On the 10th anniversary of the horrific acts of terrorism in New York and Washington, we may wonder if the 1962 act of selling West Papua and her people, like so many slaves to buy peace with Indonesia, was any more than a monstrous act of terrorism on the part of the United States? American interests have gained billions of dollars in resource revenue from the crime, as have Australian business interests that benefit from West Papuan resources.
When it comes to West Papua, should the West judge itself with all the terrorism legislation that has been passed since the 11th of September 2001?
We may also wonder if Indonesia is about to lose its grip on the western half of New Guinea, a territory the size of France and ancient homeland of the Melanesian West Papuans and their 250 tribal languages? Addressing questions at a press conference during the Pacific Island Forum in New Zealand, the Secretary-General of the United Nations, Ban Ki-moon, made the following statement:
“Again this issue should also be discussed at the Decolonisation Committee of the United Nations General Assembly. And when it comes, again, to whether you are an independent state or non self-governing territory, whatever, the human rights is an inalienable and fundamental principle of the United Nations. We will do all to ensure that the people in West Papua, their human rights should be respected.” [1]
To read of West Papua being raised in the context of the UN Decolonisation Committee by the Secretary-General is quite startling, for one specific reason: West Papua was removed from the list of colonised territories in 1969. This is unlike the situation in East Timor, which had not been removed from this list, which became the trigger for their 1999 vote for self-determination.
East Timor was a clear case of invasion in 1975, brutal suppression by a foreign power and liberation in a baptism of blood and fire in 1999. Australia took a “real” political position by going further than any other nation and recognising the Indonesian occupation of East Timor.
On the other hand, the West Papuan people were the victim of a brutal play of Realpolitiks during the Cold War. We may wonder if reference to “Realpolitik” is simply a way to justify state-sponsored terrorism, as with the invasion of Iraq, which many now see as a totally illegal and politically motivated war to gain control of oil reserves.
After Indonesia gained their independence from the Dutch in 1949, Holland retained their territory in western New Guinea and began preparing the indigenous population for independence. In 1957 Australia signed an agreement with the Netherlands to work toward the independence of the whole island of New Guinea and many Australians were involved on the ground in this preparation. [2]
If this work had proceeded to its full realisation, it is possible that the whole island of New Guinea could now be one quite large and strong independent nation.
In 1961 the Dutch administration formed a local parliament, including indigenous representatives and raised the West Papuan morning star flag, which flew along with the Dutch tri-colour across the territory and 1970 was set as their year of independence. In this bright dawn of Papuan democracy, Australia helped to raise the hopes and expectations of the people of West Papua for freedom and self-determination.
Indonesia demanded control of the western half of New Guinea, even though it was, like the eastern half of the island, an ancient Papuan land. The Indonesian response was now to begin invading and a full-blown war with Indonesia appeared imminent, in which Australia would have fought along-side Papuans trained by the Dutch to defend their island homeland.
During World War II we fought in New Guinea, including West Papua and many Papuans were our fuzzy wuzzy angels.
Wishing to avoid being drawn into a war with Indonesia, the United States intervened and told the Dutch to get out, Australia to butt out and gave the green light for Indonesia to take over half of New Guinea, as the new colonial master. This was deeply humiliating for the Netherlands and also Australia and brought into question the true independence of Australian foreign policy.
We may well wonder if we are any more than a vassal state of the United States.
In this play of Realpolitiks, West Papuan lives, land and resources were used by Washington to buy a nominally pro-Western alliance with Indonesia and also access to Indonesian and Papuan resources. This action was nothing short of a slave trade and theft of land and property on an unimaginable scale.
Indonesia became the new colonial power in New Guinea in 1963 and the atrocities began, with as many as 400,000 Papuans being killed in an ongoing genocide, which has pushed the Papuan aside to make way for Indonesian occupation and immigration. When a vote for self-determination was held in 1969, the United Nations allowed Indonesia to run it completely and even the UN observers on the ground only witnessed 20 percent of the vote.
Could it be called a vote, when 1026 selected men were lectured under the shadow of guns, before being told to step over a line drawn in the dirt as the way of voting? An armed rebellion was being fought against Indonesia in West Papua at the time. Wishing to avoid the prospect of war with Indonesia, most nations voted to allow West Papua to be incorporated into Indonesia and therefore be removed from the list of colonial territories. A few newly independent African nations objected.
The Indonesian General in charge of the sham vote in West Papua, Ali Murtopo [3], lectured those about to step over the line while showing his gun, “We don’t need you Papuan, we just need your Land and Natural Resources. If you want to get independent, so ask USA took you to the Moon. And if you want to rejected the Indonesia Government, so I will kill you.” [4]
Reference to the Moon was topical, as Indonesia timed the vote to happen as Neil Armstrong was stepping onto the Sea of Tranquillity and the United States President, Richard Nixon, was on a State visit to Jakarta at the time, drawing reporters away from the monstrous breach in natural democratic justice going on in West Papua. [5]
Would the United Nations get away with a vote run like that today. Such a bizarre process would not have been accepted in East Timor in 1999?
If the West Papuan people deserve natural justice, then they have a right to a genuine vote on self-determination. If Indonesia wishes to hold its head high as a truly democratic nation, then they will agree to this happening. If Australia wishes to regain honour with West Papua, then we will support the rights of the West Papuan people to self-determination, just as we did the East Timorese and the granting of independence to the Papuans of eastern New Guinea.
Sadly, all Australians have blood on their hands when it comes to West Papua, because we did not stand and demand justice, but went along with a brutal theft, slave trade and on-going atrocity just across our northern border, many West Papuans have been shot on sight for raising the morning star flag, or sent to jail for 20 years.
Filep Karma was jailed for 15 years in 2004 for raising the West Papuan flag and when recently offered remission by the Indonesian Government, refused to accept this, saying he “preferred to serve out his normal sentence and demanded the Indonesian Government to apologise to the Papuan people for all the atrocities it has caused.” [6]
For decades West Papuan supporters around the World have raised the question of the West Papuan right to self-determination and freedom and the voice of the indigenous Maori was added to this throng at the recent Pacific Island Forum held in New Zealand. Hone Harawira, leader of the Mana Party, raised West Papuan with Ban Ki-moon, declaring:
“Can I please ask that you support peaceful dialogue between the Indigenous People of West Papua and Indonesia, to put an end to the killings there and to find a strategy to get Indonesia out of a land that isn’t theirs.” [7]
Should Australians invite their Parliament to issue an apology to the West Papuan people, for helping to raise their hopes for freedom as an independent democratic nation between 1957 and 1962 and then so cruelly betraying them to a wholesale act of slavery, theft and ongoing genocide of an ancient indigenous people?
Should the Australian Parliament invite the Netherlands, the United States and the United Nations to do the same and press on to invite Indonesia to finally allow a properly run plebiscite on self-determination by Papuans in west New Guinea and wherever in the World they have fled to as refugees?
Perhaps then the daily news seeping out of West Papua will no longer be one of arrests for raising the morning star flag, the torture and murder of West Papuans by Indonesian military forces and police and military operations sweeping through towns and villages hunting for anyone who resists their rule and killing those who stand in their way.
For now, the Indonesian serpent rests with a firm grip on New Guinea, as the West Papuan people are slowly absorbed, but the time may come, with a weakened Papua New Guinea, when the whole island is swallowed, East Timor once again threatened and an Indonesian shadow cast across the north of Australia. Then the cost of our betrayal of the West Papuan people could come home to haunt us.
Even New Zealand may have much to fear in this future, should the expanding military might of China forge stronger ties with Indonesia, to assure the flow of Middle East oil and Australian resources, which in time could come to include the resource wealth from the Australian and New Zealand territories in Antarctica. It may pay to keep in mind that the Chinese occupation of Tibet is in many ways similar to the Indonesian occupation of West Papua.
1. United Nations 7 September 2011 (full transcript included below)
http://www.un.org/apps/sg/offthecuff.asp?nid=1929
2. p. 882, ‘Current Notes on International Affairs – November 1957’,
Department of External Affairs, Canberra
3. Wikipedia entry http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ali_Murtopo
4. Western New Guinea http://oppb.webs.com/Western_New_Guinea.pdf
5. Richard Nixon Travels http://www.u-s-history.com/pages/h1464.html
6. Engage Media 29 August 2011 http://tiny.cc/17ndx
7. 3 News, New Zealand 8 September 2011 http://tiny.cc/9kyk8
Of the Cuff
Remarks to the press and the public Office of the Spokesperson UN Secretary-General
Auckland, New Zealand, 7 September 2011 – Remarks at Press Conference With Prime Minister John Key 7 September 2011
Prime Minister Key,
Ladies and Gentlemen of the media,
I am honoured to participate in this very historic, 40th anniversary of the PIF leaders” meeting and I am also very pleased to have a very successful constructive visit, bilateral, to New Zealand.
And I thank you very much for your initiative of hosting this very important meeting.
I am here to continue sounding a global alarm about climate change. As you know, I have visited almost all the places around the world where I could see the impact of climate change, including the North and South Poles, and you name it. And my most recent visits to Solomon Islands and Kiribati have reinforced my belief and conviction that climate change is happening and we must take action now.
Having visited these two Pacific Island states I have a much keener sense of the challenges of Pacific Island states
And, of course, I saw the real world vulnerability of these lands.
For the countries of the region, climate change is not about what might happen tomorrow. This is about what is happening now, today.
The countries of the Pacific are at the front of the front-lines of climate change. And I share the region”s concerns and I support their calls for more concerted action.
We have had a very good discussion this afternoon about climate change, ocean economies, regional peace and security and other issues.
We also discussed the importance of expanding opportunities and democratic participation for women in the region.
There is much room for improvement and today I heard a genuine commitment from the leaders to improve upon this record and ensure that Pacific Island countries can benefit from the power and potential of all its citizens, particularly including women.
Our two organizations, the United Nations and PIF, have agreed to explore ways to further strengthen our cooperation in addressing key economic, environmental, security and human challenges.
Through adoption of the joint statement as the result of our interactive dialogue, in particular we have agreed to meet at regular intervals – starting next year at the opening of the 67th session of the United Nations General Assembly. We will further strengthen our cooperating partnership.
This will ensure that the priorities of the region for its future welfare and development remain firmly registered with the organization at its highest levels.
Prime Minister, let me thank you for being such a strong partner of the United Nations. I am very grateful for such a strong support that New Zealand has been providing to the United Nations.
New Zealand is a reliable contributor to peacekeeping. You are a major development donor, particularly to your neighbours here in the Pacific. You are a model country, protecting and promoting human rights and gender empowerment.
I look forward to further strengthening this partnership in the years ahead.
My main priority as I look ahead to my second term is sustainable development, and my main approach will be to connect the dots between and among climate change, water scarcity, food crisis and energy shortages, gender empowerment and all [ kinds of] global diseases.
Just as people and countries are interconnected increasingly, so are the issues.
We can connect the dots, all these, to make a very comprehensive, integrated approach to these issues.
This will be a key focus as we prepare for the Rio+20 summit meeting next year.
And I count on [the] continuing support and leadership role being played by Prime Minister Key and your Government.
Thank you.
QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS
Q: Secretary-General, many of the non-self governing territories in the Pacific are joining the Forum as observers, including the US territories this week. What role can the United Nations specialised agencies in the Pacific play to contribute to their economic and social development and also political education and self-determination?
SG: The right of self-determination is recognized by the United Nations Charter, and I listened to the concerns of some leaders, particularly French Polynesia. It is up to the Member States voting in the General Assembly to decide on the re-listing or delisting of any territory as non-state governing territory. I would encourage them to continue to have a meaningful dialogue. The United Nations has been providing support, particularly in the developmental area, as well as protection of human rights. This is a concern and this is a fundamental principle of the United Nations Charter. So we will continue to provide such assistance. However, as far as this specific question is concerned then I hope that the territories concerned will continue to engage in dialogue with the concerned parties.
Q: Mr. Secretary-General, how appropriate is it for the United Nations to use Fijian peacekeepers from a military dictatorship?
SG: I know that Fiji has been suspended from the PIF and there are some serious concerns about violations of human rights. While keeping Fijian soldiers in peacekeeping operations, particularly in Iraq, we have been making sure that each individual soldier”s record about human rights should be and has been vetted, very seriously and carefully considered. This is what the UN will continue to do.
Q: [inaudible, question on the possibility of a human rights mission to Fiji]
SG: I would expect that the Member States of the United Nations may raise this issue at the Human Rights Council, and if there is a decision, I can of course ask my High Commissioner for Human Rights to dispatch a fact-finding mission there. But as far as human rights are concerned, the UN is always very strongly committed to ensure that human rights of everybody are fully protected. This [question of a human rights mission] I leave to the Member States.
Q: [inaudible, question on West Papua]
SG: Again this issue should also be discussed at the Decolonisation Committee of the United Nations General Assembly. And when it comes, again, to whether you are an independent state or non self-governing territory, whatever, the human rights is an inalienable and fundamental principle of the United Nations. We will do all to ensure that the people in West Papua, their human rights should be respected.
Q: [inaudible, question on possibility of a human rights mission to West Papua]
SG: That we will have to see. Again, this is the same answer to you that it should be discussed at the Human Rights Council among the Member States. Normally the Secretary-General acts on the basis of the mandate given by inter-governmental bodies.
http://www.un.org/apps/sg/offthecuff.asp?nid=1929
