New peace deal greeted with caution

New peace deal greeted with caution

Tony Hotland, The Jakarta Post/Jakarta

Doubt and joy have been the alternating feelings since another
milestone toward ending the decades-long armed conflict in Aceh
occurred on Monday with the signing of a historic peace accord.

Applause and tears of joy have been juxtaposed against raised
eyebrows and mounting questions, particularly when people --
Acehnese in particular -- look back and take history into
account.

Monday's signing of the Memorandum of Understanding (MoU)
between the government and the Free Aceh Movement (GAM) was the
third effort in the last five years to terminate one of the
world's longest-running wars after previous ones were short-
lived.

In May 2000, the Joint Understanding on Humanitarian Pause was
signed in Davos, Switzerland. It failed shortly thereafter as the
parties could not agree on the creation of a steering committee
to facilitate dialogs.

In December 2002, the Cessation of Hostilities Agreement
(CoHA) was signed at the Henry Dunant Center headquarters in
Geneva.

It also faltered (in May 2003) as the parties failed to agree
on the mechanism for demilitarization. Indonesia's negotiation
team chief was diplomat and former ambassador Wiryono
Sastrohandoyo, while GAM's was Zaini Abdullah.

So when the current MoU was churned out over five rounds of
talks and eventually signed, it was naturally logical to wonder
whether this one would really work.

"I wish everything well. But looking at the process and the
results, I still have concerns," Wiryono told The Jakarta Post on
Tuesday.

"Everybody's happy. It also happened back then (December 2002
for the CoHA) because it was a euphoric moment. But the thing is,
most people think that this automatically means peace. They don't
know the compromises and political considerations behind it,
which are usually the source of any failure," he said.

This time around, said Wiryono, that source could be from the
House of Representatives, because the negotiations had been
carried out without proper consultation and seemed to be
secretive.

"During the CoHA process, I consulted with them on every
single word and I was stern. It failed because GAM didn't abide
by the agreement and kept demanding independence. But this MoU
was not made public until after it was signed," he argued.

Moreover, he said, many elements of the agreement would need
House approval.

"I also think we (the central government) gave away too much.
The fact that GAM wanted to sign was because they got their
demands, while now the central government is basically powerless
with the planned presence of the very powerful provincial
legislative body," he argued.

Wiryono said there was no explicit statement about giving up
their independence ambitions, nor about accepting the Special
Autonomy Law, while the previous agreement openly used the law as
its basis.

"The real commitment is missing here. But if it is to proceed,
I hope all parties will be rational about the peace commitment,"
he said.

Acehnese legislator Tgk. Imam Suja, who was the head of the
Muhammadiyah's Aceh branch when CoHA was conceived, was more
optimistic.

"This agreement is very detailed. There are no more gray
areas, and was signed by two high-ranking officials. The two
parties are really committed this time," he asserted.

Imam explained that there were not any references made to the
creation of "peace zones" in this MoU, but there were in the
CoHA. In addition, all GAM weapons would now be surrendered,
rather than just stored as the CoHA ordered.

"The monitoring mission (in the MoU) also has more power now
(than the CoHA) to ensure that neither parties break their
commitment," he added.