E. Timor: Another Western conspiracy?

E. Timor: Another Western conspiracy?

By T.M. Callahan

JAKARTA (JP): If you agree with Malaysian Prime Minister
Mahathir's remarks in the Oct. 14 issue of The Straits Times,
Singapore's most widely circulated daily, then the West is
squarely to blame for the current crisis in East Timor.

According to Mahathir, the issue was handled poorly and much
more could have been done to avoid the post-referendum turmoil
and the acute sense of abasement felt by many Indonesians.
Responding to how the matter could have been handled better, the
outspoken premier makes the argument that Indonesia should not
have been pressured to make a decision about the future of East
Timor precisely when it was in the midst of making its own
transition to democracy.

Making this point, Mahathir says, "We have seen many countries
trying to switch to liberal democracy making a mess of things. It
was not the best time to make a decision."

In this regard Mahathir got it partially right. The timing of
the referendum for either autonomy or independence was rushed,
partly because those involved in the talks did not know if the
offer would survive President Habibie's current administration.
In hindsight, it was imprudent to push ahead with the referendum
on such a short timeline and in an environment that was far from
secure. At the very least, the United Nations should have
insisted on a stronger mandate in East Timor, one which obligated
Jakarta's authorities to permit international peacekeepers on the
ground prior to any referendum.

However, Mahathir is wrong when he accuses the West of using
East Timor as a way to break up Indonesia. Is there really some
dark Western conspiracy to divide and destroy Indonesia?

I doubt it, but that is exactly what Malaysia's Mahathir would
have us believe. Incredibly, after suggesting that foreign
elements were at work to break up Indonesia during the Soeharto
era, Mahathir contends, "And so when the currency crisis plunged
Indonesia into political and economic turmoil and Mr. Soeharto
was overthrown, the West seized the opportunity to once again
break up Indonesia. East Timor presented the best possibility for
this new attempt." Taking special aim at Australia's perceived
overzealous stance on East Timor, Dr. Mahathir stated that
Australians would be the largest beneficiaries if Indonesia, as a
result of independence in East Timor, began to disintegrate.

These kinds of conspiracy theories obviously are not only
unfounded but irresponsible and inflammatory. In fact, the
Western world has nothing to gain from a destabilized Indonesia.
On the contrary, a strong, united and prosperous Indonesia will
mean greater stability in Asia and better prospects for the
significant western business interests in the country.

On the matter of Australia, aside from stating Canberra's
ambition to act as a U.S. deputy in policing Asia, a role
Australia is ill-equipped to assume, Mahathir fails to show in
any concrete manner how Australians can benefit from supporting
East Timorese independence.

In fact, the Australian government stands to pay dearly for
taking a lead role in pushing for the referendum and then sending
the largest number of peacekeepers to East Timor. Consider the
following: diplomatic relations between Australia and Indonesia
are at an all-time low; relations with other Asian neighbors,
particularly within ASEAN, have been disrupted; and Canberra will
need to bear the financial cost of maintaining thousands of
peacekeepers in East Timor as well as providing future aid to the
newly independent state.

In his remarks Mahathir acknowledges that the East Timorese,
if given a free choice, would likely prefer separation. However,
never one to concede a point easily, Mahathir asserts, "But the
West made sure that the Timorese voted for independence through
overt propaganda, support, promises of protection and aid for an
independent Timor."

Mahathir even suggests that Western powers saw to it that Jose
Ramos-Horta, the territory's de facto foreign minister, was
awarded the Nobel Peace Prize simply to further their own agendas
in East Timor. Without such intervention, the Malaysian premier
says East Timor would have moved towards "eventual full
integration," a claim that many observers familiar with East
Timor's unhappy marriage with Indonesia would dispute.

As I listened to last Thursday's live broadcast of President
Habibie's accountability speech, it struck me that the long-
awaited referendum in East Timor could be one of the few
noteworthy decisions for which he later receives recognition,
despite the enormous destruction and dislocation that followed
the vote. And he did it without alleging any Western conspiracy
to break up or humiliate Indonesia.

In the end, if Indonesia's government and people can come to
terms with an independent East Timor, perhaps Mahathir, in his
capacity as head of state of a close neighbor, should try to do
the same.

The writer is a business consultant based in Jakarta.