A major piece of the reformasi puzzle is still missing. So far it seems difficult to find. The fall of Soeharto presented the possibility to shift away from New Order tactics and policies.
Generally speaking, Indonesia has managed to transform itself. Several of the major pillars of democracy are now protected.
However, the conflict in Papua has not been solved and human rights abuses continue to occur at the hands of security forces. It remains a considerable stain on the government’s track record in the post-Soeharto era.
Peace was reached in Aceh after the most disastrous tsunami in modern history created a revived impetus for both parties to end an almost 30-year-old conflict. Rebuilding the province was imperative and long-standing grievances had to be solved.
Aceh and Papua are often compared to one another as they have both represented major secessionist challenges to the Indonesian Republic. However, their respective differences must not be forgotten and the recipe for peace in Aceh cannot be applied to Papua.
Papuans symbolically “handed” special autonomy (Otsus) back to the government in July 2010. It marked the ultimate failure of the 2001 Special Autonomy Law. It is essentially a comprehensive piece of legislation which would guarantee special autonomy for Papua, including the creation of a Truth and Reconciliation Commission and a Human Rights Court.
However, the lack of Papuan ownership and illusions of implementation intertwined with continuous allegations of corruption of Otsus funds has left it dead in the water.
What is next? The Papuan legislative council, DPRP, spearheaded by Weynand Watori, has announced an evaluation of Otsus to be completed within the year, although its legal and political impact remain unclear as the DPRP remains politically isolated from the Papuan executive.
The Indonesian Institute of Sciences (LIPI) and key figures such as Father Neles Tebay have emphasized the need for dialogue. Moreover, LIPI’s Papuan Road Map (2010) outlines comprehensive strategies for a “new” Papua with emphasis on the pillars of recognition, dialogue, reconciliation and justice and a new paradigm for development. As we let the 10-year anniversary of Otsus float past in silence, it is time for change.
Furthermore, dialogue is the only route to peace, but its actual parameters remain vague as LIPI recommendations remain a piece of theory not utilized by the government.
So how will the government find the momentum to communicate with Papua? And can the very fragmented Papuan factions consolidate? If so, will they find the trust to approach Jakarta without shouting merdeka (independence)?
Nevertheless, this year has (almost) seen the birth of a new initiative, with the elegant name of UP4B (Special Unit for the Acceleration of Development in the Land of Papua). Headed by Lt. Gen. Bambang Darmono, former commanding officer in Aceh from 2002 to 2005, it is seen by many as the new hope for a change of heart in Jakarta.
Although skepticism has been expressed over Darmono’s human rights record, his ties to the military may prove pivotal.
Armed with comprehensive powers, a special budget and a large staff, it is seen as the most ambitious presidential initiative since the passing of Otsus, enjoying support from human rights NGOs, the National Commission on Human Rights and LIPI.
Yet the only thing we know for certain is that UP4B is a multi-headed creature with a strategy that emphasizes economic development above anything else as a gateway to dialogue and peace. How will this fare with Papuans? In essence, Papuans have emphasized the need for a historical rectification process and accountability of human rights violations since the 1960s.
To say the least, it is highly unclear if the new UP4B strategy can accommodate such demands. In effect, the unit’s strategy focuses on development and promises of improving welfare as ways to flirt with the Papuan people. Keep in mind, one of the great fallacies of Otsus was the lack of public participation from Papuan civil society in its creation. Beginning in the 1960s, decisions on Papua’s future have many of times been decided outside Papua.
As LIPI has argued, there are many preliminary actions needed for dialogue to take place. Jakarta must find the political willingness to compromise, but, maintaining the status quo is not as problematic for Jakarta as it is for Papua. In order for Papua to take Jakarta seriously, political prisoners must be released, the intelligence apparatus curtailed and all nonorganic troops must be withdrawn.
On the other hand, for Jakarta to believe Papua is willing to strengthen its relationship within the Indonesian state, Papua must consolidate its fragmented factions and avoid a repetition of the 1999 Team 100 “moment”, as it would undermine any attempt to forge a relationship built on mutual trust. For a future sustainable peace to be attainable, one can no longer avoid the difficult and sensitive issues of the past, as they remain pillars of Papuan identity today.
The acknowledgement of the truth about what happened to their relatives and friends who were victims of the violence of the New Order and recognition of the history of the Indonesian annexation of Papua remain cornerstones of Papuan grievances.
Moreover, Jakarta must understand that those factors do not necessarily mean revived cries of independence. They remain parameters for dialogue and reconciliation.
Despite political sensitivity, they are crucial ingredients to a sustainable dialogue and, ultimately, peace in Papua. Thus, UP4B must be impeccably certain about their strategy and its resonance with the people of Papua.
Finally, there is no time to waste as the 2014 presidential elections are approaching. A tall order stands before the President, but SBY has the opportunity to leave his mark upon Indonesian history with a new courageous and ambitious approach to Jakarta-Papua relations.
The writer, a graduate student at the Norwegian Center for Human Rights, is an intern at the Commission for Missing Persons and Victims of Violence (Kontras) in Jakarta. The opinions expressed are his own.
Henk Rumbewas, Jayapura, Papua | Thu, 25/08/2011 - 16:08pm
Mr SBY is a good song writter and entertainer. Could Mr SBY be able to write a song and name it "Papua, You are just a Minor Issue" in my life. Unfortunately, the government of Indonesia has never learned from its true Past history.
Look at East Timor, after all, the Timorese government forgave Indonesia over the crime committed in the former occupied territory. I am sure that Papuans will love and forgive the People of Indonesia and the government. So why not surrender the occupied territory of Papua. Please do not maintain the former colonial borders of the Past.
Look at Malaysia, Singapore and Brunei. They are Asians, but they do not need to be forced to be Indonesians.Soekarno tried through DWIKORA, but failed. Why does Indonesia keep maintaining this old colonial border and forcing a totally different race of people to be Indonesians. This is modern slavery and genocide.
COMMENTS
Henk Rumbewas, Jayapura, Papua | Thu, 25/08/2011 - 16:08pm
Mr SBY is a good song writter and entertainer. Could Mr SBY be able to write a song and name it "Papua, You are just a Minor Issue" in my life. Unfortunately, the government of Indonesia has never learned from its true Past history.
Look at East Timor, after all, the Timorese government forgave Indonesia over the crime committed in the former occupied territory. I am sure that Papuans will love and forgive the People of Indonesia and the government. So why not surrender the occupied territory of Papua. Please do not maintain the former colonial borders of the Past.
Look at Malaysia, Singapore and Brunei. They are Asians, but they do not need to be forced to be Indonesians.Soekarno tried through DWIKORA, but failed. Why does Indonesia keep maintaining this old colonial border and forcing a totally different race of people to be Indonesians. This is modern slavery and genocide.
Gary Mayham, Banten | Thu, 25/08/2011 - 14:08pm
The Indonesia is already changing their policy for Papua problem by persuasive way not by military way although military action still needed for pressing down the OPM/TPN terror of killing civilian and military and police personnel..The Indonesia Government is trying to improve the development of education, health, way of live, infrastructure and equal right for all real Papua People in Papua..
raflihasan, medan | Thu, 25/08/2011 - 13:08pm
Talking about human rights abuses in relating with self- determination claim by minor Papuan seems like an interesting issue to discuss all the time. We all aware and understand all these years since the reformation era, that the Human Right is the issue of the world and becoming “the new and lethal weapon” by the human rights activists and even by the pro independence movements. So I presumed, this issue has no longer its purity to defend people’s basic rights, but more over to personals/groups desires which means lust of power, appetite for destruction and domination, luring people’s mind with money and power to accomplish its own aims and many things might be worse. I would say that’s all crap! What they did just because of money, power and nothing more than job seeker. Most of Indonesia’s human rights organizations are foreign country’s puppets that have been told by its master to balancing the people’s power with the government by raising those issues!!
I don’t say this skepticism feeling I just addressed because of my promotion to this government. No, it did not. Since the first hand I also dislike this weak government. But with those weaknesses don’t mean this government did nothing to Papuan. To see what the government has done, we need to jump into its side and see in honest. Special autonomy is the best deal the Papuan can get. Supported by UP4B (Special Unit for the Acceleration of Development in the Land of Papua), showed how serious this government deal with Papua. among those failures in implementing the Otsus, there also many achievements that beginning to be felt by Papuan people. In doing so, I would say those efforts to return Otsus to the government was an act of ungratefulness.
About the human rights abuses by the military, I’d say let the Indonesia’s rules of law talk. There are no human right violation can be freely regardless of the sanctions by the law. Therefore, the government should uphold the law firmly and indiscriminately. Furthermore, about the dialogue between Jakarta and Papua, I believe no one can guarantee it will be run for independence or any other issues, I just say that we live in world full of anger and uncertainty, so anything can be happened swiftly without conscious. That’s why the government should arrange it carefully and manage this demand while remained still guided by the national interest.
Then if ultimately the dialogue must be conducted or even hold, I would likely to say that internal dialogue to evaluate Otsus and many problems in Papua must becoming its primary agenda and the dialogue would conduct in a proper manner, which means in the frame of unitary of the Republic of Indonesia.
access_access, cirebon | Thu, 25/08/2011 - 12:08pm
and what’s that major piece of the reformasi puzzle, which is still missing and seems difficult to find? and what makes you think that you know this nation better than the rest of us – the indigenous people?
we would’ve solved the conflict in papua with ease, had there not been foreign intervention in the first place – the same foreign intervention that tells this government not to really take out the Papuan rebellious.
therefore, it’s just a normal thing for any human rights abuses abound still there. pretty much the same like when breivik shot those people and yet he only has to face up to 21 years in incarceration for literally killing 69 people, which means he only gets an average of 3.6 months in incarceration for every soul he’s murdered.
just like the same foreign intervention that tells indonesian armed forces to let go the free aceh movement ragtag soldiers, which have been literally cornered and they had nowhere to go.
it’s also pretty much the same when all those white men literally murdered all those Indians – the indigenous people of america, spanish and portuguese conquerors murdered all those indigenous people down there in south america, the shooting of mark duggan by the metropolitan police and the brutal beating of Rodney king by lapd.
aceh and papua are two different things; on the one hand aceh had become an integral part of Indonesia since the day one and in fact, the proud people of aceh even donated their money to buy a douglas dc-3 airplane - the first Indonesian aircraft, donated in 1949; but on the other hand at the same year, papua was still occupied by the dutch and we had to literally force the dutch to leave papua.
papua doesn’t have a strong representation overseas, unlike the free aceh movement/gam; therefore, the government of indonesia doesn’t have to negotiate with the rebels. i personally feel sorry for my own government for having negotiated with those rebels under the auspices of strong foreign intervention.
the central government has been showering the papuan authority with billions of rupiahs annually to finance itself and when this special autonomy fails, i don’t think it’s the central government’s failure. it’s the people of papua themselves who’ve failed to decide what’s best for them in the first place.
what’s been happening in papua is no conundrum for it’s just their own confusion, like I’ve just said, to decide what’s best for themselves. the papuans should’ve taken the best advantage of the special autonomy for there were no interventions from the central government, but they blew it. and now they’re blaming the central government.
there is no military operating zone in papua unlike in aceh but the papuans are more troublesome than the acehnese for both of them have experienced the ruthless repression of the new order, but the aceh people have made peace with the reality for most of their demands have been met by the central government. and it’s papuans’ own failure to decide their future, the billions of rupiahs bankrolled by the central government notwithstanding.
i find it very hard to digest that you consider it as an annexation for the integrity of papua to the republic of Indonesia and as a foreigner and an intern at the commission for missing persons and victims of violence (Kontras) in Jakarta, you do have balls to have expressed it.
now, the question is what’s your real intention?