KK-AMP-JOGYA NEWS RELEASE: FRONT-PEPERA-PB
The Congressmen’s request comes in response to a petition letter they sent to UN Secretary General Kofi Annan on March 14, 2005 in which they requested his support in conducting a review of the 1969 Act of No Choice in which 1,025 Papuan elders were coerced and manipulated into voting unanimously on behalf of 80,000 Papuans to become a part of Indonesia rather than an independent nation. Although the UN sanctioned the 1969 Act of No Choice, the Act is generally regarded in the international community as a fraudulent tactic that was used by former President Suharto and his military regime to claim control of West Papua, a territory rich in natural resources including gold, silver, copper, oil and gas. In fact, recently declassified US documents show that the Indonesia government knew that allowing an open referendum would lead to West Papuan independence.
Jumat, 16 Mei 2008
Selasa, 13 Mei 2008
FRONT-PEPERA-PB
TUHAN ENGKAULAH GEMBALAKU AKU TAK AKAN GOYAH WALAUPUN MUSUH MENGEPUN AKU SANPAI HAMPIR DICOPOT NYAWA.
TUHAN BERILAH AKAL BUDI PEKERTI YANG BAIK DAN KEBIJAKSANAAN YANG MENJIWAI MANUSIA PAPUA AGAR MEREKA PEMERINTAHAN INDONESIA LEWAT KAKI TAQNGANNYA (MILITER INDONESIA=TNI-POLRI). TAU MENGORMATI RASA KEMANUSIAAN, PERDAIAN, AKAL BUDIPEKERTI, CINTAH DAMAI CINTAH AKAN KEBENARANG DLL.
BY :VICE OF GOD ON THE EARTH 4 HUMAN BEING
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
TUHAN BERILAH AKAL BUDI PEKERTI YANG BAIK DAN KEBIJAKSANAAN YANG MENJIWAI MANUSIA PAPUA AGAR MEREKA PEMERINTAHAN INDONESIA LEWAT KAKI TAQNGANNYA (MILITER INDONESIA=TNI-POLRI). TAU MENGORMATI RASA KEMANUSIAAN, PERDAIAN, AKAL BUDIPEKERTI, CINTAH DAMAI CINTAH AKAN KEBENARANG DLL.
DISINI HANYA ANAK ANAK PILIHANMU LAH YANG DAPAT MENGENDALIKAN PERJUAMGAN PEMBEBASAN AKAN BANGSA-MU, NEGERI-MU, TANAH LELUHUR-MU, NEGARA-MU PAPUA.
TERMULIALAH ENGKAU YAA BAPA........!!!!
SEBAB ENGKAU TELAH MENGJAGA DAN MELINDUNGI AKU......!!!!
DARI TANGAN TANGAN JAHANAM PENCURI DAN PEMBUNUH, PENGHANCUR ITU......!!!!
AKU MASI DISINI YAA....BAPA KIRANYA MENURUT KEBAIKAN HATI DAN KEHENDAKMULAH JADI....!!!
SAYA SELALU TIDAK MENGERTI BANGSA DAN NEGARA YANG NAMANYA NKRI INI, ATAS NAMA NKRI, BANGSA INDONESIA ,IBU PERTIWI MEREKA TELAH DAN SEDANG MEMBANTAI BANGSA MU YAAA ALLAH, MEREKA INI DISINI BUTA KEBENARANG DARI PADA BANGSA DAN NEGARA PAPUA BARAT.
KLASIS MIMIKA ISHAK ONDAWAME DLL, SERTA BEBERAPA PEMUKA UMAT-MU MEREKA TAWAN DAN BUNUH TANPAH ADA ALASAN YANG JELAS......!!!!
DIMANAKAH...!!!! MURKAMU/DAN AMARAHMU.....!!! DATANGLAH DAN TUNJUKANLAH....!!!! AKU INGIN MAU MENGAKSIKAN MALAPETAKAN YANG AKAN MENIMPAH PADA NKRI YANG BOSDOH INI....!!!!!
KEESAHAN-MU KAMI BUTUH YAA ALLAH.
SELLA.
AMIN.
The Congressmen’s request comes in response to a petition letter they sent to UN Secretary General Kofi Annan on March 14, 2005 in which they requested his support in conducting a review of the 1969 Act of No Choice in which 1,025 Papuan elders were coerced and manipulated into voting unanimously on behalf of 80,000 Papuans to become a part of Indonesia rather than an independent nation. Although the UN sanctioned the 1969 Act of No Choice, the Act is generally regarded in the international community as a fraudulent tactic that was used by former President Suharto and his military regime to claim control of West Papua, a territory rich in natural resources including gold, silver, copper, oil and gas. In fact, recently declassified US documents show that the Indonesia government knew that allowing an open referendum would lead to West Papuan independence.
BAPA INI MEREKA SUDAH BERTEKAD UNTUK MEWUJUDKAN SUATU KEMERDEKAAN SEJATI BAGI BNGSA-MU, NEGARA MU WEST PAPUA.
INILAH ANAK ANAK-MU YANG MASIH TERSISA, TUHAN TOLONG PELIHARA MEREKA, LINGDUNGI MEREKA, DAN JAGAI MEREKA, KARENA KAMI SEDANG BERADA DALAM MULUT SINGGA , MEREKA SEDANG MENGAUM-NGAUM TUK MENELANG KAMI YANG MASIH SISA. SELLA .AMIN.
BY :VICE OF GOD ON THE EARTH 4 HUMAN BEING
Senin, 12 Mei 2008
Takeover of West Papua
Indonesia's 1969 Takeover of West Papua Not by "Free Choice"
Indonesia's 1969 Takeover of West Papua Not by "Free Choice"
Document Release Marks 35th Anniversaryof Controversial Vote and Annexation
Secret Files Show U.S. Support for Indonesia,Human Rights Abuses by Indonesian Military
Edited by Brad Simpsonsimpbrad@isu.edu / 208-282-3870
Posted July 9, 2004
Document Release Marks 35th Anniversaryof Controversial Vote and Annexation
Secret Files Show U.S. Support for Indonesia,Human Rights Abuses by Indonesian Military
Edited by Brad Simpsonsimpbrad@isu.edu / 208-282-3870
Posted July 9, 2004
Washington, D.C. - July 8, 2004 - "You should tell [Suharto] that we understand the problems they face in West Irian," national security adviser Henry Kissinger wrote President Nixon on the eve of Nixon's July 1969 visit to Indonesia. On the 35th anniversary of West Papua's so-called "Act of Free Choice" and Indonesia's first direct presidential elections, the National Security Archive posted recently declassified documents on U.S. policy deliberations leading to Indonesia's controversial 1969 annexation of the territory. The documents detail United States support for Indonesia's heavy-handed takeover of West Papua despite overwhelming Papuan opposition and United Nations requirements for genuine self-determination.
Background
When Indonesia gained its independence from the Netherlands in 1949, the Dutch government retained control over the territory of West New Guinea. From 1949 until 1961 the Indonesian government sought to "recover" West New Guinea (later known as West Irian or West Papua), arguing that the territory, a part of the former Netherlands East Indies, rightfully belonged with Indonesia.
In late 1961, after repeated and unsuccessful attempts to secure its goals through the United Nations, Indonesia's President Sukarno declared a military mobilization and threatened to invade West New Guinea and annex it by force. The Kennedy administration, fearing that U.S. opposition to Indonesian demands might push the country toward Communism, sponsored talks between the Netherlands and Indonesia in the spring of 1962. Negotiations took place under the shadow of ongoing Indonesian military incursions into West New Guinea and the threat of an Indonesian invasion.
The U.S.-sponsored talks led to the August 1962 New York Agreement, which awarded Indonesia control of West New Guinea (which it promptly renamed West Irian) after a brief transitional period overseen by the UN. (Note 1) The agreement obligated Jakarta to conduct an election on self-determination with UN assistance no later than 1969. Once in control, however, Indonesia quickly moved to repress political dissent by groups demanding outright independence for the territory.
U.S. officials understood at the outset that Indonesia would never allow West Irian to become independent and that it was unlikely to ever allow a meaningful act of self-determination to take place. The Johnson and Nixon administrations were equally reluctant to challenge Indonesian control over West Irian, especially after the conservative anti-Communist regime of General Suharto took over in 1966 following an abortive coup attempt which led to the slaughter of an estimated 500,000 alleged Communists. Suharto quickly moved to liberalize the Indonesian economy and open it to the West, passing a new foreign investment law in late 1967. The first company to take advantage of the law was the American mining company Freeport Sulphur, which gained concessions to vast tracts of land in West Irian containing gold and copper reserves. (Note 2)
Over six weeks from July to August 1969, U.N. officials conducted the so-called "Act of Free Choice." Under the articles of the New York Agreement (Article 18) all adult Papuans had the right to participate in an act of self-determination to be carried out in accordance with international practice. Instead, Indonesian authorities selected 1022 West Papuans to vote publicly and unanimously in favor of integration with Indonesia.
Despite significant evidence that Indonesia had failed to meet its international obligations, in November 1969 the United Nations "took note" of the "Act of Free Choice" and its results, thereby lending support of the world body to Indonesia's annexation.
Thirty-five years later, as Indonesia holds its first-ever direct Presidential elections, the international community has come to question the validity of Jakarta's takeover of West Papua and the ongoing human rights abuses there. In March, 88 members of the Irish Parliament urged United Nations Secretary General Kofi Annan to review the United Nations' role in the 1969 Act of Free Choice, joining South African Archibishop Desmond Tutu and scores of non-governmental organizations and European Parliamentarians. On June 28, 2004, nineteen U.S. Senators sent a letter to Annan urging the appointment of a Special Representative to Indonesia to monitor the human rights situation in West Papua and the territory of Aceh.
The Documents
The Archive's postings include a confidential February 1968 cable from U.S. Ambassador to Indonesia Marshall Green. Following a conversation with Indonesian Foreign Minister Adam Malik about the situation in West Irian, Green concluded that conditions in the territory are "far from satisfactory and deteriorating." A subsequent cable reported that Indonesia is "belatedly and almost desperately seeking to develop support among the peoples of West Irian" for the "Act of Free Choice."
A consular trip to West Irian in early 1968 observed that "the Indonesian government directs its main efforts" in the territory to "maintaining existing political facilities and suppressing political dissent." Because of neglect, corruption and repression at the hands of Indonesian authorities, Western observers agreed almost unanimously that "Indonesia could not win an open election" and that the vast majority of West Irian's inhabitants favored independence.
In July of 1968 the UN-appointed Ambassador Fernando Ortiz Sanz arrived in Jakarta as the Secretary General's Special Representative for assisting Indonesia with the West Irian plebiscite, as called for by the 1962 New York Agreement.
A confidential cable from the U.S. Embassy to the State Department outlined the stakes in the upcoming "Act of Free Choice." While cautioning that the U.S. government "should not become directly involved in this issue," Ambassador Green worried that Ortiz Sanz or other UN members might "hold out for free and direct elections" in West Irian, frustrating Indonesia's intention to retain the territory at all costs. Consequently, U.S. and other Western officials worried about the need to meet with Ortiz Sanz to "make him aware of political realities." In a confidential October 1968 Airgram the U.S. Embassy reported with relief that Ortiz now "concedes that it would be inconceivable from the point of view of the interest of the U.N., as well as the GOI, that a result other than the continuance of West Irian within Indonesian sovereignty should emerge."
The Indonesian government firmly rejected the possibility of a one-person, one-vote plebiscite in West Irian, insisting instead on a series of local 'consultations' with just over 1,000 hand selected tribal leaders (out of an estimated population of 800,000), conducted in July 1969 with between 6,000-10,000 Indonesian troops spread throughout the territory. As the U.S. Embassy put it in a July 1969 telegram:
The Act of Free Choice (AFC) in West Irian is unfolding like a Greek tragedy, the conclusion preordained. The main protagonist, the GOI, cannot and will not permit any resolution other than the continued inclusion of West Irian in Indonesia. Dissident activity is likely to increase but the Indonesian armed forces will be able to contain and, if necessary, suppress it.
Ambassador Frank Galbraith noted on July 9, 1969 that past abuses had stimulated intense anti-Indonesian and pro-independence sentiment at all levels of Irian society, suggesting that "possibly 85 to 90%" of the population "are in sympathy with the Free Papua cause." Moreover, Galbraith observed, recent Indonesian military operations, which resulted in the deaths of hundreds, possibly thousands of civilians, "had stimulated fears and rumours of intended genocide among the Irianese."
President Nixon and national security adviser Henry Kissinger visited Jakarta in July 1969 while the "Act of Free Choice" was underway. Improving relations with Indonesia's authoritarian regime was clearly uppermost in the mind of Kissinger, who characterized Suharto as a "moderate military man … committed to progress and reform." In Nixon's secret briefing papers (Document 9 and Document 10) for the visit Kissinger flatly told the President "you should not raise this issue" of West Irian and argued "we should avoid any U.S. identification with that act." The White House generally held to this position throughout the period preceding and following the "Act of Free Choice."
Although they recognized the deep flaws in the Act and in Indonesia's intentions, U.S. officials were not interested in creating any problems for a Suharto regime they saw as nonaligned but pro-Washington. While the U.S. was unwilling to actively intervene on Indonesia's behalf (an action they thought unnecessary and counterproductive) at the UN to insure quick General Assembly acceptance of Indonesia's formal takeover of West Papua, the U.S. quietly signaled that it was uninterested in a lengthy debate over an issue it viewed as a foregone conclusion and marginal to U.S. interests. In a secret briefing memo for a meeting with Indonesia's Ambassador to the United States Soedjakmoto, a State Department official expressed confidence that international criticism of the "Act of Free Choice" would quickly fade, allowing the Nixon Administration to move forward with its plans for forging closer military and economic ties with the authoritarian regime in Jakarta.
Documents
NOTE: The documents featured below were selected for inclusion in this Electronic Briefing Book. Click here to download the complete set of documents on this issue (PDF - 7.6 MB).
Document 1February 29, 1968Subject: West IrianU.S. Embassy in Jakarta, Confidential Telegram
The U.S. Ambassador to Indonesia, Marshall Green reports on a conversation with Indonesian Foreign Minister Adam Malik on West Irian. Malik suggests the possibility of reducing the more than 10,000 Indonesian troops serving in Irian. He also hints Indonesia will insist on indirect means for ascertaining the wishes of the inhabitants of the territory in 1969, perhaps relying on tribal leaders who can be induced with "favors for them and their tribes." Green expresses concern about the "deteriorating" situation.
Document 2May 2, 1968Subject: West IrianU.S. Embassy in Jakarta, Confidential Telegram
U.S. Ambassador to Indonesia Marshall Green, reports on a conversation with Indonesian Foreign Minister Adam Malik in which Malik outlines some of the measures Jakarta is undertaking in an attempt to build support among the people of West Irian for merger with Indonesia.
Document 3May 10, 1968Subject: Consular Trip to West IrianU.S. Embassy in Jakarta, Confidential Airgram
In January, 1968 Embassy Political Consul Thomas Reynders visits West Irian for one month. Reynders observes the relatively low level of economic development in the territory since Indonesia assumed control in 1962, noting that "The Indonesian government's presence in West Irian is expressed primarily in the form of the Army." Reynders concludes, as have nearly all Western observers, that "Indonesia will not accept Independence for West Irian and will not permit a plebiscite that would reach such an outcome" and notes the "antipathy or outright hatred believed to be harbored toward Indonesia and Indonesians by West Irians in the relatively developed and sophisticated areas."
Document 4August 20, 1968Subject: The Stakes in West Irian's "Act of Free Choice"U.S. Embassy in Jakarta, Confidential Telegram
US Ambassador Marshall Green suggests "Act of Free Choice" in West Irian "May well be the most important political issue in Indonesia during the coming year." Notes Indonesian "dilemma" in seeking "to devise some meaningful way to conduct ascertainment which will not involve real risks of loss of West Irian." Green reminds the State Department, in urging a hands-off approach by the U.S., that "we are dealing here essentially with stone age, illiterate tribal groups" and that "free elections among groups such as this would be more of a farce than any rigged mechanism Indonesia could devise."
Document 5August 4, 1968Subject: "Act of Free Choice" in West IrianU.S. Embassy in Jakarta, Confidential Telegram
Marshall Green writes to Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for East Asian and Pacific G. McMurtry Godley expressing concern over the views of U.N. Special Representative for West Irian Ortiz Sanz. Green recommends that "in view of high stakes … we should do anything we can indirectly to make him aware of political realities" regarding Indonesian intentions toward West Irian.
Document 6October 4, 1968Subject: West IrianU.S. Embassy in Jakarta, Confidential Airgram
Embassy Political Consul Jack Lydman describes the results of Ortiz Sanz's recent orientation visit to West Irian and asserts that Sanz is now "attempting to devise a formula for an "act of free choice" in West Irian which will result in an affirmation of Indonesian sovereignty" yet "stand the test of international opinion."
Document 7June 9, 1969Subject: Assessment of Irian situationU.S. Embassy in Jakarta, Confidential Telegram
On the eve of the "Act of Free Choice," the U.S. embassy offers a highly critical appraisal of Indonesia's determination to insure West Irian's integration, concluding that from Jakarta's standpoint "separation is unthinkable." After detailing Indonesian efforts to repress "increasingly desperate" supporters of independence for West Irian, Embassy concludes with concern for "future Indonesian relations with Irianese," many of whom display a "festering antagonism and distrust of Indonesians."
Document 8June 9, 1969Subject: West Irian: The Nature of the OppositionU.S. Embassy in Jakarta, Confidential Airgram
Galbraith offers a detailed assessment of the views of various Irian groups opposed to integration with Indonesia and advocating independence, including the Free Papua Movement (OPM). He observes that "opposition to the GOI stems from economic deprivation over the years, military repression and capriciousness, and maladministration," and suggests that anti-Indonesian groups will be unable to alter the final outcome of the "Act of Free Choice."
Documents 9 and 10June 10 and July 18, 1969Subject: Djakarta Visit: Your Meetings with President SuhartoHenry Kissinger, Memorandum for the President
National security adviser Henry Kissinger briefs President Nixon on his visit to Indonesia and likely conversations with Indonesian President Suharto. Kissinger argues that there is no U.S. interest in getting involved in the issue of West Irian and that it is certain its people will choose integration with Indonesia. In Nixon's talking points, Kissinger urges that the President refrain from raising the issue except to note U.S. sympathy with Indonesia's concerns.
Document 11August 25, 1969Subject: Call by Indonesian Ambassador SoedjakmotoU.S. State Department, Secret Memorandum
Paul Gardner briefs Assistant Secretary of State Marshall Green on his visit with Indonesian Ambassador to the U.S. Soedjakmoto, who is expected to ask for help from the U.S. in "preparing smooth U.N. handling" of the "Act of Free Choice" in the General Assembly.
Notes
1. For an excellent overview of the events leading up to the New York Agreement, see Jones, Matthew. Conflict and Confrontation in Southeast Asia, 1961-1965: Britain, the United States, Indonesia and the Creation of Malaysia (Cambridge: Cambridge Press, 2002): 31-62; C.L.M. Penders. The West New Guinea Debacle: Dutch Colonization and Indonesia, 1945-1962 (Hawaii, 2002); John Saltford. The United Nations and the Indonesian Takeover of West Papua, 1962-1969 (Routledge, 2003).
Background
When Indonesia gained its independence from the Netherlands in 1949, the Dutch government retained control over the territory of West New Guinea. From 1949 until 1961 the Indonesian government sought to "recover" West New Guinea (later known as West Irian or West Papua), arguing that the territory, a part of the former Netherlands East Indies, rightfully belonged with Indonesia.
In late 1961, after repeated and unsuccessful attempts to secure its goals through the United Nations, Indonesia's President Sukarno declared a military mobilization and threatened to invade West New Guinea and annex it by force. The Kennedy administration, fearing that U.S. opposition to Indonesian demands might push the country toward Communism, sponsored talks between the Netherlands and Indonesia in the spring of 1962. Negotiations took place under the shadow of ongoing Indonesian military incursions into West New Guinea and the threat of an Indonesian invasion.
The U.S.-sponsored talks led to the August 1962 New York Agreement, which awarded Indonesia control of West New Guinea (which it promptly renamed West Irian) after a brief transitional period overseen by the UN. (Note 1) The agreement obligated Jakarta to conduct an election on self-determination with UN assistance no later than 1969. Once in control, however, Indonesia quickly moved to repress political dissent by groups demanding outright independence for the territory.
U.S. officials understood at the outset that Indonesia would never allow West Irian to become independent and that it was unlikely to ever allow a meaningful act of self-determination to take place. The Johnson and Nixon administrations were equally reluctant to challenge Indonesian control over West Irian, especially after the conservative anti-Communist regime of General Suharto took over in 1966 following an abortive coup attempt which led to the slaughter of an estimated 500,000 alleged Communists. Suharto quickly moved to liberalize the Indonesian economy and open it to the West, passing a new foreign investment law in late 1967. The first company to take advantage of the law was the American mining company Freeport Sulphur, which gained concessions to vast tracts of land in West Irian containing gold and copper reserves. (Note 2)
Over six weeks from July to August 1969, U.N. officials conducted the so-called "Act of Free Choice." Under the articles of the New York Agreement (Article 18) all adult Papuans had the right to participate in an act of self-determination to be carried out in accordance with international practice. Instead, Indonesian authorities selected 1022 West Papuans to vote publicly and unanimously in favor of integration with Indonesia.
Despite significant evidence that Indonesia had failed to meet its international obligations, in November 1969 the United Nations "took note" of the "Act of Free Choice" and its results, thereby lending support of the world body to Indonesia's annexation.
Thirty-five years later, as Indonesia holds its first-ever direct Presidential elections, the international community has come to question the validity of Jakarta's takeover of West Papua and the ongoing human rights abuses there. In March, 88 members of the Irish Parliament urged United Nations Secretary General Kofi Annan to review the United Nations' role in the 1969 Act of Free Choice, joining South African Archibishop Desmond Tutu and scores of non-governmental organizations and European Parliamentarians. On June 28, 2004, nineteen U.S. Senators sent a letter to Annan urging the appointment of a Special Representative to Indonesia to monitor the human rights situation in West Papua and the territory of Aceh.
The Documents
The Archive's postings include a confidential February 1968 cable from U.S. Ambassador to Indonesia Marshall Green. Following a conversation with Indonesian Foreign Minister Adam Malik about the situation in West Irian, Green concluded that conditions in the territory are "far from satisfactory and deteriorating." A subsequent cable reported that Indonesia is "belatedly and almost desperately seeking to develop support among the peoples of West Irian" for the "Act of Free Choice."
A consular trip to West Irian in early 1968 observed that "the Indonesian government directs its main efforts" in the territory to "maintaining existing political facilities and suppressing political dissent." Because of neglect, corruption and repression at the hands of Indonesian authorities, Western observers agreed almost unanimously that "Indonesia could not win an open election" and that the vast majority of West Irian's inhabitants favored independence.
In July of 1968 the UN-appointed Ambassador Fernando Ortiz Sanz arrived in Jakarta as the Secretary General's Special Representative for assisting Indonesia with the West Irian plebiscite, as called for by the 1962 New York Agreement.
A confidential cable from the U.S. Embassy to the State Department outlined the stakes in the upcoming "Act of Free Choice." While cautioning that the U.S. government "should not become directly involved in this issue," Ambassador Green worried that Ortiz Sanz or other UN members might "hold out for free and direct elections" in West Irian, frustrating Indonesia's intention to retain the territory at all costs. Consequently, U.S. and other Western officials worried about the need to meet with Ortiz Sanz to "make him aware of political realities." In a confidential October 1968 Airgram the U.S. Embassy reported with relief that Ortiz now "concedes that it would be inconceivable from the point of view of the interest of the U.N., as well as the GOI, that a result other than the continuance of West Irian within Indonesian sovereignty should emerge."
The Indonesian government firmly rejected the possibility of a one-person, one-vote plebiscite in West Irian, insisting instead on a series of local 'consultations' with just over 1,000 hand selected tribal leaders (out of an estimated population of 800,000), conducted in July 1969 with between 6,000-10,000 Indonesian troops spread throughout the territory. As the U.S. Embassy put it in a July 1969 telegram:
The Act of Free Choice (AFC) in West Irian is unfolding like a Greek tragedy, the conclusion preordained. The main protagonist, the GOI, cannot and will not permit any resolution other than the continued inclusion of West Irian in Indonesia. Dissident activity is likely to increase but the Indonesian armed forces will be able to contain and, if necessary, suppress it.
Ambassador Frank Galbraith noted on July 9, 1969 that past abuses had stimulated intense anti-Indonesian and pro-independence sentiment at all levels of Irian society, suggesting that "possibly 85 to 90%" of the population "are in sympathy with the Free Papua cause." Moreover, Galbraith observed, recent Indonesian military operations, which resulted in the deaths of hundreds, possibly thousands of civilians, "had stimulated fears and rumours of intended genocide among the Irianese."
President Nixon and national security adviser Henry Kissinger visited Jakarta in July 1969 while the "Act of Free Choice" was underway. Improving relations with Indonesia's authoritarian regime was clearly uppermost in the mind of Kissinger, who characterized Suharto as a "moderate military man … committed to progress and reform." In Nixon's secret briefing papers (Document 9 and Document 10) for the visit Kissinger flatly told the President "you should not raise this issue" of West Irian and argued "we should avoid any U.S. identification with that act." The White House generally held to this position throughout the period preceding and following the "Act of Free Choice."
Although they recognized the deep flaws in the Act and in Indonesia's intentions, U.S. officials were not interested in creating any problems for a Suharto regime they saw as nonaligned but pro-Washington. While the U.S. was unwilling to actively intervene on Indonesia's behalf (an action they thought unnecessary and counterproductive) at the UN to insure quick General Assembly acceptance of Indonesia's formal takeover of West Papua, the U.S. quietly signaled that it was uninterested in a lengthy debate over an issue it viewed as a foregone conclusion and marginal to U.S. interests. In a secret briefing memo for a meeting with Indonesia's Ambassador to the United States Soedjakmoto, a State Department official expressed confidence that international criticism of the "Act of Free Choice" would quickly fade, allowing the Nixon Administration to move forward with its plans for forging closer military and economic ties with the authoritarian regime in Jakarta.
Documents
NOTE: The documents featured below were selected for inclusion in this Electronic Briefing Book. Click here to download the complete set of documents on this issue (PDF - 7.6 MB).
Document 1February 29, 1968Subject: West IrianU.S. Embassy in Jakarta, Confidential Telegram
The U.S. Ambassador to Indonesia, Marshall Green reports on a conversation with Indonesian Foreign Minister Adam Malik on West Irian. Malik suggests the possibility of reducing the more than 10,000 Indonesian troops serving in Irian. He also hints Indonesia will insist on indirect means for ascertaining the wishes of the inhabitants of the territory in 1969, perhaps relying on tribal leaders who can be induced with "favors for them and their tribes." Green expresses concern about the "deteriorating" situation.
Document 2May 2, 1968Subject: West IrianU.S. Embassy in Jakarta, Confidential Telegram
U.S. Ambassador to Indonesia Marshall Green, reports on a conversation with Indonesian Foreign Minister Adam Malik in which Malik outlines some of the measures Jakarta is undertaking in an attempt to build support among the people of West Irian for merger with Indonesia.
Document 3May 10, 1968Subject: Consular Trip to West IrianU.S. Embassy in Jakarta, Confidential Airgram
In January, 1968 Embassy Political Consul Thomas Reynders visits West Irian for one month. Reynders observes the relatively low level of economic development in the territory since Indonesia assumed control in 1962, noting that "The Indonesian government's presence in West Irian is expressed primarily in the form of the Army." Reynders concludes, as have nearly all Western observers, that "Indonesia will not accept Independence for West Irian and will not permit a plebiscite that would reach such an outcome" and notes the "antipathy or outright hatred believed to be harbored toward Indonesia and Indonesians by West Irians in the relatively developed and sophisticated areas."
Document 4August 20, 1968Subject: The Stakes in West Irian's "Act of Free Choice"U.S. Embassy in Jakarta, Confidential Telegram
US Ambassador Marshall Green suggests "Act of Free Choice" in West Irian "May well be the most important political issue in Indonesia during the coming year." Notes Indonesian "dilemma" in seeking "to devise some meaningful way to conduct ascertainment which will not involve real risks of loss of West Irian." Green reminds the State Department, in urging a hands-off approach by the U.S., that "we are dealing here essentially with stone age, illiterate tribal groups" and that "free elections among groups such as this would be more of a farce than any rigged mechanism Indonesia could devise."
Document 5August 4, 1968Subject: "Act of Free Choice" in West IrianU.S. Embassy in Jakarta, Confidential Telegram
Marshall Green writes to Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for East Asian and Pacific G. McMurtry Godley expressing concern over the views of U.N. Special Representative for West Irian Ortiz Sanz. Green recommends that "in view of high stakes … we should do anything we can indirectly to make him aware of political realities" regarding Indonesian intentions toward West Irian.
Document 6October 4, 1968Subject: West IrianU.S. Embassy in Jakarta, Confidential Airgram
Embassy Political Consul Jack Lydman describes the results of Ortiz Sanz's recent orientation visit to West Irian and asserts that Sanz is now "attempting to devise a formula for an "act of free choice" in West Irian which will result in an affirmation of Indonesian sovereignty" yet "stand the test of international opinion."
Document 7June 9, 1969Subject: Assessment of Irian situationU.S. Embassy in Jakarta, Confidential Telegram
On the eve of the "Act of Free Choice," the U.S. embassy offers a highly critical appraisal of Indonesia's determination to insure West Irian's integration, concluding that from Jakarta's standpoint "separation is unthinkable." After detailing Indonesian efforts to repress "increasingly desperate" supporters of independence for West Irian, Embassy concludes with concern for "future Indonesian relations with Irianese," many of whom display a "festering antagonism and distrust of Indonesians."
Document 8June 9, 1969Subject: West Irian: The Nature of the OppositionU.S. Embassy in Jakarta, Confidential Airgram
Galbraith offers a detailed assessment of the views of various Irian groups opposed to integration with Indonesia and advocating independence, including the Free Papua Movement (OPM). He observes that "opposition to the GOI stems from economic deprivation over the years, military repression and capriciousness, and maladministration," and suggests that anti-Indonesian groups will be unable to alter the final outcome of the "Act of Free Choice."
Documents 9 and 10June 10 and July 18, 1969Subject: Djakarta Visit: Your Meetings with President SuhartoHenry Kissinger, Memorandum for the President
National security adviser Henry Kissinger briefs President Nixon on his visit to Indonesia and likely conversations with Indonesian President Suharto. Kissinger argues that there is no U.S. interest in getting involved in the issue of West Irian and that it is certain its people will choose integration with Indonesia. In Nixon's talking points, Kissinger urges that the President refrain from raising the issue except to note U.S. sympathy with Indonesia's concerns.
Document 11August 25, 1969Subject: Call by Indonesian Ambassador SoedjakmotoU.S. State Department, Secret Memorandum
Paul Gardner briefs Assistant Secretary of State Marshall Green on his visit with Indonesian Ambassador to the U.S. Soedjakmoto, who is expected to ask for help from the U.S. in "preparing smooth U.N. handling" of the "Act of Free Choice" in the General Assembly.
Notes
1. For an excellent overview of the events leading up to the New York Agreement, see Jones, Matthew. Conflict and Confrontation in Southeast Asia, 1961-1965: Britain, the United States, Indonesia and the Creation of Malaysia (Cambridge: Cambridge Press, 2002): 31-62; C.L.M. Penders. The West New Guinea Debacle: Dutch Colonization and Indonesia, 1945-1962 (Hawaii, 2002); John Saltford. The United Nations and the Indonesian Takeover of West Papua, 1962-1969 (Routledge, 2003).
The Implementation of Special Autonomy in West Papua, Indonesia ...
.JPG)
Accession Number : ADA462594
Title : The Implementation of Special Autonomy in West Papua, Indonesia: Problems and Recommendations
Descriptive Note : Master's thesis
Corporate Author : NAVAL POSTGRADUATE SCHOOL MONTEREY CA
Personal Author(s) : Halmin, Muhammad Y.
Handle / proxy Url :
writeHandle("http://handle.dtic.mil/100.2/ADA462594");
http://handle.dtic.mil/100.2/ADA462594 Check NTIS Availability...
Report Date : DEC 2006
Pagination or Media Count : 95
Abstract : West Papua in the easternmost area of Indonesia has long been recognized as one of its most controversial provinces. Since its integration into the Republic of Indonesia in 1969, recurring controversy has colored many aspects of West Papuans everyday lives. The problems in West Papua are rooted to the way it was originally integrated, which, according to some scholars, is unacceptable. They argue that the Indonesian government manipulated the self-determination process and its results. The government, however, has always denied this claim, noting in its legal argumentation, for instance, the involvement of the United Nations and the international community in the process of self-determination, known as the Act of Free Choice. Far from being resolved, the problems in West Papua have been exacerbated by the Indonesian government s policies, which rely heavily on a strict security approach in an effort to suppress the secessionist movement. As part of its attempt to address the problems comprehensively, the Indonesian government introduced a special autonomy bill for West Papua in the late 2001. The bill, which was drafted mostly by indigenous West Papuans, passed the Indonesian parliament as Law No. 21 in November. Implementation of the law, however, has not worked as expected. Many of the law s requirements have either not been implemented or have been only minimally implemented, even five years after of the law s promulgation. As a result, many West Papuans, including many scholars, have become increasingly skeptical and cynical. Obviously, the Indonesian government must deal with and resolve the problems inherent in the implementation law s requirements. This thesis addresses some of those problems and provides recommendations for potential solutions.
Descriptors : *INTERNATIONAL POLITICS, *PROBLEM SOLVING, *INDONESIA, REQUIREMENTS, GOVERNMENT(FOREIGN), SECURITY, UNITED NATIONS, AUTONOMIC AGENTS, LAW ENFORCEMENT, SOLUTIONS(GENERAL), THESES, DISTRIBUTION, COMMUNITIES
Subject Categories : GOVERNMENT AND POLITICAL SCIENCE
Distribution Statement : APPROVED FOR PUBLIC RELEASE
Search DTIC's Public STINET for similiar documents. Members of the public may purchase hardcopy documents from the National Technical Information Service.
Title : The Implementation of Special Autonomy in West Papua, Indonesia: Problems and Recommendations
Descriptive Note : Master's thesis
Corporate Author : NAVAL POSTGRADUATE SCHOOL MONTEREY CA
Personal Author(s) : Halmin, Muhammad Y.
Handle / proxy Url :
writeHandle("http://handle.dtic.mil/100.2/ADA462594");
http://handle.dtic.mil/100.2/ADA462594 Check NTIS Availability...
Report Date : DEC 2006
Pagination or Media Count : 95
Abstract : West Papua in the easternmost area of Indonesia has long been recognized as one of its most controversial provinces. Since its integration into the Republic of Indonesia in 1969, recurring controversy has colored many aspects of West Papuans everyday lives. The problems in West Papua are rooted to the way it was originally integrated, which, according to some scholars, is unacceptable. They argue that the Indonesian government manipulated the self-determination process and its results. The government, however, has always denied this claim, noting in its legal argumentation, for instance, the involvement of the United Nations and the international community in the process of self-determination, known as the Act of Free Choice. Far from being resolved, the problems in West Papua have been exacerbated by the Indonesian government s policies, which rely heavily on a strict security approach in an effort to suppress the secessionist movement. As part of its attempt to address the problems comprehensively, the Indonesian government introduced a special autonomy bill for West Papua in the late 2001. The bill, which was drafted mostly by indigenous West Papuans, passed the Indonesian parliament as Law No. 21 in November. Implementation of the law, however, has not worked as expected. Many of the law s requirements have either not been implemented or have been only minimally implemented, even five years after of the law s promulgation. As a result, many West Papuans, including many scholars, have become increasingly skeptical and cynical. Obviously, the Indonesian government must deal with and resolve the problems inherent in the implementation law s requirements. This thesis addresses some of those problems and provides recommendations for potential solutions.
Descriptors : *INTERNATIONAL POLITICS, *PROBLEM SOLVING, *INDONESIA, REQUIREMENTS, GOVERNMENT(FOREIGN), SECURITY, UNITED NATIONS, AUTONOMIC AGENTS, LAW ENFORCEMENT, SOLUTIONS(GENERAL), THESES, DISTRIBUTION, COMMUNITIES
Subject Categories : GOVERNMENT AND POLITICAL SCIENCE
Distribution Statement : APPROVED FOR PUBLIC RELEASE
Search DTIC's Public STINET for similiar documents. Members of the public may purchase hardcopy documents from the National Technical Information Service.
December 16, 2005 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
WASHINGTON, D.C.—FALEOMAVAEGA AND CONGRESSMAN DONALD PAYNE CALL UPON AFRICAN NATIONS TO REQUEST UN REVIEW OF WEST PAPUA
Congressman Eni Faleomavaega (D-American Samoa), Ranking Member of the House International Relations Subcommittee on Asia and the Pacific, and Congressman Donald Payne (D-New Jersey), Ranking Member of the House International Relations Subcommittee on Africa, Global Human Rights & International Operations, announced today that they have called upon the African nations to request a review of the United Nation’s actions in West Papua.
The Congressmen’s request comes in response to a petition letter they sent to UN Secretary General Kofi Annan on March 14, 2005 in which they requested his support in conducting a review of the 1969 Act of No Choice in which 1,025 Papuan elders were coerced and manipulated into voting unanimously on behalf of 80,000 Papuans to become a part of Indonesia rather than an independent nation. Although the UN sanctioned the 1969 Act of No Choice, the Act is generally regarded in the international community as a fraudulent tactic that was used by former President Suharto and his military regime to claim control of West Papua, a territory rich in natural resources including gold, silver, copper, oil and gas. In fact, recently declassified US documents show that the Indonesia government knew that allowing an open referendum would lead to West Papuan independence.
In a letter dated September 26, 2005, the Secretary General informed Congressman Faleomavaega and Congressman Payne that he would consider a review of the 1969 Act and the UN’s conduct in West Papua if the General Assembly called for it. Should the Assembly decide to revisit this issue, Secretary General Annan has assured that he will do his utmost to implement the Assembly’s mandate.
For this reason, Congressman Faleomavaega and Congressman Payne have called upon the Ambassadors representing the African nations before the UN to initiate a call for a General Assembly review. Historically, the African nations raised objections to the 1969 Act of No Choice. Bolivian Ambassador Ortiz-Sans, who monitored the vote on behalf of the United Nations, also noted that the referendum had occurred in the absence of political freedoms guaranteed by the 1962 New York Agreement brokered by the United States that set the framework for Dutch withdrawal from West Papua.
Ambassador Otiz-Sanz issued the following statement in his report:
“I regret to have to express my reservation regarding the implementation of Article XXII of the (New York) Agreement relating to ‘the rights, including the rights of free speech, freedom of movement and of assembly of the inhabitants of the area.’ In spite of my constant efforts, this important provision was not fully implemented and the (Indonesian) Administration exercised at all times a tight political control over the population.”
In spite of the Ambassador’s report, testimonials from the press, the opposition of fifteen countries and the cries for help from the Papuans themselves, the UN sanctioned Indonesia’s act and, on September 10, 1969, West Papua became a providence of brutal, Indonesian rule. Since Indonesia seized control of West Papua, the native Papuans have suffered blatant human rights abuses, including extrajudicial execution, torture, sexual violence and mutilation as well as, according to Afrim Djonbalic’s 1998 statement to the UN, “environmental degradation, natural resource exploitation, and commercial dominance of immigrant communities.” This exploitation of resources includes reserves of gold, copper, nickel, oil and gas which have been valued at over $54 billion. Local labor has been used in the extraction of these resources with little or no compensation to Papuans.
A recent study by the Lowenstein Human Rights Clinic at Yale University states:
“The historical and contemporary evidence strongly suggests that the Indonesian government has committed proscribed acts with the intent to destroy the West Papuans as such in violation of the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide and the customary international law prohibition this Convention embodies.”
In view of this study, it should be noted that native West Papua New Guineans differ linguistically and racially from the majority of Indonesians. The Papuans are Melanesian and believed to be of African descent while the majority of Indonesians are of Javanese descent. Studies like the aforementioned show that there is a strong indication that the Indonesians are committing genocide against the West Papuans through oppression and acts of violence and these acts of genocide may be race-based.
For this and other reasons, Archbishop Desmond Tutu and 174 parliamentarians and 80 nongovernmental agencies from around the world have written to Secretary General Kofi Annan asking that a review be initiated. In turn, Faleomavaega and Congressman Payne have called upon the African nations to call for a General Assembly review. Additionally, the Congressmen included historic language in the U.S. Foreign Relations Authorization bill for FY 2006 and 2007 which requires the U.S. State Department to submit to Congress a report analyzing the 1969 Act.
The language also requires the State Department to submit a report detailing implementation of special autonomy for Papua and Aceh. Such reports shall include (a) an assessment of the extent to which each province has enjoyed an increase in revenue allocations and decision making authority; (b) a description of access by international press and non-governmental organizations to each province; (c) an assessment of the role played by local civil society in governance and decision making; (d) a description of force levels and conduct of Indonesian security forces in each province; and (e) a description of United States efforts to promote respect for human rights in each province.
The U.S. House of Representatives passed this legislation on July 20, 2005. As this matter is now pending between the House and Senate, Congressman Faleomavaega and Congressman Payne are determined to keep Indonesia under the spotlight until exploitation, violence and racism in West Papua is brought to an end.
by edoway yunus
WASHINGTON, D.C.—FALEOMAVAEGA AND CONGRESSMAN DONALD PAYNE CALL UPON AFRICAN NATIONS TO REQUEST UN REVIEW OF WEST PAPUA
December 16, 2005 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
WASHINGTON, D.C.—FALEOMAVAEGA AND CONGRESSMAN DONALD PAYNE CALL UPON AFRICAN NATIONS TO REQUEST UN REVIEW OF WEST PAPUA
Congressman Eni Faleomavaega (D-American Samoa), Ranking Member of the House International Relations Subcommittee on Asia and the Pacific, and Congressman Donald Payne (D-New Jersey), Ranking Member of the House International Relations Subcommittee on Africa, Global Human Rights & International Operations, announced today that they have called upon the African nations to request a review of the United Nation’s actions in West Papua.
The Congressmen’s request comes in response to a petition letter they sent to UN Secretary General Kofi Annan on March 14, 2005 in which they requested his support in conducting a review of the 1969 Act of No Choice in which 1,025 Papuan elders were coerced and manipulated into voting unanimously on behalf of 80,000 Papuans to become a part of Indonesia rather than an independent nation. Although the UN sanctioned the 1969 Act of No Choice, the Act is generally regarded in the international community as a fraudulent tactic that was used by former President Suharto and his military regime to claim control of West Papua, a territory rich in natural resources including gold, silver, copper, oil and gas. In fact, recently declassified US documents show that the Indonesia government knew that allowing an open referendum would lead to West Papuan independence.
In a letter dated September 26, 2005, the Secretary General informed Congressman Faleomavaega and Congressman Payne that he would consider a review of the 1969 Act and the UN’s conduct in West Papua if the General Assembly called for it. Should the Assembly decide to revisit this issue, Secretary General Annan has assured that he will do his utmost to implement the Assembly’s mandate.
For this reason, Congressman Faleomavaega and Congressman Payne have called upon the Ambassadors representing the African nations before the UN to initiate a call for a General Assembly review. Historically, the African nations raised objections to the 1969 Act of No Choice. Bolivian Ambassador Ortiz-Sans, who monitored the vote on behalf of the United Nations, also noted that the referendum had occurred in the absence of political freedoms guaranteed by the 1962 New York Agreement brokered by the United States that set the framework for Dutch withdrawal from West Papua.
Ambassador Otiz-Sanz issued the following statement in his report:
“I regret to have to express my reservation regarding the implementation of Article XXII of the (New York) Agreement relating to ‘the rights, including the rights of free speech, freedom of movement and of assembly of the inhabitants of the area.’ In spite of my constant efforts, this important provision was not fully implemented and the (Indonesian) Administration exercised at all times a tight political control over the population.”
In spite of the Ambassador’s report, testimonials from the press, the opposition of fifteen countries and the cries for help from the Papuans themselves, the UN sanctioned Indonesia’s act and, on September 10, 1969, West Papua became a providence of brutal, Indonesian rule. Since Indonesia seized control of West Papua, the native Papuans have suffered blatant human rights abuses, including extrajudicial execution, torture, sexual violence and mutilation as well as, according to Afrim Djonbalic’s 1998 statement to the UN, “environmental degradation, natural resource exploitation, and commercial dominance of immigrant communities.” This exploitation of resources includes reserves of gold, copper, nickel, oil and gas which have been valued at over $54 billion. Local labor has been used in the extraction of these resources with little or no compensation to Papuans.
A recent study by the Lowenstein Human Rights Clinic at Yale University states:
“The historical and contemporary evidence strongly suggests that the Indonesian government has committed proscribed acts with the intent to destroy the West Papuans as such in violation of the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide and the customary international law prohibition this Convention embodies.”
In view of this study, it should be noted that native West Papua New Guineans differ linguistically and racially from the majority of Indonesians. The Papuans are Melanesian and believed to be of African descent while the majority of Indonesians are of Javanese descent. Studies like the aforementioned show that there is a strong indication that the Indonesians are committing genocide against the West Papuans through oppression and acts of violence and these acts of genocide may be race-based.
For this and other reasons, Archbishop Desmond Tutu and 174 parliamentarians and 80 nongovernmental agencies from around the world have written to Secretary General Kofi Annan asking that a review be initiated. In turn, Faleomavaega and Congressman Payne have called upon the African nations to call for a General Assembly review. Additionally, the Congressmen included historic language in the U.S. Foreign Relations Authorization bill for FY 2006 and 2007 which requires the U.S. State Department to submit to Congress a report analyzing the 1969 Act.
The language also requires the State Department to submit a report detailing implementation of special autonomy for Papua and Aceh. Such reports shall include (a) an assessment of the extent to which each province has enjoyed an increase in revenue allocations and decision making authority; (b) a description of access by international press and non-governmental organizations to each province; (c) an assessment of the role played by local civil society in governance and decision making; (d) a description of force levels and conduct of Indonesian security forces in each province; and (e) a description of United States efforts to promote respect for human rights in each province.
The U.S. House of Representatives passed this legislation on July 20, 2005. As this matter is now pending between the House and Senate, Congressman Faleomavaega and Congressman Payne are determined to keep Indonesia under the spotlight until exploitation, violence and racism in West Papua is brought to an end.
reposting by : edoway yunus
Langganan:
Postingan (Atom)
.JPG)
.jpg)
.JPG)
