Dec. 1, which many
supporters of the West Papuan freedom movement regard as West Papua’s national
day, marks the date in 1961 when the New Guinea Council — the West Papuan
parliament under Dutch colonial rule — raised the Morning Star flag for the
first time. The debate whether it was a plot by the Dutch colonial rulers to
stir up conflict between the Indonesian government and the West Papuan
indigenous people, or a genuine promise to grant independence to West Papua, no
longer benefits anyone living in Papua.
Every year the Morning Star flag is
raised or displayed in some areas, sometimes followed by a clash. Especially
after the reform movement in 1998, the flag-raising has become a routine
occasion for conflict between supporters of the Free West Papua movement and
the security forces, especially in Papua and West Papua. The cycle of conflict
symbolized by the flag-raising is akin to a hamster spinning around in his
wheel, which is not funny at all for the hamster. One of the iconic figures in
such flag-raising incidents is Filep Jacob Samuel Karma, a Papuan independence
activist who helped raise the Morning Star flag on Dec. 1, 2004, in Jayapura.
He was then arrested and charged
with treason and given a 15-year prison sentence. The case is just a small part
of the bigger problem of West Papuan grievances.Filep was finally released on
Nov. 19 this year after 11 years behind bars. The UN Working Group on Arbitrary
Detention classified Filep’s detention as “arbitrary”, while Amnesty
International designated him a prisoner of conscience. The government has
sought to reduce secessionist sentiment through democracy and the acceleration
of economic and social development.
However, it has failed in cultural
recognition or to make sincere efforts to help Papuans live a better life since
the beginning of Indonesian administration in West Papua, especially after the
1969 Act of Free Choice. After the national reform movement of 1998, the two
most significant democratic changes in Indonesia have been free and fair
elections and decentralization or regional autonomy, and in the case of Papua
and West Papua, special autonomy. But economic wellbeing has increased demands
for political participation, including the preference for an independent West
Papua. Public dissatisfaction has been addressed to elected mayors and regents,
governors, councilors, and also successive presidents. At the extreme level,
the combination of factors supporting conflict such as neglecting historical
facts, social injustice, a heavy-handed security approach and mounting distrust
has metamorphosed into a violent secessionist movement. Indonesia’s “success stories”
in resolving domestic conflicts in former East Timor and Aceh were a
combination of external and internal efforts triggered by very harsh events.
In East Timor, the human rights
violations and international pressure intertwined with domestic democratization,
while in Aceh, the tsunami, external support and domestic realization of the
futility of war by both the central government and the Free Aceh Movement led
to an agreement to end the conflict. With such a limited experience of purely
government initiatives in resolving its domestic conflicts, Indonesia needs to
strengthen its democracy as the foundation for generating the initial moves in
resolving the conflict in Papua. With the success of “procedural democracy”
through local elections at national, provincial and local levels — the latest
on Dec. 9 — elected rulers should be able to create a stronger connection with
their voters by recognizing the preferences of the people.
“Substantive democracy” should be
felt by all citizens of Indonesia. After 32 years of authoritarian rule, it is
proving difficult to build structures of civic participation based on mutual
trust in West Papua and Papua. Although the reform movement turned 17 years old
this year, the West Papua issue not only remains but also may reach the state
of a “routine conflict”, where the only communication that the conflicting
parties understand is violence or to agree to disagree. The most difficult part
of secessionist problems in a democratic state is the contradiction between
freedom of political expression of the secessionist group and national
integrity or sovereignty. Part of the core of objective national interests of
all countries is related to sovereignty over an internationally recognized
physical geographic boundary.
According to Joseph Frankel in his
1970 book, National Interest, objective national interests are those that
relate to a nation-state’s ultimate foreign policy goals. These are permanent
interests, comprising factors such as geography, history, neighbors, resources,
population size and ethnicity. A secessionist problem within a democracy
deteriorates in the absence of alternative channels of communications apart
from incessant argument, diplomatic dispute, violent conflict and symbolic
conflicts like the flag-raising issue. Once in a philosophy research class, a
professor showed a picture of an abstract geometric painting with lighting and
shadows. However, as the professor explained, the cold dark matter was actually
a garden shed. The shed had been blown up with explosives and all the debris
was flying or lying on the floor.
The illustration not only suits the
“explosive conflicts” that Indonesia has undergone since its independence, but
also reflects the emotion of the conflicting parties. It doesn’t matter where
we stand, everybody hurts. The trouble in rearranging the modern democratic
Indonesia is somewhat like organizing historical facts, justice, emotions,
sadness and bitterness, all in an atmosphere of residual conflict. The effort
of the artist to arrest the moment where the pieces of the garden shed are
still in the air is like carefully capturing the tangible and intangible
factors of the social and political problem. In former East Timor, how many
social, political, and economic parts of interwoven fabric did Indonesia
detonate? In Aceh, the most explosive event was the tsunami by Mother Nature.
No one would like to experience another cold dark moment in Papua.
The writer Puguh Sadadi, is a PhD
candidate at the University of Leicester, UK.
No comments:
Post a Comment