Papua issue a challenge for the new president

Papua issue a challenge for the new president

Neles Tebay, Rome

Papua is not a determining factor in the presidential campaign
as it has a very small number of voters. Neither Megawati
Soekarnoputri or Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono need to pay too much
attention to wooing voters from among the some two million
indigenous Papuans as these only account for one percent of the
total number of voters in the country.

In reality, they can ignore the small number of indigenous
Papuan voters, and focus their campaigning on more densely
populated provinces.

But it would be a big mistake for them to underestimate the
dangers presented by a failure to resolve the Papua issue.

For whoever is elected as the next president, the Papua issue
will require greater attention if a peaceful settlement is to be
achieved.

In the last four years, the Papua issue has been receiving
greater attention from the international community. The
government needs to be reminded just who the actors are who are
spurring interest in the Papua issue and how the topics related
to the Papua issue have been changing.

The growing international focus on Papua may be viewed from
two aspects.

The first aspect concerns the actors who are heightening
awareness of the Papua issue in foreign countries.

In the past, only a very few overseas non-governmental
organizations (NGOs) were interested in the Papua issue. But now,
it has become the center of attention for many leading NGOs from
various foreign countries. Their campaign has become more
effective since the establishment of the International Solidarity
Group for West Papua, which holds an annual conference on
the Papua issue.

The Papua question has also become the subject of study and
research among scholars. As a consequence, it is receiving more
attention from political, social and legal experts at a number of
leading universities and research institute. Through their
studies, the issue is being analyzed from different perspectives.
Their work, in turn, strengthens the West Papua campaign.

Some governments have begun to closely follow socio-political
developments in the western half of the island of New Guinea.
Whatever their motivations are, it is clear that the Papua issue
has been raised at some bilateral and multilateral meetings with
the Indonesia government.

The second aspect concerns the issues raised by the above
groups in relation to the Papua question. It is interesting to
analyze the topics raised, particularly by foreign
parliamentarians and governments.

They repeatedly insist on maintaining the territorial
integrity of Indonesia, including Papua. Therefore, they are not
supporting the Papuan independence movement.

They also clearly state that Indonesian territorial unity
cannot be maintained by a security approach alone as military
operations result in human rights violations. Instead, they
repeatedly emphasize the necessity for constructive dialogue as
part of an effort to tackle the root cases of the Papua issue.

When Law No.21/2001 on special autonomy for Papua Province was
passed, the international community was warm in its praise and
gave its wholehearted support to the Indonesian government.
However, when Megawati's government postponed the implementation
of the Papua autonomy law, the international community began to
put pressure on the government to fully and effectively implement
the legislation.

Stronger pressure was brought to bear when President Megawati
issued her controversial Presidential Instruction No. 1/2003 on
the division of Papua into three provinces.

With the government's failure to implement the Papua autonomy
law, the focus of attention of foreign parliamentarians and
governments changed.

They began raising human rights issues. Unresolved human
rights violations, such as cases of summary executions, torture,
arbitrary detention, rape and other rights abuses both in the
past and at the present time in Papua are now being discussed.
The necessity of addressing these rights abuses has been
recognized.

They have been putting pressure on the Indonesian government
to address these unresolved human rights abuses in Papua.

Some have even sent letters to the secretary-general of the
United Nations asking him to send a UN representative to
Indonesia in order to monitor the human rights situation in
Papua.

This is because human rights are universal, and violations of
these rights are a universal problem, even though the Indonesian
government always claims that these are internal matters. More
pressure on human rights violations may be expected, and the
government will need to be ready to respond to this pressure.

The latest bad news for Indonesia is that the international
community is now beginning to raise that very sensitive issue
(for Indonesia) -- the 1969 plebiscite, or the so-called "Act of
Free Choice" (AFC). It has become the subject of attention not
only of NGOs, but also of many legal experts, parliamentarians
and governments.

Therefore, the government will need to ready its diplomatic
weapons (The Jakarta Post, July 16). In my opinion, only two
weapons are needed, namely implementation of the Papua autonomy
law and the consequent revocation of the presidential instruction
on the division of Papua into three provinces, and engaging in a
constructive dialog with the Papuans with the mediation of a
third party.

Without these weapons, other countries will not be convinced
no matter what the Indonesian government does.

They already know about the problems in West Papua, the root
causes, the way the government is tackling these problems, and
what the government will say at diplomatic forums.

If the next President perpetuates Megawati's way of handling
the Papua issue, then the government must be ready to accept more
international pressure.

The writer is a postgraduate student at Urbaniana Pontifical
University in Rome.