West Papua 35 years on: Time to hear the truth

West Papua 35 years on: Time to hear the truth

John Saltford, London

In his July 30th article in this newspaper, Foreign Affairs
official Andri Hadi argues against any discussion of the 1969
Indonesian-organized act of self determination in West Papua
known as the "Act of Free Choice".

The Papuans it seems should accept what happened to them and
be grateful for anything that Jakarta cares to offer, whether it
is the, still unimplemented, Special Autonomy law or the
threatened division of their country into three. But nowhere does
he make any mention of what the Papuans themselves actually want,
then or now.

Instead he argues that West Papua was always an integral part
of the Netherlands East Indies with no right to its own self-
determination. There are of course arguments for and against this
position. Jakarta's official line suggests that the West Papuans'
culture, ethnicity and history are bound up with that of Java and
other parts of Indonesia. Others would point out that an
artificial border created by Europeans in the 19th century cannot
alter the fact that the people on the divided island of New
Guinea have far more in common with each other than they have
ever had with the neighboring populations of South East Asia.

But I would argue that this debate lost its relevance in 1962
when the West Papuans were guaranteed their right to full self-
determination in the UN-brokered New York Agreement signed by
Indonesia and the Netherlands. Since then the key historical
issue has been whether or not this agreement was properly
implemented, and if not, what now needs to be done to rectify the
past.

Despite Hadi's protests, it is perfectly possible, with or
without a "present lens", to make a relevant judgment on what
happened 35 years ago during the "Act of Free Choice". In
particular one can examine whether it was, as required by the
agreement, an act of self-determination involving all adult
Papuans "in accordance with international practice".

The facts are this. In total 1,022 Papuans out of a population
of nearly 800,000 were selected by Jakarta to publicly
participate in the "Act of Free Choice" in front of a selection
of UN and Indonesian officials, Ambassadors and the military.

At each of the eight "voting ceremonies" all the
representatives would stand up on command to indicate their
unanimous support for annexation by Indonesia and rejection of
independence.

Hadi would perhaps argue that "international practice" is a
vague term that does not specify any particular method. However
to understand what was meant by it at the time you need only look
at the 1960 UN General Assembly Resolution 1541.

This stated that the integration of a non-self governing
territory (as West Papua officially was then) with an independent
state should be "the result of the freely expressed wishes of the
territory's peoples...their wishes having been expressed through
informed and democratic processes, impartially conducted and
based upon universal suffrage."

Whatever Jakarta might argue, the "Act of Free Choice" bore no
relation to this. Government officials today like Hadi must
privately regret that Soeharto's soldiers did not permit some
dissenting voices to be heard to allow a more realistic outcome.
Instead he is left to try and make us believe that a 100 percent
result was anything more than a ridiculous and crudely
orchestrated denial of Papuan rights.

Hadi is correct that the New York Agreement came about as a
compromise by the Dutch who had originally intended to grant West
Papua independence by 1970.

In the face of military threats from President Sukarno, and
pressure from the U.S. who wished to appease Jakarta in the face
of Soviet competition, they agreed to sign and hand West Papua
over to a temporary UN administration. But this was only on
condition that political and human rights were guaranteed and an
act of self determination involving all adult Papuans would be
permitted "in accordance with international practice".

In the event, the UN pulled out seven months later and
transferred the territory to Jakarta, without any consultation
with the population. A senior UN official commented privately at
the time: "I have yet to meet any thinking, sober, generally
responsible Papuan who sees any good with the coming link with
Indonesia."

In 1968, a small UN team returned to West Papua to help
Indonesia prepare for the "Act of Free Choice". But by this time
the Papuans had already experienced five years of Jakarta's rule
and, as a visiting U.S. diplomat remarked, "The Indonesians have
tried everything from bombing them with B-26's, to shelling and
mortaring them, but a continuous state of semi-rebellion
persists".

Aware of their deep unpopularity, Soeharto's men devised the
"Act of Free Choice" to avoid a referendum on the grounds that
the Papuans were "too primitive" to be able to vote directly -
something that they had already done under the Dutch and would do
again in the 1971 Indonesian general elections.

But rather than protest, the UN chose to collaborate and
privately urged Indonesia to gain assurances from the Dutch that
they would not question the inevitable result.

Despite the obvious vote-rigging by Jakarta, there was little
international interest. Explaining this, one British official
commented: "I cannot imagine the U.S., Japanese, Dutch, or
Australian governments putting at risk their economic and
political relations with Indonesia on a matter of principle
involving a relatively small number of very primitive peoples."

Another diplomat added: "the [UN] Secretariat, whose influence
could be important, appear only too anxious to get shot of the
problem as quickly and smoothly as possible."

In the end, despite protests from some African states, the UN
General Assembly simply voted in November 1969 to "take note" of
the Papuan "vote" and with that the UN washed its hands of the
whole business.

This is the unpleasant reality of what happened to the
Papuans, and rather than try and bury the past as Mr. Hadi
suggests, I would argue that a proper acknowledgement of the
truth by Indonesia, its allies and importantly the UN, would at
least go some way towards beginning the process of finding a just
and lasting solution to the tragedy of West Papua.

The writer (johnsaltford@hotmail.com) is author of The United
Nations and the Indonesian Takeover of West Papua 1962.