Response to Sidney Jones' argument to apply Indonesia's anti-terrorism law in West Papua

Excerpts from Ed McWilliams responds to Sidney Jones' argument to apply Indonesia's anti-terrorism law in West Papua

"In a December 5, 2012 lecture at Stanford University's International Policy Studies program (revised January 22, 2013), the respected Southeast Asia analyst Sidney Jones discussed the Indonesian government's unwillingness, thus far, to categorize the Papuan "ethno-nationalists/separatists" as "terrorists." 

...

Jones summarily credits recent violent acts in West Papua to the "ethno-nationalists and separatists." This is surprising insofar as Jones is a highly regarded observer of the Indonesian political scene with a deep human rights background. She knows, or should know, that the authors of violence in the Indonesian archipelago -- especially violence with complex motives -- are never so clear cut as her lecture implies. This is especially true of West Papua where police-military rivalries over access to resources and sources of extortion monies is well known. Jones should know also that military, police and intelligence agencies, have long played the role of provocateur, orchestrating acts of violence which advance agendas that are invariably obscure

....

Jones also fails to acknowledge the reality, widely noted in international and local human rights circles, that the Indonesian government has long sought to smear peaceful dissent in West Papua as "separatist." Jakarta, through the aegis of a corrupt court system and often criminal state security forces, has repeatedly employed the "separatist" label to arrest and prosecute or detain peaceful political dissenters, such as those who display the Papuan morning star flag. Courts regularly resort to charges of treason that date to the Dutch colonial era and widely used by the Suharto dictatorship to intimidate dissidents. Jones' call for Indonesia to define "separatism" as "terrorism" would deepen Jakarta's targeting of peaceful dissent and the intimidation of Papuans generally.  

...

Employing the "terrorist" label against "ethno-nationalist and separatist" groups and individuals in West Papua could have direct legal implications for international solidarity movements. In the U.S., groups or individuals who advocate on behalf of groups designated by the U.S. government as "terrorists" are subject to criminal prosecution. 

Indonesia's 'anti-terror" Detachment 88

Read in full here

April 2010 West Papua Report out

The West Papua Advocacy Team's April 2010 West Papua Report is available here


The lightly-armed Papuan resistance organization (OPM) expressed public support for a internationally mediated dialogue between Papuans and the Indonesian government. The announcement indicates broad unity among Papuans for a peaceful approach to resolving Papuans' myriad problems with Jakarta. In late March, Papuan demonstrators in various Papuan cities met a mixed response from police who at times used repression against the uniformly peaceful protests. The trial of Victor Yiemo began. The activist stands accused of "rebellion" under Indonesia's infamous Article 106. The Indonesian military announced plans, not yet approved by the civilian government, to significantly augment its presence in West Papua. The plan stands in stark contrast to broad Papuan calls for demilitarizing their homeland. Environmentalists have pointed to new problems with government plans to develop a massive food estate in the area of Merauke. In its annual assessment of human rights in Indonesia in 2009, the U.S. Department of State chronicles many of the cases of rights abuse, usually at the hands of the security forces, but inexplicably ignores a key June 2009 Human Rights Watch report which detailed extensive Kopassus abuse of Papuans, as well as decades of Indonesian government failure to extend health, education and other basic services to Papuans. The International Crisis Group (ICG) issued a report on West Papua which seeks to assign blame for growing violence to individual Papuan groups rather than acknowledge deteriorating human rights and humanitarian conditions. Some media reports of the analysis, abetted by an ICG official's comments, mischaracterize the report's assessment of who is to blame for recent violence in the area of the Freeport-McMoran mine. A recent violent incident in the Puncak Jaya region has local people on edge.


full April report here