About West Papua

It is very clear that there have been egregious abuses of the human rights of Papuan people in Indonesia over an extended period. It is entirely appropriate that international pressure is brought to bear on the Indonesian government to address this situation.

One potential solution involves self-determination, of Papuan control over governance in areas historically associated with Papuan people and land. However, this could take a number of forms, and is not reducible simply to the creation of a new nation.

I respect Mr Wenda’s right to put a case for the latter. But to characterise the situation in Indonesia’s existing Papuan provinces as ‘slow-moving genocide’ is simply wrong. The article he cites (authored by his lawyer and supporter) itself refers rather to a situation some have assessed as ‘approaching genocide’ – a description with unclear significance – and to local Papuan fears in the past of potential escalation of repression reaching the point of genocide.

I acknowledge Mr Wenda inserts the caveat ‘what I consider to be …’ and of course he is entitled to his opinion. But equally, to argue that genocide is actually occurring, whether ‘gradual’ or not, is a serious accusation and requires more justification that appears here.

Further, the presence of this description prominently in the second sentence of the article is not helpful to exploring a range of constructive options in addressing human rights abuses in Indonesia’s Papuan provinces, but rather, represents an appeal to and incitement of popular emotion that, arguably, aims to reduce such options down solely to new nationhood.

This is to the detriment of constructive engagement with the Indonesian national government which ultimately could lead to a version of the kind of political autonomy currently applying in the province of Aceh, itself the site of many decades of brutal repression by Indonesian military forces and local armed resistance.

Why would an Aceh-like outcome not be applicable to Papuan territories in Indonesia?

Another point: post-colonial national boundaries established throughout the world following WWII are more often than not imperfect with regard to issues of culture and ethnicity. In the context of the era of post-war decolonisation, Indonesian nationalists had as solid a claim as any (and more than many) to a nation formed from the colonial territory of the Dutch East Indies. This was resisted fiercely (and militarily) by the Dutch at the time, though supported by both the Australian union movement and Indonesian socialists.

The Dutch attempted many gambits to undermine this nationalist vision partly by breaking their colonial territory into sections – including visions of a ‘Great Eastern’ archipelagic state separated from the most populous islands of Java and Sumatra. Similarly, Dutch support for a separate ‘West New Guinea’ aimed to maintain a foothold in the region, particularly by the Dutch right, who envisaged a 'white man's paradise' in a last (Christianised) bastion of colonial enterprise. Their deliberate encouragement of nationalist sentiments among a local Papuan administrative elite was geared to this end.

Against this historical background, it is hardly surprising that ideas of a 'unitary Indonesian state' in a country as new as Indonesia retain some force.

The contemporary Indonesian nation is a pluralistic multi-ethnic and newly democratic state which has made great strides in many areas of political and economic reform, including a radical program of decentralisation which has seen Papuans now dominating powerful, locally elected administrations in their territory.

There is considerable scope for the western Papua region to gain real economic and political benefits as a result of remaining in a contemporary, democratic Indonesia which has embraced international notions of human rights and increasingly seeks to develop its adherence to these standards. International activists concerned for the people of the region can exert real pressure on the Indonesian government and public to improve the situation there -- including special forms of autonomy -- if such measures are not necessarily linked to independence.