On signing of MOU
The Indonesian government announced that on May 12 or May 13 a memorandum of understanding (MOU) will be signed between the Indonesian government and the Free Aceh Movement (GAM) in Geneva. Signing for Indonesia will be Indonesian Ambassador Hasan Wirayuda, and somebody called Zaini Abdullah will represent GAM. This looks like a signing ceremony involving two sovereign countries, taking place in a neutral foreign country.
Why is the projected signing not in Jakarta if GAM is considered a rebel organization? Worse still this ceremony will be attended by two Cabinet ministers, namely the foreign minister and the state minister of human rights affairs.
The presence of the two ministers is really a boost to the morale and honor of GAM. Is the attendance of those two ministers really necessary? If the government thinks that the GAM is just a rebel organization which is trying to achieve something illegal, like separation from the republic, then this signing ceremony is purely a domestic affair.
The government has appointed an ambassador to sign the MOU, and if that is not enough the government can send a not too high- ranking official from the ministry of home affairs. The Republic of Indonesia is an internationally recognized sovereign country, while GAM is an unlawful political organization which goes against the 1945 Constitution.
If we follow the explanation of the state minister of human rights affairs, we will become more confused. The minister has called this signing a historic moment because both sides will agree not to use violence any longer, which means that both sides will lay down their arms (The Jakarta Post, May 5, 2000). How could a minister give such a statement? He should understand that the Indonesian Military and the police are legally armed and hence it is not possible for them to lay down their arms. Arms are the official equipment of a soldier and a police officer. It is the illegal armed forces of GAM who should lay down their arms.
According to President Abdurrahman Wahidm, an incorrect statement could turn the whole thing upside down. The interpretation given by GAM spokesman Ismail Syahputra about the MOU should be carefully examined. The spokesman said the armed wing of GAM backed the peace plan as it constitutes the first step toward gaining independence. Is the Indonesian government aware of this?
Ismail Syahputra explained further the details of this MOU. First, it calls for a cease-fire between GAM and the country's security forces. Second, the withdrawal of troops from Aceh. Third, the laying down of arms. Fourth, the prosecution of human rights abuses in the province.
It seems that the mature republic in this case has lost the battle with the infant GAM, but thanks to our foreign minister, Alwi Shihab, we still can win the war. Our foreign minister is more mature in politics than our state minister of human rights affairs, Hasballah.
Alwi Shihab's interpretation of the MOU is more logical and acceptable. By telling the truth, the foreign minister is pouring cold water on the Aceh plan (Post, May 6, 2000). According to Alwi Shihab, the MOU is neither a peace agreement, a cease-fire and certainly not a political settlement of the Aceh problem, but a humanitarian pause. This is purely an earnest effort to create peaceful conditions, and the involvement of the government in this MOU is certainly not a recognition of GAM as a state. GAM has been disturbing stability and causing the Aceh people to live in chaos.
This statement from the foreign minister is loud and clear, and leaves no place for illusions in GAM for an independent Aceh. Aceh is part of the unitary Republic of Indonesia, which was proclaimed on Aug. 17, 1945, and, with God's help, it will remain that way.
SOEGIH ARTO
Jakarta