GAM and martial law

GAM and martial law

Let me respond to Hilde May's comments (The Jakarta Post, July
15) on my analysis Unspoken protest amid prolonged war in Aceh of
July 8.

Hilde May said the "Free Aceh Movement (GAM) ... eventually
provoked martial law". It is not so simple as it may seem. If, as
even the Indonesian Military has recognized, GAM controlled a
large part of Aceh, why would it prefer to live under martial
law?

Hilde May reminded us of well-known issues such as "GAM
unlawfully collected ID cards" and that "those who refused to
obey GAM's orders had to face punishment". Worse and more recent,
villagers I met in areas of Bireuen and Pidie have confirmed that
GAM was responsible for intimidating village heads and firing on
public transportation vehicles; I have written about these
incidents elsewhere.

So for May to criticize my article as "one-sided" is unfair.
It is also puzzling, as she expects me to explain whether I
believe that "GAM would offer better leadership", while she
herself wonders "what kind of government (GAM) would like to
establish".

Does she really believe that these things are possible under
martial law (which was my subject matter)? And why should I
explain things which, as I made clear in the article, I did not
consider likely and therefore did not even mention?

Let us stick to the subject matter instead of speculating
beyond the topic; or else, May should go to Aceh to check the
facts herself.

ABOEPRIJADI SANTOSO
Banda Aceh, Aceh