Aceh monitor anxiety

Ravaged by nature, plundered by greed; the scars of suffering will be difficult to wipe from our national psyche.

It is hard to get excited about suggested "breakthroughs" on resolving the conflict in Aceh. Promises have been broken and repeated initiatives have fallen by the wayside. The end result of years of political pledges and hundreds of hours of diplomatic speak, is that the suffering continues unabated.

Despite a couple failed attempts to make peace, there is, frankly, little political will on either side -- the government or separatist -- to come to an amicable resolution, which would allow the Acehnese to live in peace.

There are those inhumane among us who seem more interested in maintaining an atmosphere of antagonism in the province than a solution to the conflict. This a sad reality, which Indonesia cannot excuse.

This nation has been guilty of omission by permitting injustice toward its brothers and sisters in Aceh to continue. We -- the people of Indonesia -- have been accomplices to a reign of terror in Indonesia's westernmost province.

When the tsunami of Dec. 26 devastated the shores of Nanggroe Aceh Darussalam, a renewed mood of political cooperation briefly dawned on the nation.

Friend and foe alike were of the same mind-set: everybody needed to unite to provide relief and to assist and rebuild the devastated province.

There was suddenly a climate conducive to a commencement of informal talks to bring about a respite in Aceh.

Five months and four rounds of negotiations later, the distant roar of narrow-minded persons who call themselves "nationalists" are beginning to be heard once again.

They are leading a growing chorus of critics whose "manhood" is threatened by the fact that a "foreign" institution (the CMI in Finland) may yet be able to facilitate progress in peace talks between the government and Free Aceh Movement (GAM) representatives.

Lawmakers are already grumbling about the possibility of having foreign observers (from the EU) in Aceh to monitor whatever peace accords are eventually reached.

Do these Jakarta lawmakers not realize that after years of abuse, a lot of people in Aceh consider them more alien than real foreigners, who will arrive and show credible respect for the Acehnese?

Many arguments concerning domestic sovereignty may well be valid, and the "internationalization" of Aceh may unnecessarily "invite" foreign intervention into a domestic issue.

But Indonesia cannot summarily reject peaceful initiatives on Aceh after it has utterly failed to bring peace and prosperity to people in the province.

For all intents and purposes, successive Indonesian governments, because of their exploitation, patronizing behavior and habitual use of terror in the province, may have has lost any legitimacy to represent the interests of Aceh. Simply put "I'm sorry" no longer suffices. Empty promises are not a good enough reason for the Acehnese to believe that we care.

By scuttling potential peace in Aceh, just because a few Jakartans, who have not been to Aceh in years, do not want a few dozen foreign observers there is reckless behavior.

In jeopardizing peace, one also sabotages reconstruction efforts for those in dire need. How can Aceh fully engage in redevelopment if at any moment there is a likelihood of a gun battle?

We support the resolution of the Aceh conflict within the framework of the unitary state of Indonesia. That should be the foremost option discussed on the negotiating table.

But the final objective should be the welfare and well-being of the Acehnese.

If there is a cost to peace, then Indonesia should seriously consider bearing it. And if that entails having foreign observers on the ground, then it is a small price to pay.

If certain politicians are so "allergic" to the presence of foreigners in Aceh, Jakarta could, like it did during a previous failed cessation of hostilities agreement, invite the presence of observers from "friendly" neighbors deemed less threatening. The cooperation of Thailand and the Philippines, for example, could be sought for such a process.

Indonesia's national sovereignty is an important element in the negotiations for conflict resolution. Nevertheless, basic human rights -- the right to live in peace, free from fear and provision of basic welfare -- is an undisputable God-given entitlement.

Ultimately, basic human rights precedes nationalist sovereignty.