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.