri tak sepenuhnya cocok dengan hukum Allah. Aku sebuah situasi kompleks yang terbentuk oleh perkalian yang simpang-siur. Kemarin apa saja yang kulakukan? Nanti apa pula?<br /><br />Dan di saat itu juga, si tertuduh bukan lagi hanya satu eksemplar dari ”perempuan-perempuan yang demikian”. Ia satu sosok, wajah, dan riwayat yang singular, tak terbandingkan—dan sebab itu tak terumuskan. Ia kisah yang kemarin tak ada, besok tak terulang, dan kini tak sepenuhnya kumengerti. Siapa gerangan namanya, kenapa ia sampai didakwa?<br /><br />Perempuan itu, juga tiap orang yang hadir di pelataran itu, adalah nasib yang datang entah dari mana dan entah akan ke mana. Chairil Anwar benar: ”Nasib adalah kesunyian masing-masing”.<br /><br />Dalam esainya tentang kejadian di pelataran Baitullah itu, René Girard—yang menganggap mimesis begitu penting dalam hidup manusia—menunjukkan satu adegan yang menarik: setelah terhenyak mendengar kata-kata Yesus itu, ”satu demi satu orang-orang itu pergi….” Pada saat itulah, dorongan mimesis—hasrat manusia menirukan yang dilakukan dan diperoleh orang lain—berhenti sebagai faktor yang menguasai perilaku. Dari kancah orang ramai itu muncul individu, orang seorang. ”Teks Injil itu,” kata Girard, ”dapat dibaca hampir secara alegoris tentang munculnya ke-person-an yang sejati dari gerombolan yang primordial.”<br /><br />Tapi kepada siapakah sebenarnya agama berbicara: kepada tiap person dalam kesunyian masing-masing? Atau kepada ”gerombolan”? Saya tak tahu. Di pelataran itu Yesus membungkuk, membisu, hanya mengguratkan jarinya. Ketika ia berdiri, ia berkata ke arah orang banyak. Tapi sepotong kalimat itu tak berteriak.<br /><br />Goenawan Mohamad<br /><br />Source: Tempointeraktif.com<br /></span>papuatodayhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14548843079715458975noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4931382601439810424.post-38450684680524935002007-10-30T05:25:00.000-07:002009-10-30T05:27:36.668-07:00Indonesia's 1969 Takeover of West Papua Not by "Free Choice"<b>Document Release Marks 35th Anniversary</b><br />
of Controversial Vote and Annexation<br />
Secret Files Show U.S. Support for Indonesia,<br />
Human Rights Abuses by Indonesian Military<br />
Edited by Brad Simpson<br />
simpbrad@isu.edu / 208-282-3870<br />
Posted July 9, 2004<br />
<br />
Washington, D.C. - July 8, 2004 - "You should tell [Suharto] that we understand the problems they face in West Irian," national security adviser Henry Kissinger wrote President Nixon on the eve of Nixon's July 1969 visit to Indonesia. On the 35th anniversary of West Papua's so-called "Act of Free Choice" and Indonesia's first direct presidential elections, the National Security Archive posted recently declassified documents on U.S. policy deliberations leading to Indonesia's controversial 1969 annexation of the territory. The documents detail United States support for Indonesia's heavy-handed takeover of West Papua despite overwhelming Papuan opposition and United Nations requirements for genuine self-determination.<span class="fullpost"> <br />
<br />
<b>Background</b><br />
When Indonesia gained its independence from the Netherlands in 1949, the Dutch government retained control over the territory of West New Guinea. From 1949 until 1961 the Indonesian government sought to "recover" West New Guinea (later known as West Irian or West Papua), arguing that the territory, a part of the former Netherlands East Indies, rightfully belonged with Indonesia.<br />
<br />
In late 1961, after repeated and unsuccessful attempts to secure its goals through the United Nations, Indonesia's President Sukarno declared a military mobilization and threatened to invade West New Guinea and annex it by force. The Kennedy administration, fearing that U.S. opposition to Indonesian demands might push the country toward Communism, sponsored talks between the Netherlands and Indonesia in the spring of 1962. Negotiations took place under the shadow of ongoing Indonesian military incursions into West New Guinea and the threat of an Indonesian invasion.<br />
<br />
The U.S.-sponsored talks led to the August 1962 New York Agreement, which awarded Indonesia control of West New Guinea (which it promptly renamed West Irian) after a brief transitional period overseen by the UN. (Note 1) The agreement obligated Jakarta to conduct an election on self-determination with UN assistance no later than 1969. Once in control, however, Indonesia quickly moved to repress political dissent by groups demanding outright independence for the territory.<br />
<br />
U.S. officials understood at the outset that Indonesia would never allow West Irian to become independent and that it was unlikely to ever allow a meaningful act of self-determination to take place. The Johnson and Nixon administrations were equally reluctant to challenge Indonesian control over West Irian, especially after the conservative anti-Communist regime of General Suharto took over in 1966 following an abortive coup attempt which led to the slaughter of an estimated 500,000 alleged Communists. Suharto quickly moved to liberalize the Indonesian economy and open it to the West, passing a new foreign investment law in late 1967. The first company to take advantage of the law was the American mining company Freeport Sulphur, which gained concessions to vast tracts of land in West Irian containing gold and copper reserves. (Note 2)<br />
<br />
Over six weeks from July to August 1969, U.N. officials conducted the so-called "Act of Free Choice." Under the articles of the New York Agreement (Article 18) all adult Papuans had the right to participate in an act of self-determination to be carried out in accordance with international practice. Instead, Indonesian authorities selected 1022 West Papuans to vote publicly and unanimously in favor of integration with Indonesia.<br />
<br />
Despite significant evidence that Indonesia had failed to meet its international obligations, in November 1969 the United Nations "took note" of the "Act of Free Choice" and its results, thereby lending support of the world body to Indonesia's annexation.<br />
<br />
Thirty-five years later, as Indonesia holds its first-ever direct Presidential elections, the international community has come to question the validity of Jakarta's takeover of West Papua and the ongoing human rights abuses there. In March, 88 members of the Irish Parliament urged United Nations Secretary General Kofi Annan to review the United Nations' role in the 1969 Act of Free Choice, joining South African Archibishop Desmond Tutu and scores of non-governmental organizations and European Parliamentarians. On June 28, 2004, nineteen U.S. Senators sent a letter to Annan urging the appointment of a Special Representative to Indonesia to monitor the human rights situation in West Papua and the territory of Aceh.<br />
<b><br />
The Documents</b><br />
The Archive's postings include a confidential February 1968 cable from U.S. Ambassador to Indonesia Marshall Green. Following a conversation with Indonesian Foreign Minister Adam Malik about the situation in West Irian, Green concluded that conditions in the territory are "far from satisfactory and deteriorating." A subsequent cable reported that Indonesia is "belatedly and almost desperately seeking to develop support among the peoples of West Irian" for the "Act of Free Choice."<br />
<br />
A consular trip to West Irian in early 1968 observed that "the Indonesian government directs its main efforts" in the territory to "maintaining existing political facilities and suppressing political dissent." Because of neglect, corruption and repression at the hands of Indonesian authorities, Western observers agreed almost unanimously that "Indonesia could not win an open election" and that the vast majority of West Irian's inhabitants favored independence.<br />
<br />
In July of 1968 the UN-appointed Ambassador Fernando Ortiz Sanz arrived in Jakarta as the Secretary General's Special Representative for assisting Indonesia with the West Irian plebiscite, as called for by the 1962 New York Agreement.<br />
<br />
A confidential cable from the U.S. Embassy to the State Department outlined the stakes in the upcoming "Act of Free Choice." While cautioning that the U.S. government "should not become directly involved in this issue," Ambassador Green worried that Ortiz Sanz or other UN members might "hold out for free and direct elections" in West Irian, frustrating Indonesia's intention to retain the territory at all costs. Consequently, U.S. and other Western officials worried about the need to meet with Ortiz Sanz to "make him aware of political realities." In a confidential October 1968 Airgram the U.S. Embassy reported with relief that Ortiz now "concedes that it would be inconceivable from the point of view of the interest of the U.N., as well as the GOI, that a result other than the continuance of West Irian within Indonesian sovereignty should emerge."<br />
<br />
The Indonesian government firmly rejected the possibility of a one-person, one-vote plebiscite in West Irian, insisting instead on a series of local 'consultations' with just over 1,000 hand selected tribal leaders (out of an estimated population of 800,000), conducted in July 1969 with between 6,000-10,000 Indonesian troops spread throughout the territory. As the U.S. Embassy put it in a July 1969 telegram:<br />
<br />
The Act of Free Choice (AFC) in West Irian is unfolding like a Greek tragedy, the conclusion preordained. The main protagonist, the GOI, cannot and will not permit any resolution other than the continued inclusion of West Irian in Indonesia. Dissident activity is likely to increase but the Indonesian armed forces will be able to contain and, if necessary, suppress it.<br />
<br />
Ambassador Frank Galbraith noted on July 9, 1969 that past abuses had stimulated intense anti-Indonesian and pro-independence sentiment at all levels of Irian society, suggesting that "possibly 85 to 90%" of the population "are in sympathy with the Free Papua cause." Moreover, Galbraith observed, recent Indonesian military operations, which resulted in the deaths of hundreds, possibly thousands of civilians, "had stimulated fears and rumours of intended genocide among the Irianese."<br />
<br />
President Nixon and national security adviser Henry Kissinger visited Jakarta in July 1969 while the "Act of Free Choice" was underway. Improving relations with Indonesia's authoritarian regime was clearly uppermost in the mind of Kissinger, who characterized Suharto as a "moderate military man … committed to progress and reform." In Nixon's secret briefing papers (Document 9 and Document 10) for the visit Kissinger flatly told the President "you should not raise this issue" of West Irian and argued "we should avoid any U.S. identification with that act." The White House generally held to this position throughout the period preceding and following the "Act of Free Choice."<br />
<br />
Although they recognized the deep flaws in the Act and in Indonesia's intentions, U.S. officials were not interested in creating any problems for a Suharto regime they saw as nonaligned but pro-Washington. While the U.S. was unwilling to actively intervene on Indonesia's behalf (an action they thought unnecessary and counterproductive) at the UN to insure quick General Assembly acceptance of Indonesia's formal takeover of West Papua, the U.S. quietly signaled that it was uninterested in a lengthy debate over an issue it viewed as a foregone conclusion and marginal to U.S. interests. In a secret briefing memo for a meeting with Indonesia's Ambassador to the United States Soedjakmoto, a State Department official expressed confidence that international criticism of the "Act of Free Choice" would quickly fade, allowing the Nixon Administration to move forward with its plans for forging closer military and economic ties with the authoritarian regime in Jakarta.<br />
Documents<br />
<br />
NOTE: The documents featured below were selected for inclusion in this Electronic Briefing Book. Click here to download the complete set of documents on this issue (PDF - 7.6 MB).<br />
<br />
Document 1<br />
February 29, 1968<br />
Subject: West Irian<br />
U.S. Embassy in Jakarta, Confidential Telegram<br />
<br />
The U.S. Ambassador to Indonesia, Marshall Green reports on a conversation with Indonesian Foreign Minister Adam Malik on West Irian. Malik suggests the possibility of reducing the more than 10,000 Indonesian troops serving in Irian. He also hints Indonesia will insist on indirect means for ascertaining the wishes of the inhabitants of the territory in 1969, perhaps relying on tribal leaders who can be induced with "favors for them and their tribes." Green expresses concern about the "deteriorating" situation.<br />
<br />
Document 2<br />
May 2, 1968<br />
Subject: West Irian<br />
U.S. Embassy in Jakarta, Confidential Telegram<br />
<br />
U.S. Ambassador to Indonesia Marshall Green, reports on a conversation with Indonesian Foreign Minister Adam Malik in which Malik outlines some of the measures Jakarta is undertaking in an attempt to build support among the people of West Irian for merger with Indonesia.<br />
<br />
Document 3<br />
May 10, 1968<br />
Subject: Consular Trip to West Irian<br />
U.S. Embassy in Jakarta, Confidential Airgram<br />
<br />
In January, 1968 Embassy Political Consul Thomas Reynders visits West Irian for one month. Reynders observes the relatively low level of economic development in the territory since Indonesia assumed control in 1962, noting that "The Indonesian government's presence in West Irian is expressed primarily in the form of the Army." Reynders concludes, as have nearly all Western observers, that "Indonesia will not accept Independence for West Irian and will not permit a plebiscite that would reach such an outcome" and notes the "antipathy or outright hatred believed to be harbored toward Indonesia and Indonesians by West Irians in the relatively developed and sophisticated areas."<br />
<br />
Document 4<br />
August 20, 1968<br />
Subject: The Stakes in West Irian's "Act of Free Choice"<br />
U.S. Embassy in Jakarta, Confidential Telegram<br />
<br />
US Ambassador Marshall Green suggests "Act of Free Choice" in West Irian "May well be the most important political issue in Indonesia during the coming year." Notes Indonesian "dilemma" in seeking "to devise some meaningful way to conduct ascertainment which will not involve real risks of loss of West Irian." Green reminds the State Department, in urging a hands-off approach by the U.S., that "we are dealing here essentially with stone age, illiterate tribal groups" and that "free elections among groups such as this would be more of a farce than any rigged mechanism Indonesia could devise."<br />
<br />
Document 5<br />
August 4, 1968<br />
Subject: "Act of Free Choice" in West Irian<br />
U.S. Embassy in Jakarta, Confidential Telegram<br />
<br />
Marshall Green writes to Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for East Asian and Pacific G. McMurtry Godley expressing concern over the views of U.N. Special Representative for West Irian Ortiz Sanz. Green recommends that "in view of high stakes … we should do anything we can indirectly to make him aware of political realities" regarding Indonesian intentions toward West Irian.<br />
<br />
Document 6<br />
October 4, 1968<br />
Subject: West Irian<br />
U.S. Embassy in Jakarta, Confidential Airgram<br />
<br />
Embassy Political Consul Jack Lydman describes the results of Ortiz Sanz's recent orientation visit to West Irian and asserts that Sanz is now "attempting to devise a formula for an "act of free choice" in West Irian which will result in an affirmation of Indonesian sovereignty" yet "stand the test of international opinion."<br />
<br />
Document 7<br />
June 9, 1969<br />
Subject: Assessment of Irian situation<br />
U.S. Embassy in Jakarta, Confidential Telegram<br />
<br />
On the eve of the "Act of Free Choice," the U.S. embassy offers a highly critical appraisal of Indonesia's determination to insure West Irian's integration, concluding that from Jakarta's standpoint "separation is unthinkable." After detailing Indonesian efforts to repress "increasingly desperate" supporters of independence for West Irian, Embassy concludes with concern for "future Indonesian relations with Irianese," many of whom display a "festering antagonism and distrust of Indonesians."<br />
<br />
Document 8<br />
June 9, 1969<br />
Subject: West Irian: The Nature of the Opposition<br />
U.S. Embassy in Jakarta, Confidential Airgram<br />
<br />
Galbraith offers a detailed assessment of the views of various Irian groups opposed to integration with Indonesia and advocating independence, including the Free Papua Movement (OPM). He observes that "opposition to the GOI stems from economic deprivation over the years, military repression and capriciousness, and maladministration," and suggests that anti-Indonesian groups will be unable to alter the final outcome of the "Act of Free Choice."<br />
<br />
Documents 9 and 10<br />
June 10 and July 18, 1969<br />
Subject: Djakarta Visit: Your Meetings with President Suharto<br />
Henry Kissinger, Memorandum for the President<br />
<br />
National security adviser Henry Kissinger briefs President Nixon on his visit to Indonesia and likely conversations with Indonesian President Suharto. Kissinger argues that there is no U.S. interest in getting involved in the issue of West Irian and that it is certain its people will choose integration with Indonesia. In Nixon's talking points, Kissinger urges that the President refrain from raising the issue except to note U.S. sympathy with Indonesia's concerns.<br />
<br />
Document 11<br />
August 25, 1969<br />
Subject: Call by Indonesian Ambassador Soedjakmoto<br />
U.S. State Department, Secret Memorandum<br />
<br />
Paul Gardner briefs Assistant Secretary of State Marshall Green on his visit with Indonesian Ambassador to the U.S. Soedjakmoto, who is expected to ask for help from the U.S. in "preparing smooth U.N. handling" of the "Act of Free Choice" in the General Assembly.<br />
<br />
<b>Notes</b><br />
1. For an excellent overview of the events leading up to the New York Agreement, see Jones, Matthew. Conflict and Confrontation in Southeast Asia, 1961-1965: Britain, the United States, Indonesia and the Creation of Malaysia (Cambridge: Cambridge Press, 2002): 31-62; C.L.M. Penders. The West New Guinea Debacle: Dutch Colonization and Indonesia, 1945-1962 (Hawaii, 2002); John Saltford. The United Nations and the Indonesian Takeover of West Papua, 1962-1969 (Routledge, 2003).<br />
<br />
2. Denise Leith. The Politics of Power: Freeport in Suharto's Indonesia (Hawaii, 2003).<br />
</span>papuatodayhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14548843079715458975noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4931382601439810424.post-58618117885136919212007-10-30T05:17:00.000-07:002009-10-30T05:22:35.077-07:00Chronology:Chronology:<br />
<br />
Significant Dates in Irian/New Guinea History<br />
<br />
<br />
• 1511 - 12<br />
Antonio d' Abreu and Francisco Serrano, Portugese sailors, sight New Guinea but do not go ashore <br />
<br />
• 1526 - 27<br />
The Portugese Governor of Ternate, Jorge de Menezes, Takes shelter at Warsai on the Vogelkop for some months and names the region, "Ilhas dos Papuas". <br />
<br />
• 1528<br />
The Spaniard Alvaro de Saavedra Ceron lives for one month on the Schouten Islands which he calls, "isla de oro." <br />
<br />
• 1545<br />
Inigo Oritz de Retes, Sailing along the north coast, plants the spanish flag at a spot east of the mouth of the mamberamo river on June 20th taking possession of the island for his king and names it "Nueva Guinea". <br />
<br />
• 1606<br />
Willem Janz, a Dutchman, sails along the West and South coast. Luis Vaez de Torres, a Spanish sailor, explores the entire South and West coast and sails through the Torres Strait. <br />
<br />
• 1616<br />
Jacob Le Maire and Willem Schouten chart the North Coast. <br />
<br />
• 1623<br />
Jan Carstensz sails along the South West coast and sees a "very high mountain range [that is] in many places white with snow." <br />
<br />
• 1660<br />
Treaty between the Dutch East India Company (V.O.C.) and Tidore whereby the V.O.C. recognizes the Sultan's sovereignty over the "Papuan islands in general." <br />
<br />
•1678<br />
First Dutch flags hoisted at West coast by Keyts. <br />
<br />
• 1700<br />
William Dampier sails along the North and West Coast. His voyage sparks the VOC again to activity. <br />
<br />
• 1705<br />
Jacob Weyland discovers and explores the Geelvink Bay. <br />
<br />
• 1714<br />
Tidore empire rescinds to the VOC its claim to Irian. <br />
<br />
• 1750<br />
Power of the VOC declines; Other nations appear in these regions.<br />
<br />
• 1768<br />
Louis de Bougainville sails along the North coast and names the Cyclop mountains near Jayapura. <br />
<br />
• 1770<br />
James Cook travels along the South West coast during his voyage around the world and goes ashore at Cook Bay. Hostile natives force a quick retreat. <br />
<br />
• 1780<br />
Prince Nuku, pretender to the throne of Tidore, flees to the Papuan islands, commences guerilla war against the Dutch. <br />
<br />
• 1793<br />
British (Or possibly the Dutch - source contradictory) establish "Fort Coronation" at Dorei Bay, Vogelkop, the first European settlement. Abandoned April 1795. <br />
<br />
• 1828<br />
Dutch settlement at Fort Du Bus, Triton Bay until 1836. Dutch formally proclaim the South West coast as a Netherlands possession - August 24th. <br />
<br />
• 1848<br />
Netherlands Indies Government lays claim to West New Guinea as far as the 141 degrees E.L. in the name of the Sultan of Tidore. <br />
<br />
• 1855<br />
The first German missionaries, C. W. Ottow and J. G. Geissler settle on Mansinam Island, Dorei Bay, Feburary 5th. <br />
<br />
• 1862<br />
Three Dutch missionaries of the "Utrecht Mission Society" arrive at Dorei Bay. <br />
<br />
• 1875<br />
Eastern boundary determined. <br />
<br />
• 1884<br />
British flag raised at Port Moresby - South East New Guinea declared a British Protectorate. Germans claim North East New Guinea - Kaiser Wilhelmsafen. <br />
<br />
• 1895<br />
Treaty of The Hague, whereby boundary with British New Guinea is determined which remains unchanged until today. Treaty signed May 16th. <br />
<br />
• 1898<br />
Government Administrative posts established at Fak-Fak and Manokwari. <br />
<br />
• 1902<br />
Government post opened at Merauke. <br />
<br />
• 1905<br />
Two Roman Catholics missionaries settle at Merauke. <br />
<br />
• 1907 - 15<br />
Military explorative expeditions map all of West New Guinea except the intirior mountain ranges. <br />
<br />
• 1910<br />
Dutch flag hoisted at Hollandia, March 7th. <br />
<br />
• 1913<br />
Franssen Herderschee climbs the Wilhelmina Top (15,585 ft) from the south on February 21st. <br />
<br />
• 1920<br />
Van Overeem Expedition visits the Swart Valley. <br />
<br />
• 1921<br />
Kremer expedition reaches the Wilhelmina Top from the North after crossing the headwaters of the Baliem river. <br />
<br />
• 1926<br />
Netherlands - American Stirling expedition to the upper Rouffaer regions, the first expedition to use air transport. <br />
<br />
• 1928<br />
Demarcation line between Protestant and Roman Catholic missions abolished. Franciscan mission founded at Fak Fak. <br />
<br />
• 1929<br />
The Moluccan Protestant (M.P.K.) commences work in South New Guinea. <br />
<br />
• 1930<br />
First expatriate settlers arrive at Manokwari and Hollandia. <br />
<br />
• 1935<br />
Bijlmer expedition to the Charles Louis Mountains. <br />
<br />
• 1936 - 7<br />
Colijn, Dozy and Wissel climb some of the Carstensz Peaks. Ngga Pulu top (16,530 ft) reached December 5th. Wissel dsicovers the lakes which now bear his name, December 31st. Aerial mapping begun by the Netherlands New Guinea Petroleum Company. <br />
<br />
• 1938<br />
First Dutch Government post opened in the highlands at Enarotali, Wissel Lakes. Third Archibold expedtion made - visits the Grand Valley of the Baliem. <br />
<br />
• 1939 <br />
Le Roux expedition to the Wissel lakes region . C.A.M.A and Roman Catholic missionaries begin work at the Wissel lakes. <br />
<br />
• 1942<br />
Japanese sieze all but the South Eastern part of New Guinea. They arrive in Fak Fak April 1st and at Manokwari April 12th. <br />
<br />
• 1944<br />
Hollandia recaptured from the Japanese April 22nd. <br />
<br />
• 1949<br />
All Dutch East Indies bar Irian are handed over to the Republic of Indonesia. The Constitution of the Government of Netherlands New Guinea is established. <br />
<br />
• 1951 - 1958<br />
Various missions begin work around Holandia, the Vogelkop area, the Baliem Valley and related locales. <br />
<br />
• 1959<br />
Dutch expedition to the Star Mountains. Juliana Peak reached. <br />
<br />
• 1962<br />
Bunker agreement signed. U.N.T.E.A. replaces Dutch Amdinistration in West New Guinea. Harrer expedition climbs Carstensz Pyramid on February 13th (17,000 feet). Dutch defeat Indonesian naval attack<br />
<br />
• 1963<br />
May 1st - Indonesia assumes full administrative control of West Irian. <br />
<br />
• 1969<br />
Formal integration of West Irian into Indonesia after the dubiously named, "Act of Free Choice." (Sept 17th becomes official province)<br />
<br />
• 1973<br />
March 3rd, 1973, province renamed to irian Jaya (from West Irian)<br />
<br />
• 1977<br />
Indonesian paratroopers land in Baliem valley to quell OPM uprising <br />
<br />
Source: World Team Intl. Historical Archivespapuatodayhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14548843079715458975noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4931382601439810424.post-73343711285563503432007-10-30T02:59:00.000-07:002009-10-30T03:12:40.318-07:00Western New GuineaWestern New Guinea is the western half of the island of New Guinea. It is the easternmost part of Indonesia, consisting of two provinces: Papua and West Papua. It was previously known by various names, including Netherlands New Guinea (1895–1 October 1962), West New Guinea (1 October 1962–1 May 1963), West Irian (1 May 1963–1973), and Irian Jaya (1973–2000). The incorporation of western New Guinea into Indonesia remains controversial with many of the territory's indigenous population and many NGOs such as the Free Papua Movement[1][2] and International Parliamentarians for West Papua (IPWP), whose members include parliamentarians from Britain, Czech Republic, New Zealand, Australia and Vanuatu, United States, Sweden and the Netherlands.[3]. Many who oppose Western New Guinea's incorporation into Indonesia refer to it as West Papua.<span class="fullpost"> <br />
<br />
During the 1950s the Dutch government began to prepare Netherlands New Guinea for full independence and allowed elections in 1959; an elected Papuan council, the New Guinea Council (Nieuw Guinea Raad) took office on April 5, 1961. The Council decided on the name of West Papua, a national emblem, a flag called the Morning Star or Bintang Kejora, and a national anthem; the flag was first raised — next to the Dutch flag — on December 1, 1961. However, Indonesia threatened with an invasion, after full mobilisation of its army, by August 15, 1962, after receiving military help from the Soviet Union. Under strong pressure of the United States government (under the Kennedy administration) the Dutch, who were prepared to resist an Indonesian attack, attended diplomatic talks. On October 1, 1962, the Dutch handed over the territory to a temporary UN administration (UNTEA). On May 1, 1963, Indonesia took control. The territory was renamed West Irian and then Irian Jaya.<br />
<br />
Western New Guinea was annexed by Indonesia under the 1969 Act of Free Choice contrary to Article XIV and Article XVIII of the 1962 New York Agreement. During the rule of President Suharto from 1965 to 1998, human rights and other advocates[who?] criticized Indonesian government policies in the province as repressive, and the area received relatively little attention in Indonesia's development plans. During the Reformasi period from 1998 to 2001, Papua and other Indonesian provinces received greater regional autonomy. In 2001, a law was passed granting "Special Autonomy" status to Papua, although many of the law's requirements have either not been implemented or have been only minimally implemented.[4]<br />
<br />
In 2003, the Indonesian central government declared that the province would be split into three provinces: Papua Province, Central Irian Jaya Province, and West Irian Jaya Province. Opposition to this resulted in the plan for Central Irian Jaya province being scrapped, and even the designation of West Irian Jaya Province is still legally unclear. Despite this, the West Irian Jaya (Irian Jaya Barat) province was formed on February 6, 2006, and the name was officially changed to West Papua (Papua Barat) on February 7, 2007. The independent sovereign state of Papua New Guinea (PNG) borders Papua Province to the east.<br />
<br />
<b>Contents</b><br />
<br />
* 1 History<br />
o 1.1 Netherlands New Guinea<br />
o 1.2 Incorporation into Indonesia<br />
* 2 The Act Of Free Choice<br />
* 3 Indonesian clampdown on independence activities<br />
* 4 International Parliamentarians for West Papua<br />
* 5 Regions<br />
* 6 Geography<br />
* 7 Demographics<br />
* 8 Tribes<br />
* 9 Ecology<br />
* 10 Culture<br />
* 11 See also<br />
* 12 References<br />
* 13 Notes<br />
* 14 Further reading<br />
* 15 External links<br />
<br />
<b>History</b><br />
Papuans have inhabited the Australasian continental island of New Guinea for over 40,000 years while Austronesians have been there for several thousand years. These groups have developed diverse cultures and languages in situ; there are over 300 languages and two hundred additional dialects in West New Guinea alone (See Papuan languages, Austronesian languages).<br />
<br />
On June 13, 1545, Ortiz de Retez, in command of the San Juan, left port in Tidore, an island of the East Indies and sailed to reach the northern coast of the island of New Guinea, which he ventured along as far as the mouth of the Mamberamo River. He took possession of the land for the Spanish Crown, in the process giving the island the name by which it is known today. He called it Nueva Guinea owing to the resemblance of the local inhabitants to the peoples of the Guinea coast in West Africa.<br />
<br />
<b>Netherlands New Guinea</b><br />
In 1828, the Dutch claimed the south coast west of the 141st meridian, and in 1848 added the north coast west of Humboldt Bay. The border at 141° East was 'marked' on the coast by iron signpost displaying the Dutch coat of arms by an expedition in 1881[5]. The Netherlands established trading posts in the area after Great Britain and Germany recognised the Dutch claims in treaties of 1885 and 1895. At much the same time, Britain claimed south-east New Guinea, later known as the Territory of Papua, and Germany claimed the northeast, later known as the Territory of New Guinea.<br />
<br />
In 1923, the Nieuw Guinea Beweging (New Guinea Movement) was created in the Netherlands by ultra right-wing supporters calling for Dutchmen to create a tropical Netherlands in Papua. This prewar movement without full government support was largely unsuccessful in its drive, but did coincide with the development of a plan for Eurasian settlement of the Dutch Indies to establish Dutch farms in northern West New Guinea. This effort also failed as most returned to Java disillusioned, and by 1938 just 50 settlers remained near Hollandia and 258 in Manokwari.<br />
<br />
In the early 1930s, the need for a national Papuan government was discussed by graduates of the Dutch Protestant Missionary Teachers College in Mei Wondama, Manokwari. These graduates continued their discussions among the wider community and quickly succeeded in cultivating a desire for national unity across the region and its three hundred languages. The College Principal Rev. Kijne also composed "Hai Tanahku Papua" ("Oh My Land Papua"), which in 1961 was adopted as the national anthem.<br />
<br />
A exploration company NNGPM was formed in 1935 by Shell (40%), Mobil (40%) and Chevron's Far Pacific investments (20%) to explore West New Guinea. During 1936, Jean Dozy working for NNGPM reported the world's richest gold and copper deposits in a mountain near Timika which he named Ertsberg (Mountain of Ore). Unable to license the find from the Dutch or indigenous landowners, NNGPM maintained secrecy of the discovery.<br />
<br />
In 1942, the northern coast of West New Guinea and the nearby islands were occupied by Japan. Allied forces expelled the Japanese in 1944, and with Papuan approval, the United States constructed a headquarters for Gen. Douglas MacArthur at Hollandia (now Jayapura) and over twenty US bases and hospitals intended as a staging point for operations taking of the Philippines.<br />
<br />
West New Guinean farms supplied food for the half million US troops. Papuan men went into battle to carry the wounded, acted as guides and translators, and provided a range of services, from construction work and carpentry to serving as machine shop workers and mechanics.<br />
<br />
The Dutch retained possession of West New Guinea from 1945, but upon reaching Java 4,000 km (2,490 mi) west they did not find similar levels of support from the population of Java. Indonesian leaders Mohammad Hatta and Sukarno had declared independence weeks before and claimed all Dutch possessions should become part of the United States of Indonesia. The dispute continued until the Round Table Conference, which was held from August to October 1949 at the Hague. Unable to reach a compromise on the matter of West New Guinea, the conference closed with the parties agreeing to discuss the West New Guinea issue within one year.<br />
<br />
In December 1950[6] the United Nations requested the Special Committee on Decolonization to accept transmission of information regarding the territory in accord with Article 73 of the Charter of the United Nations. Article 73 constituted formal recognition of the territory's right to independence and the Netherlands obligation to assist. After repeated Indonesian claims to possession of Dutch New Guinea, the Netherlands invited Indonesia to present its claim before an International Court of Law. Indonesia declined the offer. Concerned by Indonesian insurgencies beginning in 1950, the Netherlands accelerated its education and technical programs in preparation for independence. A naval academy was opened in 1956, and Papuan troops and naval cadets began service by 1957.<br />
<br />
By 1959, Papuans were nurses, dental surgeons, draftsmen, architects, telephone repairmen, and radio and power technicians, cultivating a range of experimental commercial crops and serving as police, forestry and meteorological staff. This progress towards self-government was documented in reports prepared for the United Nations from 1950 to 1961.<br />
<br />
Local Council elections were held and Papuan representatives elected from 1955. On 6 March 1959 the New York Times published an article revealing the Dutch government had discovered alluvial gold flowing into the Arafura Sea and were searching for the gold's mountain source.[citation needed] In 1959, Freeport Sulphur approached the Dutch East Borneo company for partnership. An agreement signed in January 1960 to lodge a Dutch claim for the Timika area as a copper deposit did not inform the government about the gold or known extent of the copper deposit.[citation needed]<br />
<br />
Election of a national parliament began on 9 January 1961 in fifteen electoral districts with direct voting in Manokwari and Hollandia to select 26 Councillors, of whom 16 were elected, 12 appointed, 23 were Papuan, and one female Councillors. The Councillors were sworn in by Governor Platteel on 1 April 1961, and the Council took office on 5 April 1961. The inauguration was attended by officials from Australia, Britain, France, the Netherlands, New Zealand, and members of the South Pacific Commission; a large Australian delegation was headed by Mr Hasluck MP and included Sir Alistair McMullan, President of Australian Senate. The United States declined the invitation to attend the inauguration.<br />
<br />
After news that the Hague was considering a United States plan to trade the territory to United Nations administration, Papuan Councillors met for six hours in the New Guinea Council building on 19 October 1961 to elect a National Committee which drafted a Manifesto for Independence & Self-government, a National flag (Morning Star), State Seal, selected a national anthem ("Hai Tanahkoe Papua" / "Oh My Land Papua"), and called for the people to be known as Papuans. The New Guinea Council voted unanimous support of these proposals on 30 October 1961, and on the 31st October 1961 presented the Morning Star flag and Manifesto to Governor Platteel who said (translated) "Never before has the oneness of the Council been put forward so strongly." The Dutch recognized the flag and anthem on November 18, 1961 (Government Gazettes of Dutch New Guinea Nos. 68 and 69), and these ordinances came into effect on December 1, 1961.<br />
<br />
<b>Incorporation into Indonesia</b><br />
At the US White House a proposal to have the Netherlands trade West New Guinea to Indonesia was opposed by the Bureau of European Affairs who viewed this "would simply trade white for brown colonialism"; but from April 1961 Robert Komer and McGeorge Bundy promoted a plan to have the United Nations give the transfer an outward appearance of legitimacy. Though reluctant, John Kennedy was told the transfer of the territory was the only means to prevent Indonesia turning to Soviet aid.[7]<br />
<br />
The Morning Star flag was raised next to the Dutch tricolour on December 1, 1961, an act which Papuan independence supporters celebrate each year at flag raising ceremonies. National Committee Chairman Mr Inury said: "My Dear compatriots, you are looking at the symbol of our unity and our desire to take our place among the nations of the world. As long as we are not really united we shall not be free. To be united means to work hard for the good of our country, now, until the day that we shall be independent, and further from that day on."<br />
<br />
On January 2, 1962, Indonesia, which had made seven known insurgency attempts since 1950, now created the Mandala Command headed by Brig. General Suharto to coordinate military efforts for the territory. Two previous insurgencies, Pasukan Gerilya 100 (November 1960) and Pasukan Gerilya 200 (September 1961), were followed by Pasukan Gerilya 300 with 115 insurgents leaving Jakarta on four Jaguar class torpedo boats (January 15), intercepted in the Aru Sea the lead boat was sunk and 51 survivors were picked up after Commodore Yos Sudarso went down with his boat.[8]<br />
<br />
Continuing US efforts to have the Netherlands secretly negotiate the transfer of the territory to Indonesian administration eventually succeeded in creating the "New York Agreement" signed in August 1962. The Australian government, which previously had been a firm supporter of Papuan independence, also reversed its policy to support incorporation with Indonesia.[7][9]<br />
<br />
The agreement, ratified in the UN on September 21, 1962, stipulated that authority would transfer to a United Nations Temporary Executive Authority (UNTEA) on 1 October 1962, and that once UNTEA had informed the public of the terms of the Agreement had the option to transfer administration of the territory to Indonesia after May 1, 1963, until such time as an "Act of Free Choice" could determine the will of the people. Under Article 18 of the Agreement "all adults, male and female, not foreign nationals" were to be allowed to vote in an Act "in accordance with international practice". On May 1, 1963, UNTEA transferred total administration of West New Guinea to the Republic of Indonesia. The capital Hollandia was renamed Kota Baru for the transfer to Indonesian administration and on 5 September 1963, West Irian was declared a "quarantine territory" with Foreign Minister Subandrio administrating visitor permits.<br />
<br />
<b>The Act Of Free Choice</b><br />
Although United Nations General Assembly Resolution 2504 did acknowledge that an event called Act of Free Choice took place, neither the General Assembly nor International Court of Justice gave their opinion about the event, nor did they claim the Act to have been any form of self determination. Although the United Nations representative Ambassador Fernando Ortiz-Sanz was unable to get Indonesia to allow a "one-man, one-vote" within the territory, the Indonesian authorities declared that there was a unanimous vote against independence. However, participants and other observers question the conduct and legitimacy of the process. It is widely reported that just 1000 tribal elders were allowed by the Indonesian military to vote[10], in direct contravention of Article 18 of the New York Agreement which stated "The eligibility of all adults, male and female, not foreign nationals to participate in the act of self-determination to be carried out in accordance with international practice". As such the vote was not an expression of self-determination. Men who were selected for the vote subsequently testified that they had been blackmailed and threatened at gunpoint into voting against independence with threats of violence against their families and communities. Although Indonesia denies these allegations, recently released United States government correspondence indicates that the pro-Indonesian outcome was effectively agreed in advance between Indonesia and the U.S.[11]<br />
<br />
<b>Indonesian clampdown on independence activities</b><br />
Since the 1960s, consistent reports have filtered out of the territory of government suppression and terrorism, including murder, political assassination, imprisonment, torture, and aerial bombardments. The Indonesian government disbanded the New Guinea Council and forbade the use of the West Papua flag or the singing of the national anthem. There has been considerable resistance to Indonesian integration and occupation, both through civil disobedience (such as Morning Star flag raising ceremonies) and via the formation of the Organisasi Papua Merdeka (OPM, or Free Papua Movement) in 1965. The movement's military arm is the TPN, or Liberation Army of Free Papua. Estimates vary on the death toll, with wild variation in the number claimed dead. A Sydney University academic has estimated more than 100,000 Papuans, one sixteenth of the population, have died as a result of government-sponsored violence against West Papuans,[12] while others had previously specified much higher death tolls.[13]<br />
<br />
After General Suharto replaced Sukarno as President of Indonesia, Freeport Sulphur was the first foreign company awarded a mining license, a 30 year license to mine the Tembagapura region of Papua for gold and copper.<br />
<br />
In 1969, General Sarwo Edhi Wibowo oversaw the Indonesian conduct of the widely criticized "Act of Free Choice." Prior to the vote, the Indonesian military rounded up and detained for one month a large group of Papuan tribal leaders. The Papuans were daily threatened with death at gunpoint if the entire group did not vote to continue Indonesian rule. Assembled troops and two Western observers acted as witnesses to the public vote; however, the Western observers left after witnessing the first two hundred (of 1,054) votes for integration. Concerned over Communism in South East Asia, and with an eye toward extracting Papua's vast mineral wealth, the US and other Western powers ignored protests over the circumstances surrounding the vote [14] The process was deemed to have been an "Act of Free Choice" in accordance with the United Nations requirements, and Indonesia formally annexed the territory in August. Dissenters mockingly called it the "Act of No Choice" or "Act Free of Choice."<br />
<br />
In 1971, construction of the world's largest copper and gold mine (also the world's largest open cut mine) began. Under an Indonesian agreement signed in 1967 (two years before the "Act of Free Choice"), the US company Freeport-McMoRan Copper & Gold Inc. obtained a 30-year exclusive mining license from Suharto in (dating from the mine's opening in 1973). The pact was extended in 1991 by another 30 years. After 1988 with the opening of the Grasberg mine it became the biggest gold mine and lowest extraction-price copper mine in the world. Locals made several violent attempts to dissuade the mine owners, including sabotage of a pipeline that July, but order was quickly restored.<br />
<br />
In the 1970s and 1980s, the Indonesian state accelerated its transmigration program, under which tens of thousands of Javanese and Sumatran migrants were resettled to Papua. Prior to Indonesian rule, the non-indigenous Asian population was estimated at 16,600; while the Papuan population were a mix of Roman Catholics, Protestants and pagan people following tribal religions[15]. Critics suspect that the transmigration program's purpose was to tip the balance of the province's population from the heavily Melanesian Papuans toward western Indonesians, thus further consolidating Indonesian control. The transmigration program officially ended in the late 1990s, although so-called "spontaneous migration" by western Indonesians voluntarily relocating to provinces such as Papua seeking economic opportunity has increased and remains at high levels.[citation needed]<br />
<br />
A separatist congress in 2000 again calling for independence resulted in a military crackdown on independence supporters. In 2001, a now-majority Islamic population was given limited autonomy. An August 2001, US State Department travel warning advised "all travel by US and other foreign government officials to Aceh, Papua and the Moluccas (provinces of North Maluku and Maluku) has been restricted by the Indonesian government".<br />
<br />
During the Abdurrahman Wahid administration in 2000, Papua gained a "Special Autonomy" status, an attempted political compromise between separatists and the central government that has weak support within the Jakarta government. Despite lack of political will of politicians in Jakarta to proceed with real implementation of the Special Autonomy, which is stipulated by law, the region was divided into two provinces: the province of Papua and the province of West Papua, based on a Presidential Instruction in January 2001, soon after President Wahid was impeached by the Parliament and replaced by Vice President Megawati Sukarnoputri. The division of the province has neither directly cancelled the Law of Special Autonomy of Papua nor engaged ongoing protest in the region. There was brief consideration of dividing the territory into thirds, but the plan was quickly abandoned. The plan again gained support in early 2008.<br />
<br />
In January 2006, 43 refugees in a traditional canoe landed on the coast of Australia with a banner stating the Indonesian military was carrying out a genocide in Papua. They were transported to an Australian immigration detention facility on Christmas Island, 2,600 km (1,400 nmi) north-west of Perth, and 360 km (190 nmi) south of the western head of Java. On March 23, 2006, the Australian government granted temporary protection visas to 42 of the 43 having determined all 43 were bonafide refugees.[16] A day later Indonesia recalled its ambassador to Australia.[17] A number of expatriate Papuans currently campaign for independence in Australia, the United Kingdom and other countries, and call for international support for their campaigns. Their claims, which sometimes include allegations of historic or present genocide, are strongly challenged by Indonesia, and Papuan independence is not supported by any recognised government except that of Vanuatu.<br />
[edit] International Parliamentarians for West Papua<br />
<br />
On October 15 2008, the International Parliamentarians for West Papua was launched at the Houses of Parliament, London[18]. The group was set up by exiled West Papuan independence leader Benny Wenda, and is chaired by the British MP Andrew Smith (politician) and Lord Harries. The group set out aims to develop international parliamentary support for West Papuan self-determination, through "recognising the inalienable right of the indigenous people of West Papua to self-determination, which was violated in the 1969 “Act of Free Choice”[19]. Some of the founding members of the group were also involved in a similar group that was set up for East Timor prior to it gaining independence from Indonesia. So far the group has gathered support from politicians in countries including the United Kingdom, The United States of America, Australia, Vanuatu and Papua New Guinea[20].<br />
<br />
<b>Regions</b><br />
Indonesia structures regions by Regencies and districts within those. Though names and areas of control of these regional structures can vary over time in accord with changing political and other requirements, in 2004 Papua province (including what is now West Papua province) consisted of 27 regencies (kabupaten), 2 cities (kotamadya), 117 subdistricts (kecamatan), 66 kelurahan, and 830 villages (desa).<br />
<br />
As of 2004, the Regencies in Papua province were: Asmat, Biak Numfor, Boven Digoel, Jayapura, Kota Jayapura, Jayawijaya, Keerom, Mappi, Merauke, Mimika, Nabire, Paniai, Pegunungan Bintang, Puncak Jaya, Sarmi, Supiori, Tolikara, Waropen, Yahukimo, and Yapen Waropen. The Regencies in the same time period for West Papua province were: Fak-Fak, Kaimana, Manokwari, Raja Ampat, Sorong, Kota Sorong, Sorong Selatan, Teluk Bintuni, and Teluk Wondama.<br />
<br />
In 2003 the western-most third of Papua province was split into a separate province, called West Irian Jaya, which was itself renamed West Papua province in 2007.<br />
<br />
Jayapura, founded in 1910 as Hollandia, had by 1962 developed into a city with modern civil, educational, and medical services. Since Indonesian administration these services have been replaced by Indonesian equivalents such as the TNI (military) replacing the Papuan police force. The name of the city has been changed from Hollandia, to Kotabaru then Sukarnopura and finally Jayapura.<br />
<br />
It is the largest city in Western New Guinea, boasting a small but active tourism industry, it is a neat and pleasant city built on a slope overlooking the bay. Cenderawasih University campus houses the Jayapura Museum. Tanjung Ria beach, well-known to the Allies during World War II, is a popular holiday resort now with facilities for water sports, and General Douglas MacArthur's World War II quarters are still intact.<br />
[edit] Geography<br />
A central east-west mountain range dominates the geography of New Guinea, over 1,600 km (994 mi) in total length. The western section is around 600 km (373 mi) long and 100 km (62 mi) across. Steep mountains 3,000 to 4,000 m (9,850–13,100 ft) and up to 5,000 m (16,400 ft) high along the range ensures a steady supply of rain from the tropical atmosphere. The tree line is around 4,000 m (13,100 ft) elevation and the tallest peaks are snowbound year round.<br />
<br />
Both north and west of the central ranges the land remains mountainous — mostly 1,000 to 2,000 m (3,300–6,660 ft) high — and covered by thick rain forest with a warm humid climate year round.<br />
<br />
The third major habitat feature is the south east lowlands with extensive wetlands stretching for hundreds of kilometers.<br />
<br />
The province has 40 major rivers, 12 lakes, and 40 islands. The Mamberamo river, sometimes referred to as the "Amazon of Papua" is the province's largest river which winds through the northern part of the province. The result is a large area of lakes and rivers known as the Lakes Plains region. The vast southern lowlands, which consist of a mosaic of habitats including mangrove, tidal and freshwater swamp forest and lowland rainforest, are home to a dense population of fishermen and gatherers such as the Asmat people. The famous Baliem Valley, home of the Dani people is a tableland 1,600 m (5,250 ft) above sea level in the midst of the central mountain range; Puncak Jaya (formerly Carstensz Pyramid) is a mist covered limestone mountain peak 4,884 m (16,024 ft) above sea level, the highest point in Indonesia.<br />
<br />
The border with Papua New Guinea mostly follows the 141st meridian, with one section defined by the Fly River. This border is largely unguarded, and has seen a dramatic amount of refugees and illegal aliens cross over to PNG to flee the Indonesians. There are no reliable estimates on how many have crossed.<br />
[edit] Demographics<br />
<br />
The combined population of the Indonesian provinces of West Irian Jaya and Papua, constituting all of Western New Guinea, was estimated to be 2,646,489 in 2005. The two largest cities in the territory are Sorong in the northwest of the Bird's Head Peninsula and Jayapura in the northeast. Both cities have a population of approximately 200,000.<br />
<br />
As in Papua New Guinea and some surrounding east Indonesian provinces, a large majority of the population is Christian. In the 2000 census 54% of West Papuans identified themselves as Protestant, 24% as Catholic, 21% as Muslim, and less than 1% as either Hindu or Buddhist. There is also substantial practice of animism among the major religions, but this is not recorded by the Indonesian census.<br />
[edit] Tribes<br />
<br />
Western New Guinea is home to around 312 different tribes, including some uncontacted peoples.[21] The following are some of the most well-known:<br />
<br />
* Amungme<br />
* Asmat<br />
* Bauzi<br />
* Biak (Byak)<br />
* Damal<br />
* Dani<br />
* Kamoro<br />
* Kombai<br />
* Korowai<br />
* Lani<br />
* Mee<br />
* Mek<br />
* Nduga<br />
* Sawi<br />
* Sentani<br />
* Yali<br />
<br />
<b>Ecology</b><br />
A vital tropical rainforest with the tallest tropical trees and vast biodiversity, Papua's known forest fauna includes marsupials (including possums, wallabies, tree-kangaroos, cuscus), other mammals (including the endangered long-beaked echidna), many bird species (including birds of paradise, cassowaries, parrots, cockatoos), the world's longest lizards (Papua monitor) and some of the world's largest butterflies.<br />
<br />
The island has an estimated 16,000 species of plant, 124 genera of which are endemic.<br />
<br />
The extensive waterways and wetlands of Papua are also home to salt and freshwater crocodile, tree monitor, flying foxes, osprey, bats and other animals; while the equatorial glacier fields remain largely unexplored.<br />
<br />
In February 2005, a team of scientists exploring the Foja Mountains discovered numerous new species of birds, butterflies, amphibians, and plants, including a species of rhododendron which may have the largest bloom of the genus.[22]<br />
<br />
Ecological dangers include deforestation at an alarming rate; the spread of the exotic Crab-eating Macaque (monkey) which now threatens the existence of many native species; pollution such as Grasberg mine dumping 230 000[23] tonnes of copper and gold tailings into the rivers system each day.<br />
[edit] Culture<br />
<br />
West Papuans share many affinities with the culture of Papua New Guinea (PNG) to the east. As with PNG, the peoples of the highlands have distinct traditions and languages from peoples of the coasts.<br />
<br />
Many aspects of West Papuan culture have been forcibly repressed since the area's 1963 incorporation into the Indonesian state. In 2001 the province was granted special autonomy by the Indonesian government, opening the possibility of increased indigenous cultural production and arts venues.<br />
<br />
Some Papuans fear that the history of Indonesian repression, education, propaganda, and transmigration have negatively impacted Papuan cultures. In March 2003 John Rumbiak stated that Papuan culture "will be extinct" within 10 to 20 years, if the present rate of assimilation in the region continues.[24] In response to such criticism the Indonesian government states that the special autonomy arrangement specifically addresses the ongoing preservation of Papua culture, and that the transmigration program was "designed specifically to help the locals through knowledge transfer."[25] Papua advocates view such responses as a continuation of the Indonesian state's tendency to view Papuans as "primitives" in need of "development."[26]<br />
<br />
In some parts of the highlands, the koteka is traditionally worn by males in ceremonial contexts. Despite government efforts to suppress it, the use of the koteka as everyday dress by Dani males in Western New Guinea is still very common.<br />
<br />
<b>See also</b><br />
* Asmat people<br />
* British New Guinea<br />
* Dani people<br />
* Dutch New Guinea<br />
* Friends of Peoples Close to Nature<br />
* German New Guinea<br />
* Human rights in western New Guinea<br />
* Kaiser-Wilhelmsland<br />
* Netherlands New Guinea<br />
* New Guinea<br />
* Papua (Indonesian province)<br />
* Postage Stamps of West Irian<br />
* West Papua (province)<br />
<br />
<b>References</b><br />
* Leith, Denise. 2002. The Politics of Power: Freeport in Suharto's Indonesia. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press. ISBN 0-8248-2566-7<br />
* Conboy, Ken. 2003. Kopassus. Equinox Publishing, Jakarta Indonesia. ISBN 979-95898-8-6<br />
* Online documentaries on the West Papuan struggle for independence, sponsored by West German-based Friends of Peoples Close to Nature<br />
<br />
<b>Notes</b><br />
1. ^ http://www.freewestpapua.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=6&Itemid=6|The Free West Papua Campaign<br />
2. ^ http://english.aljazeera.net/news/asia-pacific/2009/03/200932161344224827.html<br />
3. ^ "IPWP launched in UK Parliament". http://ipwp.org. <br />
4. ^ US Dept of Defence; International Crisis Group; International Crisis Group<br />
5. ^ J. van Oldenborgh, Report of a Voyage with H. M. steamship Batavia from Ternate to the South Coast of New-Guinea to 141° E, 1881.<br />
6. ^ United Nations General Assembly Resolution 448(V)<br />
7. ^ a b US Foreign Relations, 1961–63, Vol XXIII, Southeast Asia.<br />
8. ^ Conboy, Ken. 2003. Kopassus. Equinox Publishing, Jakarta Indonesia. ISBN 979-95898-8-6<br />
9. ^ US President letter.<br />
10. ^ http://ipwp.org/briefing.html IPWP briefing<br />
11. ^ US National Security Archive http://www2.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB128/<br />
12. ^ Report claims secret genocide in Indonesia - University of Sydney<br />
13. ^ West Papua Support<br />
14. ^ Saltford, John. 2003. The United Nations and the Indonesian Takeover 1962-1969: The Anatomy of Betrayal. NY: Routledge.<br />
15. ^ Report on Netherlands New Guinea for the Year 1961, Appendix<br />
16. ^ Papua refugees get Australia visa – BBC News – 23 March 2006.<br />
17. ^ Indonesia recalls Australia envoy – BBC News – 24 March 2006.<br />
18. ^ "Launch of IPWP". International Parliamentarians for West Papua. 2008-10-15. http://ipwp.org/documents.html. Retrieved 2009-01-18. <br />
19. ^ "Mission statement of IPWP". International Parliamentarians for West Papua. 2008-10-15. http://ipwp.org. Retrieved 2009-01-18. <br />
20. ^ "List of politicians who support IPWP". International Parliamentarians for West Papua. 2008-10-15. http://ipwp.org. Retrieved 2009-01-18. <br />
21. ^ Survival International - Papua<br />
22. ^ Robin McDowell: 'Lost world' yields exotic new species – The Vancouver Sun – February 8, 2006<br />
23. ^ Grasberg MineSite | InfoMine<br />
24. ^ The exile who fights for the rights of all Papuans - By Martin Flanagan, The Age – 27 February 2003<br />
25. ^ Letter to the Editor: "Papua culture is not at risk." - The Age, 3 March 2003<br />
26. ^ Denise Leith, 2003. The Politics of Power: Freeport in Suharto’s Indonesia, University of Hawai’i Press, Honolulu. See also White man's burden.<br />
<br />
<b>Further reading</b><br />
<br />
* Penders, C.L.M., The West New Guinea debacle. Dutch decolonisation and Indonesia 1945-1962, Leiden 2002, KITLV<br />
* "Arrow Against the Wind." Narrative of documentary on people of Asmat and Dani, their culture, and their relationship with the nature http://www.dgmoen.net/video_trans/004.html<br />
<br />
<b>External links</b><br />
* Free West Papua Campaign<br />
* Extensive Library, some material written by Lani (highland) tribespeople<br />
* PapuaWeb<br />
* "Human Abuse in West Papua - Application of Law to Genocide"<br />
* West Papua Information Kit (Govt. and NGO reports, news items and contemporary)<br />
* Declassified US documents on "Act of free choice"<br />
* Conservation International's program in Mamberamo Basin<br />
* Monkeys Threaten Papua's Wildlife<br />
* Wetlands International Study on western Papua wetlands<br />
<br />
Sumber: en.wikipedia.org/<br />
</span>papuatodayhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14548843079715458975noreply@blogger.com0