Aceh peace, a challenge before the world

Aceh peace, a challenge before the world

Desra Percaya, Permanent Mission of Indonesia to UN, New York

The series of discreet contacts, led by Hasan di Tiro based in
Stockholm, Sweden, between Indonesian government officials and
the separatist Free Aceh Movement (GAM) appears to have resulted
in the imminent signing of an agreement to end the conflict in
Aceh. This latest development has given a rare hope for all
Acehnese that peace would soon return to this restive province,
provided that GAM does not repeat a unilateral retraction at the
last minute.

Indeed, the dialog process has been going on since January
2000 with its dynamics of progress and shortcomings. Despite the
government's good faith and sincere efforts to resolve the issue
by adopting a comprehensive approach, in particular the enactment
of special autonomy laws, the light at the end of the tunnel is
yet to be seen.

Nevertheless, the process has provided a firm basis for
resolving differences peacefully. Dialog should, of course,
provide opportunities to understand the underlying concerns of
the respective parties, and to instill trust and confidence among
the concerned parties towards achieving a political settlement.

Unfortunately, the expected progress has failed to
materialize. GAM leaders even continue to maintain an unrealistic
and rigid stance, namely a condition of "independence and nothing
but independence", which has been unhelpful.

In fact, figuring out GAM's approach to negotiations has been
one of the most difficult obstacles, as its leaders fail to
differentiate between rhetoric and reality. Their belated
readiness to enter into a substantive political dialog, for
instance, has shown that they have a real problem with
translating their demands for independence into a clear political
agenda.

The problem seems to lie at the heart of GAM leadership,
particularly the ailing and hardline leaders, who only repeat a
rhetorical assertion that goes back centuries. These leaders are
unquestionably living an illusory existence and seem to be out of
touch with contemporary realities. They mistakenly believe that
the international community is fully behind them in their
struggle to break away from the Indonesian republic.

While there is no longer international support for GAM, this
separatist group should try and demonstrate that it is worthy of
any. It is merely wishful thinking that, under current global
conditions, a separatist movement practicing terror against a
legitimate government would receive international support.
Concerted support should instead be extended to Indonesia -- a
country committed to promoting democracy, human rights, and the
rule of law -- which is presently fighting the terrorist
phenomenon.

GAM should take the opportunity to participate in the reform
process, rather than ignore the many opportunities that have been
extended to it. Instead, GAM has intensified military activities
and increasingly expounds upon the linkage between racial hatred
and opposition to the central government.

Recent developments in the field attest to the fact that GAM
maintains its practice of terror, and the evidence is strong
enough to classify GAM as a terrorist organization. This
intolerable situation has forced Indonesia to take firm action in
upholding law and order, as is the legitimate right of any
country in the world.

What role can the international community play at this
particular juncture? While the government of Indonesia is making
every effort to bring prosperity and justice to the people of
Aceh, the international community should contribute to the
creation of an environment conducive to peace by "enlightening"
GAM leaders about their unrealistic demands and putting some kind
of direct pressure on them to abandon violent practices.

Regrettably, some countries that have championed democracy,
human rights, and the rule of law, continue to harbor and
tolerate GAM leaders who have been waging terror in Aceh.
Although some of their hosts may argue that these people are not
directly involved in acts of terror, surely they have a certain
degree of control and authority in fomenting fear in this
province. This is a test case to show how serious the
international community is about the dialog process; speeches are
definitely not enough. The latest summons of the Swedish emissary
in Jakarta needs no further explanation.

Repeated expressions of support for the sovereignty and
territorial integrity of Indonesia would be meaningless if they
are not accompanied by concrete action directed at the leadership
of GAM, particularly in light of the forthcoming meeting in
Geneva.

The above views are personal.