Govt move only hardens Papuans's determination

Neles Tebay, Pontifical University of Urbaniana, Rome

The controversial plan to divide Papua into three provinces was delayed on the heels of the fatal clashes following the announcement of the Central Irian Jaya province in Timika.

Yet while the controversial Presidential Decree No.1, 2003 on Papua's division has not been canceled, the central government needs to take into account all potential effects of its imminent materialization.

Jakarta's endorsement of the establishment of new provinces in Papua would only fuel the Papuan people's campaign for self- determination.

The presidential decree on Papua's division has been and will be used by the Free Papua Movement (OPM) in some foreign countries to show how Jakarta deceives the international community by violating its own law on Papua's autonomy.

Such a move was already expressed in the OPM's letter dated June 30, to the Pacific Islands Forum (PIF). "Indonesia went out to sell its Special Autonomy Law," however it added, "Indonesia has destroyed it," through the division of Papua into three provinces. The letter continues, "the subdivision of West Papua does not serve any purpose other than security. It will pave the way for more security forces and militia".

Therefore, the Vanuatu based-OPM has appealed to the PIF "to collectively and individually take up the West Papuan case with the United Nations Secretary General Kofi Annan and the United Nations General Assembly".

The PIF members' annual meeting in Auckland, New Zealand, from Aug. 12 to Aug. 18, which was also participated in by the OPM's representative John Otto Ondowame through Vanuatu's delegation, did not express their support either for Papua's division nor the OPM's appeal.

Rather the Pacific countries reiterated their support for special autonomy for Papua, which for them "offers realistic prospects for peaceful resolution of the situation in Papua."

The PIF then urged Indonesia "to expedite promulgation of the necessary regulations and to take other steps needed to give effect to special autonomy."

With the possible creation of the third province in Timika, the OPM might be convincing the PIF that Jakarta has undermined PIF's support for Papua's autonomy law, and it calls for PIF's support for its campaign for the review of the 1969 Act of Free Choice in Papua.

Jakarta should not underestimate this campaign.

The campaign is no longer merely limited to OPM; it is now widely supported by the international solidarity movement for Papua, composed of many leading non-governmental organizations (NGOs) in foreign countries.

For the NGOs, the root cause of the Papua problem is the denial of the right to self-determination in 1969.

The solidarity movement, in its fourth annual conference earlier in Auckland from Aug. 8 to Aug. 10, recognized that "the root cause of the human rights problems in West Papua is the fraudulent Act of 'Free' Choice, which was part of an attempt to legitimize the take over of West Papua by Indonesia in 1969".

John Gershmen, a senior analyst at the Interhemispheric Resource Center, recognizes that "West Papua was not part of Indonesia at the time of Independence and weakly integrated into Indonesia," (Foreign Policy in Focus, October 2002).

Anthony L. Smith, a senior research fellow at the Asia-Pacific Center for Security Studies in Honolulu, acknowledges that West Papua was annexed by Indonesia through the 1969 plebiscite, and the UN simply "noted" the plebiscite as having occurred, but it never actually endorsed its outcome (Foreign Policy in Focus, Nov. 27, 2002).

The European Commission's (EC) independent mission to Indonesia further reports: "Indonesian troops immediately took control of the territory, and the 'Act of Free Choice' which took place on Aug. 2, 1969, was never more than a farce. A grand total of 1,025 Papuans, all selected by the Indonesian authorities, were permitted to vote -- with virtually no UN monitoring -- on the future of West Papua's 800,000 inhabitants."

The then UN deputy secretary general, Chakravarthy Narashiman acknowledged that the plebiscite "was just a whitewash". He was closely involved in overseeing the work of the UN mission that was present in Papua at the time.

John Saltford, a British scholar, has published his study on the UN's role in relation to the 1969 plebiscite in Papua, under the title, The United Nations and the Indonesian take-over of West Papua 1962-1969: The Anatomy of Betrayal.

Collecting data from the UN documents, Australian and British documents, Saltford indicated the failure of the UN in conducting its obligation and responsibilities, and how the UN officials advised Jakarta how to "prevent a heated debate at the UN General Assembly" when a UN report on the plebiscite came up for discussion.

He also discovered some misleading statements by senior UN Secretariat officials in the run-up to the plebiscite, some evidence of the role of the UN secretariat and staff in the take- over of West Papua by Indonesia, and how the New York agreement as the guideline of the plebiscite was not properly implemented.

All these strengthen the NGOs' campaign for Papua's self- determination by calling on the UN Secretary General to review the UN's conduct in relation to the 1969 plebiscite.

Initiated in March 2002, some 79 leading NGOs and 134 parliamentarians from several countries have since joined the campaign.

In July 19, 2002, some 34 members of the European Parliament called on the European Commission and Council "to urge the UN Secretary General to instigate an immediate review of the UN's conduct in relation to the "Act of 'Free' Choice" and reconsider the act of self-determination in West Papua of August 1969, as it continues to be a source of unrest and protest in West Papua and constitutes a threat to stability and peace in the region of Southeast Asia".

The NGOs might be influencing their respective governments by saying that Indonesian government has undermined their government's support for autonomy through the planned division of the provinces, apart from suspending the establishment of the Papua People's Assembly (MRP).

The solidarity movement has even already urged the PIF to also support demands that "West Papua" be "reinstated on the agenda of the UN Decolonization Committee".

Given its non commitment to its own law on autonomy, the central government should not be surprised if many more NGOs, governments, and parliamentarians in foreign countries, support the campaign for the UN's review of its conduct in relation to the 1969 Plebiscite.