Peace the only option for Aceh

Peace the only option for Aceh

Aguswandi, London

Irresponsible statements from politicians in Jakarta is the
last thing Acehnese need at this time, post-disaster. Yet this is
what we hear from members of the House of Representatives in
Jakarta, as they issue statements criticizing the peace talks in
Helsinki.

Tjahjo Kumolo, the chairman of Indonesian Democracy Party of
Struggle (PDI-P) faction, has described the negotiations as a
waste of time. Others have said that there has been too much talk
and no concrete results.

Deputy Speaker of the House of Representatives Soetardjo
Soerjogoeritno has also urged the government to halt negotiations
with the Free Aceh Movement (GAM) because he says it has
"internationalized" the conflict in Aceh.

What they are saying, in effect, is "forget about peace". All
this after the hundreds of thousands of deaths in the tsunami.
After the deaths of thousands more in conflict; after many
Acehnese expressed their dreams for peace, it is immensely
irresponsible, arrogant and ignorant for those in Jakarta to
derail the negotiations. Many Acehnese, meanwhile, including the
majority of the province's regents, continue to express their
support and hopes for the process.

There are many Acehnese that do view the Helsinki process as
inadequate. The exclusion, for example, of civil society groups
from the process has been a major cause of concern. But many in
Aceh continue to support negotiations as they hope it can be the
beginning of the end to the decades of violence.

The majority hope that the talks will continue, disputes can
be settled, and peace can be fully implemented in order that
lives can begin anew.

Armed conflict is not an option anymore, but peace is.
Building a sustainable peace in Aceh is a critical condition for
reconstruction and the rebuilding of hope in Aceh. But this is
far from easy in any situation, even more so where -- as in Aceh
-- the conflict has been entrenched for so many years.

These dissenting voices from the national legislature are
failing to look at the many points of agreement reached by the
government and GAM in this process. Nor have they looked at the
potential common ground that can be found. They are focussing
instead on a substantively irrelevant aspect of the talks. This
is the question of an international role in the process.

For some of them, this rebuffing of foreign help is
attributable to concerns that international involvement could
result in Aceh becoming another East Timor. This phenomena, call
it post-East Timor Syndrome, has promoted a kind of endemic
paranoia, whereby any international group trying to mediate or
help the peace process must be some kind of Trojan horse: A gift
brought to our house, but carrying the enemy within to destroy
our home.

So instead of looking at foreign contributions to the
negotiation and settlement process as an opportunity, this is
seen as yet another reason to reject the talks. In a letter from
some DPR members to the government, it was stated that the
government plan to allow observers into the process would
internationalize the situation in Aceh. The government, they
said, should not allow foreigners to be involved.

This aspect of the international role is a denial of a
necessary reality given that Aceh has already become an
internationally recognized disaster area in the wake of the
tsunami. During the rebuilding phase at least, Aceh can no longer
be said to be "owned" simply by the Acehnese and Indonesia, it is
also an interest of the international community. Huge sums of
money, aid and help for Aceh has come from all parts of the
world.

In terms of building peace, the involvement of the
international community is also important in Aceh. There are
ongoing problems in efforts to build trust between the Acehnese
and the government, thanks to the endless military operations in
Aceh, so external mediation such as that offered to the Acehnese
peace process by the international community must be made
welcome. Indonesian has done this very same thing, offering its
officials in mediating roles for conflicts in other Asian
countries.

The opposition to the negotiation process by sections of the
Indonesian public also needs to be addressed -- immediately -- by
the government if they are serious about finding a route to peace
in Aceh. The main obstacle thrown up by this opposition is not
the hostility itself but how the government works to challenge or
contain it.

The hostility towards fuel price hikes was far more widespread
than that seen in resistance to the Helsinki process. But in that
case it was in the government's interest to make serious efforts
to convince the public to support the administration's decision.
This does not seem to be the case with the Helsinki process.

The government's meetings with GAM have just completed their
third phase, and many points have been agreed on. Yet the public
remains almost wholly unaware of the progress or concessions
achieved. The opponents of the talks in Helsinki have
deliberately distorted the process and its objectives but the
government is making little effort to challenge them.

The writer is Acehnese human rights advocate working for TAPOL
in London. He can be reached at agus_smur@hotmail.com.