U.S. policy on Papua<\/p>\n
Regarding U.S. Ambassador Gelbard's letter U.S. does not
\nsupport Papua (The Jakarta Post, Aug. 22, 2000), it is no
\nsurprise to learn that the U.S. government does not support the
\nPapuan struggle for independence. In fact, it would be a bizarre
\nchange of policy for Washington to oppose Jakarta on this issue.
\nHowever, I find it hard to believe that the ambassador can
\nseriously deny Mr. Beanal's charge that the U.S. and the UN
\nrobbed the Papuans of their opportunity for independence.<\/p>\n
While Kennedy's intervention in 1962 may have helped to
\nprevent a war between the Netherlands and Indonesia over West
\nPapua, the fate of the Papuan people themselves was of no
\nconsequence to Washington. In fact there is plenty of evidence to
\nshow that America wanted the territory to go to Indonesia,
\nregardless of the Papuans' wishes. To give just one example, in
\nFebruary 1962, U.S. National Security staff member Robert Komer
\nwrote to one of president Kennedy's national assistants,
\ncommenting that: \"I can't blame the Dutch for doubting that Indos
\nhave any intention of allowing genuine plebiscite (in West Papua)
\nfive years or so from now. But the important thing is that some
\nsuch Indo promise is the essential face-saving device the Dutch
\nhave been seeking. We must get them to take it as best they can
\nexpect.\"<\/p>\n
The plain fact is that the U.S., and more importantly the UN,
\nabandoned the Papuans because they did not matter, while Jakarta
\ndid. It was big power politics and to suggest otherwise is simply
\ninaccurate.<\/p>\n
DR. JOHN SALTFORD<\/p>\n
London, UK<\/p>", "url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/us-policy-on-papua-1447893297", "image": "" }, "sponsor": "Okusi Associates", "sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com" }