Reconciliation: The key to healing wounds in East Timor

By Yuri O. Thamrin

JAKARTA (JP): In a recent article published on Oct. 4 in Newsweek, Bishop Carlos Felipe Ximenes Belo argued that the world has a moral obligation to defend the East Timorese from the ongoing humanitarian catastrophe inflicted by Indonesia. "The world owes my people", declared Bishop Belo.

Belo's article is thought provoking. He put his point across loud and clear, in an elegant and articulate manner. His article is one that abounds with vivid description of the terrible havoc wrought by pro-Jakarta militias, who were actively backed by the Indonesian Military (TNI). Considering Belo's high personal standing, it is obvious that his views will substantially color international opinion on East Timor, because the world's assessment of East Timor might be derived through the "eyes" of the bishop.

In a frank manner, Bishop Belo chided the West for its hypocrisy toward East Timor, when the Indonesian soldiers invaded and annexed his country in the 1970s. It seems that the logic of the Cold War prevented the West from taking firm action against Indonesia's bloody invasion. In the wake of Indonesia's invasion, 200,000 East Timorese perished, and many more suffered terribly under the iron-fisted rule of the Soeharto regime.

In Belo's view, the popular consultation which occurred on Aug. 30 was a significant turning point in the history of East Timor. The East Timorese -- defenseless and weak as they have long been -- were given a chance by the United Nations to express their true convictions. As such, they bravely rejected Indonesia's proposal for wide-ranging autonomy and, instead, almost 80 percent of them voted for independence. This is basically the root cause of the current East Timor debacle.

The disappointed and angry Indonesian military subsequently instigated their revenge, using the "dark force" of the pro- Jakarta militias to punish the East Timorese. The sufferings brought about by the scorched-earth policy is all too apparent for everyone to see.

According to Belo, the world has a moral obligation to help his nation. The post-Cold War era has freed the international community from the shackles of the old geopolitical logic. It also provides an opportunity for the world to redeem itself for its past mistakes. For the sake of East Timor's survival, the world has to discipline Indonesia. If need be, military force should be robustly applied to TNI members and pro-Jakarta militias alike. At the very least, vigorous economic measures should be taken to change Indonesia's behavior.

Looking closely at Belo's article, one could not but feel that Belo's opinion appeared simplistic. What Bishop Belo tries to underscore is that the key to the solution of the East Timor problem is "international intervention". In addition, Belo seems to believe that all the trouble in East Timor is solely the result of TNI-backed pro-Jakarta militias, and not due to the complexity of the question at hand.

Will the international intervention work to achieve a long- lasting and genuine settlement of the East Timor question?

First, international intervention is not without its own limitations. It is highly improbable to posit that the international intervention will last for a long period of time. There have been speculations recently that the International Force for East Timor (Interfet) will not tolerate troop casualties.

If there are Interfet fatalities in the conflict the participating states' eagerness to continue with the mission might peter out.

There are clear signs that Australia -- a country which has been enthusiastically supporting humanitarian intervention in East Timor -- is experiencing domestic disputes concerning the best and most appropriate approach to the East Timor crisis.

Furthermore, as reported by the Australian Broadcasting Corporation, Australia's Minister of Defense John Moore recently visited the Pentagon to discuss the possibility of reversing the Interfet operational doctrine, from the current war-fighting mode to a normal peace-keeping operation.

Australia is reportedly in a difficult position to sustain over a long period of time the costly financial burden needed to maintain its fully geared military deployment in East Timor.

Second, East Timor's terrain is ideal for guerrilla fighting. This is the reason why the proindependence Falintil's armed groups have managed to maintain a protracted guerrilla campaign against Indonesia for almost 24 years. This in turn gives us an inkling of what the pro-Jakarta militias may pursue in the future, unless their interests are sufficiently accommodated.

Considering this, one could pose a pertinent question: Is Interfet ready to become involved in protracted guerrilla warfare in East Timor?

Third, judging from the above, it can be argued that the cost of the military settlement in East Timor will be very high. Hence, the final solution for East Timor should be attempted through political accommodation, i.e., with the involvement of all parties concerned, regardless of their political affiliations and including the prointegration camp.

As the UN Secretary-General has rightly underlined, peace and stability in East Timor will be highly dependent on the existence of a future political system in East Timor which is inclusive and democratic in nature.

Therefore, it follows that "power sharing" is the name of the game in bringing to a close the tragedy of East Timor. That goal should be negotiated among all East Timorese people.

Fourth, in order to achieve the above-mentioned solution, the help of impartial institutions and authoritative public figures is essential. These institutions and public figures are supposed to reactivate the process of reconciliation among all the East Timorese, as a first step toward political accommodation. In this regard, one could pose a pertinent question: Do we have such impartial and authoritative institutions and public figures?

Certainly, the United Nations and Bishop Belo would be suitable for the role. Hence, they both need to craft a proper approach to gain and bolster confidence from all elements within the East Timorese community. Obviously, it remains to be seen whether the UN and Bishop Belo will take up the role of "honest brokers".

Fifth, the negative attitude shown by many in the international community toward Indonesia, as well as the biased remarks and assessments toward this country, are regrettable. Scolding never solves any problem; they only cause attitudes in Indonesia to harden. In this regard, Indonesia deserves another reading. After all, Indonesia is a country undergoing the process of democracy. Indonesia is also the prime mover for the popular consultation in East Timor. The government of Indonesia is also ready to establish a national fact-finding commission, and is even prepared to set up a national tribunal to redress human rights questions in East Timor. For all this, Indonesia deserves the world's understanding and assistance.

It is also relevant here to mention that peace and stability in East Timor will be dependent to a significant extent on Indonesia's "goodwill". After all, Indonesia is a big neighboring country looming large on East Timor's western frontier. The government has formally accepted the outcome of the popular consultation in East Timor.

This positive stance underscores the seriousness of Indonesia with regard to the settlement of the East Timor question. Considering that silly and biased remarks will only create ill feeling in Indonesia and, as such, may affect the goodwill of the Indonesian people, it is therefore important that everyone should exercise self-restraint, respect each other's honor, and also employ a forward-looking approach.

In conclusion, contrary to Bishop Belo's belief, international intervention does not seem to be the key to the East Timor solution. Worse of all, such intervention, when solely pursed in military terms, might get out of hand, and in turn make the search for peace even more elusive.

People say "violence will only beget violence". Therefore, the key to the East Timor question lies in political reconciliation and accommodation among all East Timorese, including those belonging to the prointegration camp. Given his high personal standing, Bishop Belo can obviously contribute to this goal.