TEMBAGAPURA, KOMPAS.com - Two contractors working for US company Freeport-McMoRan were found dead Monday near a giant gold-and-copper mine that has been hit by a strike and violence for months, the company said.
Ten people, all Indonesians, have now been killed around the mine in ambushes and in a clash with police since a strike that began in September at the company’s Grasberg mine in restive Papua province. The latest victims, who were found dead in a vehicle owned by the US company, had apparently been shot, said Ramdani Sirait, spokesman for the company’s local subsidiary, Freeport Indonesia.
“At about 9:15am local time this morning, we received a report of an incident involving a light vehicle which has fatally injured two contractor employees,” Sirait said in an email to AFP.
“Initial reports indicate that the vehicle appears to have been fired upon,” he added, confirming that the two workers had died.
Police, who have blamed “unidentified gunmen” for some of the shootings, did not immediately comment on the latest incident. A Freeport employee at the scene said the vehicle, a Toyota Land Cruiser, had been flipped over and burnt.
In mid-December, Freeport Indonesia said that a three-month strike involving more than 8,000 workers and 1,600 contractors had been settled. But on Friday the workers union said that several of Freeport’s subcontractors had not paid more than 900 employees at the mine and that they would not return to work until that was resolved.
Freeport had said it aims to have all workers back by January 16 and reach full capacity in the following weeks when some damaged pipelines are repaired. The workers claimed to be Freeport’s lowest-paid employees in the world, including those at mines in Africa and South America.
Last month, workers said they had agreed to return to the mines after negotiating a 37-percent pay increase on wages that started at $1.50 an hour for unionised members and better conditions for contractors

INDONESIA: Another protester dies amidst the tense situation at Freeport

December 15, 2011

ASIAN HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION - URGENT APPEALS PROGRAMME

Urgent Appeal Update: AHRC-UAU-049-2011

15 December 2011

[RE: AHRC-UAC-204-2011: Police in Timika kill one union protester and injure others at Freeport]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
INDONESIA: Another protester dies amidst the tense situation at Freeport

ISSUES: freedom of expression; indigenous people; labour rights, extra-judicial killing
---------------------------------------------------------------------

Dear friends,

The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) has received information regarding the death of yet another union protester on 15 October 2011, following a shooting injury on October 10. The situation at the Freeport mine in Timika, West Papua remains tense, due to the repressive approach of the Papua regional police (POLDA Papua).

UPDATED INFORMATION:

In its urgent appeal of 13 October 2011 (AHRC-UAC-204-2011), the AHRC raised concerns about the extrajudicial killing of trade union member Peter W. Ayamiseba and the injury of several persons in police shootings during a union protest against the illegal termination of workers on 10 October 2011 at PT Freeport Indonesia in West Papua. [Video of police shootings during a union protest] The AHRC has learnt that another protester who was shot in the back on October 10, Leo Wangadau, died on October 15, at 2pm at his home. (photo: Leo Wandagau while injured, awaiting his treatment in the hospital on October 10, source: Freeport Union)

According to Virgo Salossa (senior staff of the Union), the forensic doctor at Mimika hospital was not sure what caused Leo’s death, and said that the lack of facilities in the hospital prevented them from any further investigation. Previously, on October 10, the hospital stated that Mr. Wandegau was healthy and permitted him to go home, as seen on video. (video: Leo Wandagau before his surgery on October 10, at 11:09 am in the Mimika general hospital (RSUD), source: Freeport Union)

Meanwhile, according to the Chemical Energy Mining Union of the All Indonesia Workers Union (Serikat Pekerja Kimia Energi Pertambangan-Serikat Pekerja Seluruh Indonesia) in Timika, on October 14, Paulus Waterpau, one of the Indonesian police deputies ordered to resolve the conflict at Freeport, and Bigman Lumban Tobing, the chief of Papua regional police, instructed for the union protesters to be dispersed from where the location of the protest, the entrance gate of the Gorong-gorong company bus transportation terminal. The Papua regional police and their subordinates thus forced open the blockade in mile 27, checkpoint zone located at Freeport area, West Papua. On the same day, seven PT Freeport Indonesia (PTFI) union protesters, Gebi Taneloh, Pardianto, Degei, David Mirino, Derek Waitai, Jonotan Iyei, and Hermanus Kogoya, were interrogated as witnesses by the provost (special military police force in a military unit with tasks of security, military discipline and criminal investigation) of Timika resort police regarding the shooting incident on October 10. Furthermore, Hengky Binur, the coordinator of the protesters has been under interrogation since September 16 regarding the strike.

On October 18, Godlif Mansnembra, the chief of the mobile brigade (BRIMOB) of the North Sulawesi police, one of the officers initially ordered to resolve the conflict in Freeport was ordered by the chief of Papua regional police to leave Timika. According to Mr. Mansnembra, the alleged reason for this order was the assumption that Mansnembra was siding with the protesters as he preferred to use a non-violent and open approach to resolve the conflict rather than a repressive or aggressive approach.

The general oversight inspectorate of sector 4 of Indonesian Police (Irwasum wilayah 4) also subsequently examined this case; until now however, there is no further information from the police regarding the investigation.

BACKGROUND INFORMATION:

Since 15 September 2011, PT Freeport Indonesia (PTFI) employees were on strike demanding wage adjustments. As a result, PTFI fired them and hired new workers. To protest this illegal termination and demand their jobs back, on October 10, the employees returned to their work location. Around 1000 employees from other areas walked to the entrance gate of the Gorong-gorong company bus transportation terminal (from where the PTFI runs a bus to take the workers back to their dormitories).

The police from Timika District Police (POLRES) had placed guards in front of the terminal and fired warning shots at the protesters causing those in the front rows to leave. Peter M. Ayamiseba (PTFI employee) was shot in the shoulder and died on the scene. Nine other protestors were injured, including Leo Wandagau who was wounded in the back by rubber bullets. Please see Urgent Appeal Case: AHRC-UAC-204-2011 for further information.

Furthermore, on October 28, the chief of Indonesian police, Timor Pradopo admitted that members of the police in Papua receive money from PTFI. He described the fees paid to the police personnel as “meal money” that could be audited and accounted for. In 2010, the Papua regional police wrote a letter to NGO KontraS, in which it stated that the management of PTFI give Rp. 1.250.000, (almost USD 137) per person to 635 police officers every month. An investigation conducted by Indonesian Corruption Watch (ICW) found that PTFI provided USD 79,1 millions to the to Indonesian police and TNI over 10 years.

On 14 December 2011, the employees and the PTFI management have finally come to an agreement. The PTFI management said it would increase the basic salaries of its workers in Papua by 37 percent, starting with a 24 percent increase in the first year and 13 percent in the second year.

SUGGESTED ACTION:
Please write letters to the authorities listed below asking them to intervene in the case immediately to ensure that all allegations of institutional misconduct leading to wrongful deprivation of the victims’ liberty is investigated, that the victims are compensated. All legal process must to be conducted in accordance with international and national norms.

Please be informed that the AHRC is sending letters on this case to the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, and the Special Rapporteur on the rights of indigenous people, calling for strong intervention.

SAMPLE LETTER:

Dear ___________,

INDONESIA: Another protester dies amidst the tense situation at Freeport

Name of victim: Leo Wandagau
Names of alleged perpetrators: members of Timika Dictrict Police, Chief of Papua regional police
Date of incident: 10 and 14 October 2011
Place of incident: The entrance gate of the Gorong-gorong company bus transportation terminal, mile 27 checkpoint zone located at Freeport area, West Papua.

I am writing to voice my deep concern about a union protester who died on 15 October 2011 because of a shooting injury inflicted on 10 October 2011, and the repressive approach used to resolve the conflict in Freeport, Timika, West Papua.

Leo Wandagau, a union protester shot in the back on October 10, incident died at his house on October 15 at 2pm. According to Virgo Salossa (senior staff of the Chemical Energy Mining Union-All Indonesia Workers Union/SPKEP-SPSI PT Freeport), the forensic doctor at Timika hospital is not sure what caused Leo’s death. The doctor said that the hospital’s lack of facilities prevented further investigation. Previously, on October 10, Mimika hospital stated that Mr. Wandegan was healthy and permitted him to go home.

I have learnt that on October 14, Paulus Waterpau, one of the Indonesian police deputies, and the chief of Papua regional police were instructed to disperse union protesters, resulting in the Papua regional police and their subordinates forcing open a blockade in mile 27, Freeport area, West Papua. On the same day, seven PT Freeport Indonesia (PTFI) union protesters, Gebi Taneloh, Pardianto, Degei, David Mirino, Derek Waitai, Jonotan Iyei, and Hermanus Kogoya, were examined as witnesses by the provost (special military police force in a military unit with tasks of security, military discipline and criminal investigation) of the Timika resort police regarding the shooting incident on 10 October 2011. Furthermore, Hengky Binur, the coordinator of the protesters, continues to be examined regarding the strike since 16 September 2011.

I learnt that on October 18, Godlif Mansnembra, the chief of brigade mobile of North Sulawesi, and one of the police members ordered by the Indonesian police to resolve the conflict in Timika was ordered by the chief of Papua regional police to leave Timika. According to Mr. Mansnembra, the alleged reason for this order was the assumption that Mansnembra was siding with the protesters as he preferred to use a non-violent and open approach to resolve the conflict rather than a repressive or aggressive approach.

I also know that general oversight inspectorate of sector 4 of Indonesian Police (Irwasum wilayah 4) also examined this case, however, until now, there is no further information from the police regarding the investigation.

I am therefore urging you to take immediate action in this case, and to ensure that it is not buried or ignored, as happens to most cases involving PT Freeport Indonesia. An impartial criminal investigation must be conducted by a professional investigation team into police officers who were using lethal ammunition resulting in the death and injury of several workers. An independent investigation team should also subsequently conduct an investigation into the allegation of corruption based on the payments made by the company to the police. All those found guilty must be prosecuted according to the law. Furthermore, all members of the Indonesian police must respect the right of the protesters to strike, and prevent all forms of repression action against them.

I also urge you to ensure that PT Freeport Indonesia takes responsibility for the outcome of the conflict, for which they share responsibility, and ensure that there are no more violations of labour rights.

Yours sincerely,

----------------

PLEASE SEND YOUR LETTERS TO:

1. Mr. Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono
The President of Indonesia
Jl. Veteran No. 16
Jakarta Pusat
INDONESIA
Tel.: +62 21 3863777, 3503088.
Fax: +62 21 3442223

2. Head of Indonesian Police
Markas Besar Kepolisian Indonesia
Jl. Trunojoyo No. 3
Kebayoran Baru
South Jakarta 12110
INDONESIA
Tel. +62 21 3848537 / 7260306 / 7218010
Fax: +62 21 7220669
E-mail: info@polri.go.id

3. Head of Division of Profession and Security of Indonesian Police
Markas Besar Kepolisian Indonesia
Jl. Trunojoyo No. 3
Kebayoran Baru
South Jakarta 12110
INDONESIA
Tel.: +62 21 3848537, 7260306 / 7218010
Fax: +62 21 7220669
E-mail: info@polri.go.id

4. Chairman of the National Police Commission (Kompolnas)
Jl. Tirtayasa VII No. 20 Komplek PTIK Jakarta Selatan
INDONESIA
Tel.: +62 21 739 2352
Fax: +62 21 739 2317

5. Head of Papua Regional Police
Jl. Samratulangi No. 8 Jayapura
INDONESIA
Tel.: + 62 967 531014
Fax: +62 967 533763

6. Head of Division of Profession and Security of Papua Regional Police
Jl. Dr. Sam Ratulangi No. 8
Jayapura
INDONESIA
Tel.: + 62 967 531834

7. Chief of Timika District Police
Jl. Agimuga No. 03, Mike 32
Timika Papua
INDONESIA
Tel.: +62 901 301974

8. Office of The Anti Judicial Mafia Task Force (Satgas)
PO Box 9949
Jakarta 10 000
INDONESIA
Contact on website: http://www.satgas-pmh.go.id/?q=node/157

9. Head of National Commission on Human Rights of Indonesia
Jalan Latuharhary No.4-B,
Jakarta 10310
INDONESIA
Tel.: +62 21 392 5227-30
Fax: +62 21 392 5227
E-mail: info@komnas.go.id

Thank you.

Urgent Appeals Programme
Asian Human Rights Commission (ua@ahrc.asia)

Violence returns as two Freeport contractors  

As employees of miner PT Freeport Indonesia returned to work after their three-month strike, two men working for a contractor for the company were killed on Monday. The van they were driving was set on fire with the bodies inside.

The bodies of the two workers, identified as Thomas Bagiarsa and Masyun Simopiaref, were found in a Freeport area called Mile 51, which is located near Timika, Papua, 
according to police reports. 

The two were working for PT Kuala Pelabuhan Indonesia (KPI), a contractor for the local unit of US gold and copper giant Freeport McMoRan. 

Papua Police spokesman Sr. Comr. Wachyono said the incident, which took place at 9:00 a.m. local time, was still under investigation. 

“The bodies were badly burnt. We’ve evacuated them to [Freeport’s] Kuala Kencana clinic,” said Wachyono. 

Freeport spokesman Ramdani Sirait confirmed the incident and said there were signs of gunshots on the exterior of the victims’ van. 

“Freeport security personnel and the police are still investigating the shooting,” he said. 

A similar incident occurred on April 7, 2011, when unidentified gunmen fatally shot Freeport workers Max Mansawan and Harry Siregar near Timika, the closest town to Freeport’s Grasberg mine. The gunmen also set the workers’ van ablaze with the victims inside. 

Shootings around the Freeport site have intensified since April last year, with more than 12 people dead. 

The police have yet to identify the perpetrators of the killings, stirring speculation that some elements within the police and the military (TNI) may be creating instability in the country’s easternmost province, which has long been plagued by poverty amid abundant mineral resources. The police and the TNI have repeatedly denied any involvement in the violence. 

The violence escalated after Freeport’s workers staged a strike last September demanding higher pay. Between October and late November there were at least eight fatal incidents. 

Production at the Grasberg mine has been crippled since 8,000 workers walked off the job.

The workers ended their strike on Dec. 26 following the company’s agreement to raise their salaries by 39 percent. 

However, the return to work was delayed because KPI wanted to impose sanctions on around 500 employees who had joined the strike. 

KPI had formerly agreed not to take any action against them but subsequently several other contractors and subcontractors also refused to rehire former strikers.

DIALOG JAKARTA-PAPUA BUKAN TUJUAN AKHIR TETAPI SUATU JALAN KELUAR

Dr. Neles Tebay saat berdiskusi dengan Masyarakat

Sebenarnya yang menggerahkan hati saya untuk kita ketemu berdialok/berdiskusi adalah bahwa kalau banyak kali kita-tuntut-tuntut tetapi kalau orang tanya sama kitorang bahwa kamu mengerti apa tentang dialog?, dialog Nasional/Internasional : dialok Nasional itu yang bagaimana dan dialog Internasional itu yang bagaimana, akhirnya setiap orang mempunyai pendapat yang lain-lain. Jadi diantara kita harus mempuyai pemahaman yang sama tentang Dialog, orang tanya tapi dialok macam apa yang kamu mau, ini kita tidak mempunyai pemahaman yang sama tentang Dialok, ini sama saja dengan pemerintah pusat  tanya dorang juga sama dorang juga tidak punya konsep sampai detik ini.
Terlanjur buku ini diluncurkan di Jakarta dorang terlanjur menganggap ini sebagai pandangan Papua, saya bilang tidak ini adalah pandangan seorang Neles Tebay tidal mewakili siapa-siapa, tetapi karena buku ini yang hadir lebih dulu dan dorang disana tidak punya sudah dianggap begitu.
Tetapi terlepas dari itu, buku ini di tulis untuk membantu proses diskusi macam sekarang ini, jadi ada sesuatu kalau kita mau diskusi suda ada sesuatu yang tertulis untuk kita mulai diskusi tentang dialok sehingga saya harapkan ketika kita pulang itu “kita mempunyai pemahaman yang sama terhadap sejumlah hal, sejumlah aspek dari dialok” jadi itu sebenarnya tujuan.
Muda-mudahan ketika diskusi ini kita mempunyai pemahaman yang sama tentang pokok ini kita semua setuju, pokok itu kita tidak setuju, aspek ini kita setuju/aspek ini kalau berbeda ya sudah kita bilang kita belum bersatu, lepas dari itu kita maju ke pokok berikut sehingga pulang itu kita kita bias ceritra kepada siapa saja kepada masyarakat bahwa untuk dialok papua ini kami sepakati begini. Sehingga tidak bicara lain karena kalau tidak nanti ada yang bilang lain isi dialok minta pemekaranla? Macam-macam. Jadi banyak hal mestinya yang kita mempunyai pemahaman yang sama.
Kemarin Pemerintah Thailand dan Masyarakat Thailand selatan ada bertemu persoalannya sama seperti kita punya, Thailand selatan itu masyarakat melayu beragama Islam dorang juga merasa lain dari masyarakat Thailand yang lain dari bangsa lain dan agama lain jadi dorang juga ada berusaha dorang bilan mereka mau merdeka, tapi dorang bakalai terus jadi ada yang sedang memfasilitasi dialog antara dorang. Tetapi yang saya mau katakana bahwa  di masyarakat selatan ini mereka punya kelompok-kelompok banyak tetapi mereka sempat sepakat di sejumlah aspek sehingga dorang bias maju bersama, inilah yang mungkin kita bias belajar dari mereka untuk mencari pemahaman yang sama dari sejumlah aspek dari dialog ini.
Kata dialok menurut banyak orang tentang masalah Papua orang Jakarta tidak mau dengar (dengar saja suda tidakbisa apalagi buat)mereka tidak mau dengar padahal kita sudah dorong itu dari dulu sampai sekarang belum ada tanda-tanda (sampai Beny Giay bilan tuntut dialok dengan jakarta itu sama saja dengan rebus batu, jadi mau rebus sampai tahun berapa juga batu masih ada) tetapi kita tetap dorong saja macam tulis buku peluncuran sini-sana itu semua upaya untuk itu, sampai sekarang ini saya punya kesan bahwa sudah semakin banyak orang di Jakarta yang juga setuju dan sedang mendorong proses ini, kalau pada suatu saat Presiden SBY bilang ya saya mau dialog terus kita disini bagai mana, kita baru mulai kumpul ka? apakah kita sudah siap ka?, lebih baik entah Presiden bilan Ya atau tidak  kita bicara dulu, sehingga kalau dia bilang dialok itu kita sudah siap, tidak cepat-cepat (orang bilang cepat-cepat karena lapar bakar ubi ko makan juga tida kenyang) artinya kita siap sebelum Jakarta bilang ya dan kita harus bersatu sebelum presiden bilang Dialog.  diskusi kita seperti itu. Sebenarnya diskusi kita untuk mencapai pemahaman yang sama dari sejumlah aspek dari dialog, lalu kita saya akan jelaskan dialog seperti apa:
Dalam ringkasan buku kecil yang saya buat itu ada konflik papua antara pemerintah Indonesia dengan orang Papua, konflik ini belum selesai/belum dituntaskan. Tanda-tanda bahwa konflik ini belum selesai itu adalah adanya rancangan penembakan di akhir-akhir ini di Papua, ini menunjukan bahwa masalah belum selesai, konflik belum selesai ada penembakan di Serui Timika Nabir dan dimana-mana, ada tuduhan dialamatkan ke TPN/OPM itu konflik belum selesai Karena kalau konflik selesai TPN’OPM sudah tidak ada tetapi itu masih di akui/dituduh berarti konflik belum selesai (konflik papua) jadi siapa bilang konflik Papua sudah selesai kenapa ada tuduh TPN OPM ada penyisirandan pengejaranlah macam-macam, ada pengibaran bintang kejora sekalipun motifasinya macam-macam. Jadi itu tanda bahwa konflik Papua belum selesai, tuntutan Referendum juga menunjukan bahwa suatu tanda konflik Papua belum selesai, adanya stikma separatis juga menunjukan bahwa konflik belum selesai, kalau itu sudah tidak ada berarti masalah Papua sudah selesai.
Contohnya Aceh : dulu ada kekacauan sedikit itu bilan Gam, tetapi sekarang sesudah dialog ketika kesepakatan halsinky tidak ada Gam, tidak ada stikma separatis disana, tidak ada tuduhan Gam itu artinya masalah selesai, kalau disini itu masih ada yang artinya masalah belum selesai.
Kepada pemerintah pusat kami katakana kepada orang-orang yang kami ketemu, kita tidak bias menyangkal bahwa untuk Papua masalah sudah buktinya ini indikatornya (selagi kamu masi pake ini kamu telah mengatakan kepada orang bahwa konflik Papua belum selesai). Ini adalah sejumlah tanda- tanda.
Alasan mengapa konflik papua itu mendesak? Jalan kekerasan tidak pernah selesaikan masalah Operasi Militer sekalipun, Inplementasi OTSUS sampai sekarang belum mensejahterakan masyarakat dan juga Komitmen pemerintah pusat tidak punya komitmen untuk melaksanakan UU OTSUS karena setelah otsus di keluarkan UU, ada Kebijakan presiden setelah itu Peraturan Pemerintah jadi dorang tidak punya komitmen.
Menurut Muridan itu bahwa OTSUS itu bukan hasil dari kesepakatan. Kalau OTSUS yang UUAceh punya itu OTSUS tapi adalah kesepakatan jadi kesepakatan halsinky itulah yang dimasukan kedalam UU OTSUS Aceh. Jdai keduanya ini di ikat oleh kesepakatan ini. OTSUS Papua tidak tau siapa yang lawatkan jadi begini orang Papua dan Pemerintah Indonesia tidak di ikat jadi siapa yang tidak laksanakan yam au tuntut apa lagi tidak ada yang mengikat kedua bela pihak. Karena itu saya sendiri percaya bahwa Pemerintah Indonesia melaksanakan OTSUS.
Terus Papua menjadi sorotan Internasional, kami bilang kepada pemerintah Indonesia bahwa mengapa dulu Timor-Timor Minta Merdeka karena kamu tidak dialog dengan orang Timo-timor sehingga mereka merdeka, kenapa Aceh tetap dengan NKRI karena kamu dialog dengan orang Aceh, jadi dengan Papua ini kamu pilih sudah, kalau tidak dialog mungkin seperti Timor-timor, kalau dialog mungkin seperti Aceh (jadi terserah saja). Jadi Dialog ini kalau memang dorang mempertahankan NKRI dialog ini sebenarnya jalan sekalipun kitorang tulis begini mereka bilang separatis tapi tidakpapa, tetapi ini kita harus bilang untuk dorang di Jakarta bahwa dialog itu baik untuk Pemerintah Indonesia, dulu kamu tidak dialog dengan Timor-timor Timor-timor merdeka, kamu dialog dengan Gam Aceh ada dalam NKRI baru Papua?.. Dunia ada lihat papua dorang buat apa untuk Papua jadi ada salah sedikit maka ada sorotan internasional.
Kalau dialog kita bilang bahwa Pemerintah punya kemauan untuk Dialog dan Orang Papua punya kemauan untuk berdialog jadi kita sama-sama punya kemauan untuk berdialog. Sampai sekarang itu kalau dua-dua mau dialog itu kenapa sampai sekarang itu tidak dialog, Papua tuntut dialog Pemerintah Indonesia bilang kami akan berdialog dengan Papua tetapi sampai sekarang tidak jadi-jadi, ini kenapa. Menurut saya ada beberapa alasan :

1. Belum ada konsep dialog yang mau di terima oleh Papua Jakarta(hanya pernyataan-pernyataan saja tidak ada konsep bahwa kami mau dialok itu nanti begini-begitu baik Pemerintah Indonesia maupun Papua) kalau konsep tidak ada sampai dunia keamatpun tidak jadi.
2. Pemerintah Pusat Takut dan curiga terhadap dialog ini (dorang pikir kalau dorang kasi kesempatan dialog orang Papua membahas kemerdekaan dalam dialog jadi lebih baik tidak usah) karena tidak usa maka orang yang bicara soal dialog itu separatis, macam saya ini orang bilang nanti kasi tau pater itu separatis (saya bilang trapapa jangan bilan separatis duaparatis juga trapapa supaya dua separatis) tetapi karena mereka tidak mau dialok ”TAKUT” dan curiga nanti orang Papua manfaatkan dialog untuk MERDEKA sekalipun dalam buku ini saya tulis tidak membahas merdeka dalam dialog tapi tetap masih di curigai
3. kita orang papua betul-betul mau percaya bahwa Pemerintah Indonesia mau Dialog dengan kita (karena masyarakat tau bahwa pemerintah itu hanya tau buat janji-janji dan tidak perna mau laksanakan) jadi pemerintah mau dialog nanti masyarakat bilang ini hanya janji saja tidak ada orang Papua yang mau percaya bahwa Pemerintah Indonesia mau Dialog dengan kita.Jadi kalau yang satu takut dan curiga terhadap Papua dan yang satu tidak percaya kepada Pemerintah Indonesia maka Dialog ini tidak akan jadi
4. Posisi yang beda antara Indonesia dengan Papua. (Indonesia bilang “NKRI harga mati” jadi dialok ini harus ada hasilnya NKRI harga mati itu baru mungkin Pemerintah Indonesia buka diri untuk dialog. Tetapi dari Papua juga bila “MERDEKA itu harga mati” jadi dialok ini harus ada hasilnya Papua Merdeka) kalau dua-dua mempertahankan juga sampai keamat pun tidak ada dialog

Menurut saya dari beberapa alas an ini lah yang membuat dialog tidak jadi-jadi karena alasan ini. Jadi dialog mau dilakukan berarti “mesti ada kesepakatan-kesepakatan” menghancurkan yang tadi-tadi itu dengan sejumlah kesepakatan, itu berarti perlu ada pertemuan-pertemuan sampai mendapatkan kesepakatan-kesepakatan ini. Kesepakatan itu yang saya bilang dalam buku ini perlu ada kerangka acuan, kerangka acuan yang mengikat kedua belah pihak baik Pemerintah Indonesia maupun orang asli Papua, bahwa kerangka acuan ini memang harus disetujui oleh kedua bela pihak tidak bias satu paksakan dia punya mau. Dalam kerangka acuan ini apa yang perlu ada, itu yang saya  sebutkan dalam buku kecil itu semacam prinsip dasar bahwa kedua bela pihak mestinya sepakat bahwa bersepakat untuk menyelesaikan konflik Papua secara damai tanpa kekerasan. Setuju ka/tidak?.. kalau orang Papua setuju, Pemerintah Indonesia setuju maka ok bagin ini kamu dua sepakat artinya bahwa kalau ada yang keluar ambil kekerasan berarti keluar dari kesepakatan dan kalau suda sepakat pasti ada konsekwensinya/ tuntutannya. Hal seperti inilah yang mestinya ada dalam kerangka acuan ini, karena kita mau selesaikan konflik Papua secara menyeluruh bukan setenga-setenga.
Konflik diselesaikan secara bermartabat, jadi tidak boleh ada pihak yang merasa kehilangan muka, misalnya : saya punya ayam betina di curi oleh markus, saya mau ayam betina ini kembali, ketika saya bilang hei… ko pencuri to? Karena Buktinya, ya buktinya ko pencuri saya punya ayam betina markus bilang ayam betina ini saya beli di pasar padahal saya tau bahwa itu saya punya ayam betina. Tujuan saya ini supaya saya punya ayam betina ini kembali secara utuh hidup-hidup, karena bisa saja bilang encuri-pencuri dan dia mo kembalikan itu dia pata leher ayam baru dia bilang iyo ko bawa ko punya ayam sudah saya dapat ayam tapi dia suda mati, saya mau itu yang dapat hidup-hidup. Jadi bagaimana caranya saya dapat ayam tapi dia juga tidak rasa malu, inilah yang saya maksudkan bahwa masalah diselesaikan dengan pihak yang tidak merasa di permalukan. Tetapi saya selalu berteriak ko pencuri-pencuri ko punya ayam tidak akan kembali dan masalah tidak selesai-selesai, saya angkat parang dia juga angkat parang padahal orang tau bahwa dia pencuri tetapi ya begitu. Jadi penyelesaian Papua harus bermartabat itu berarti konsekwensinya ke meja perundingan.
Langka berikut adalah Tindak lanjut setelah mencapai kesepakatan, kalau wakil dari Papua dan wakil dari Pemerintah indonesia bertemu sepakat mesti ada tindak lanjut dari kesepakatan ini jangan sepakat terus titik, itu tidak, tetapi sepakat terus bagaimana melaksanakan kesepakatan itu, bahwa kita melaksanakan kesepakatan itu sesudah perundingan nanti sepakat sejak awal, karena kalau kesepakatan ko ambil juga nanti tidak ada lanjutan supaya dua-dua di ikat oleh kesepakatan. itu prinsip-prinsip dasar yang kita akan diskusikan.
Lalu Tujuan Dialog.
Kalau Indonesia tujuan dialog adalah mempertahankan NKRI harga mati dan Orang Papua tujuan dialog itu adalah Merdeka harga mati.
Kalau dua-dua ada di harga mati tidak akan bertemu dialog tidak akan jadi. Sehingga kalau mau dialog dilakukan maka masing-masing keluar dari kotak harga mati ini, indonesia ko keluar dari kotak NKRI harga mati dan Papua ko keluar dari Merdeka harga mati baru kamu dua bertemu di perdamaian jadi itu pikiran saya.
Jadi tujuannya itu kita membahas tentang perdamaian, bagaimana menciptakan Papua ini Tanah damai, bagai mana semua orang yang hidup di papua ini menjadi damai itu tujuannya

A creative statement to global silence

• BY:SALLIE DON 
• From:The Australian 
• January 03, 2012 9:52AM

• Increase Text Size
• Decrease Text Size
• Print

A scene from Strange Birds of Paradise, a documentary that looks at the oppression of West Papuans. Source: Supplied

DONNY Roem and Jacob Rumbiak are refugees from West Papua who live in Melbourne and have important stories to tell.

Roem crossed the Arafura Sea to Australia with his brothers and 42 other refugees in a homemade canoe; Rumbiak was a child soldier in the West Papuan resistance movement who was tortured. The film begins as the men join Australian musicologist David Bridie to record outlawed folk songs from their homeland.

The beautiful Melanesian songs were written by Arnold Ap, a West Papuan musician and anthropologist who used song as vehicle for speaking against the oppression of his people. He was arrested and tortured by the Indonesian military in 1983; five months later he was killed, allegedly while trying to escape. His music resonated with West Papuan communities as he was a champion for their right to political and cultural freedom.

It's via the music that filmmaker Charlie Hill-Smith documents the story, and he pushes you to look beyond the few impressions you may have of this wild and mostly inaccessible part of the world.

Hill-Smith has been visiting the region since he was a teenager and is clearly in his element as he laughs and jokes along with the villagers, taking part in rituals and dressing in traditional attire.

He is quick to point out, however, that this area is far from being an exotic tourist wonderland: this is, in fact, an undeclared war zone as tribes continue to fight for survival against Indonesian oppression.

Hill-Smith aims to convey a strong political message in this documentary, as he feels a great injustice has been done to the people of this region, particularly given Western nations' apparent indifference towards the actions of the Indonesian government.

Thus, says Hill-Smith in his director's statement, the film is a creative reaction to international silence and a cross-cultural response to neo-colonial tyranny.

Strange Birds in Paradise, 9.30pm, SBS One

Benny Wenda: ‘There’s a silent genocide going on in West Papua'

He might have just been put on an Interpol “wanted” list but West Papuan independence activist Benny Wenda has more important issues on his mind

'I had no involvement': Benny Wenda claims he is innocent of the crimes Indonesia wants to try him for Photo: GETTY

By Leah Hyslop

2:32PM GMT 28 Nov 2011

1 Comment

Issued at the request of Indonesian authorities, in relation to charges of arson and murder which he vehemently denies, the Interpol “red notice” means that Wenda can be arrested in, and possibly extradited from, any one of the crime-fighting agency's 190 member states.

Considering that he has been living relatively undisturbed in Britain since he fled from his homeland nearly a decade ago, the softly-spoken lobbyist admits he was “surprised” to learn about the alert – but thinks he knows why it’s happened now.

“Indonesia is getting worried,” he says simply. “I’m campaigning to free my people and I’m travelling abroad as well as up and down the UK, speaking in Parliament, things like that.... It’s definitely politically motivated.”

Wenda, 37, is at the forefront of a long and bitter battle over the sovereignity of West Papua, the former Dutch colony on the island of New Guinea which passed into Indonesian control in the 1960s. Although a referendum on the takeover was held in 1969, the fact that it involved only around 1,000 hand-picked Papuan men (just one per cent of the native population), under the watchful eyes of the Indonesian military, means that many people – Wenda included – regard it as little more than a sham, and the decades since have been marked by bloody conflict.

Wenda, a tribal chief who describes himself as a "leader" of the West Papuan people, has long been considered a hero by those in support of the independence movement. Others, however, have denounced him as an inciter of conflict – and even a potentially dangerous criminal. In 2002, he was placed on trial for spearheading a deadly attack on buildings in the town of Aberpura, but broke out of prison and fled the country before judgement was passed.

RELATED ARTICLES

• Oxford man will get a fair trial on terror charges 
  25 Nov 2011
• West Papuan rebels struggle for freedom 
  11 Nov 2010
• Papua New Guinea's tribes and traditions 
  09 Feb 2010
• Papua torture video brings to light ongoing conflict 
  19 Oct 2010
• Indonesia's human rights violations deeply entrenched 
  11 Jul 2011
• Indonesia confirms Papua torture 
  22 Oct 2010

It is for this reason that Indonesian authorities say they want him back on Papuan soil; though Wenda, of course, has a very different opinion as to their motives: "I had no involvement. I wasn't even in the country.They just wanted me in prison." He says that he had no choice but to escape from jail: already doubtful that he was going to be given an fair trial, a number of threats he received there made him fearful for his life, and he finally resolved to go one night when a guard whispered through the bars of his cell: “You are already fed, man” – a reference to the Papuan custom of fattening pigs up before slaughter. “I thought, if I try to escape and they kill me, well that’s ok, because at least I won’t have been killed like an animal.” Shortly afterwards, he broke into a ventilation shaft and escaped over the border into neighbouring Papua New Guinea.

After being granted political asylum in Britain, Wenda decided to set up the campaign, Free West Papua, dedicated not only to promoting the province’s independence, but to exposing what he alleges are serious human rights abuses taking place under Indonesian rule. In this, he is not alone. A number of human rights groups have spoken out in the past against what they see as Indonesia's oppressive approach to resistance: a report from Amnesty International released just earlier this year warned that: "The people of Papua are subject to severe human rights violations at the hands of the Indonesian authorities. Their rights to freedom of expression and peaceful assembly are heavily curtailed. Many people are imprisoned simply for having taken part in non-violent demonstrations, or having expressed their opinions."

Wenda, however, alleges that it is not only those who speak out who are badly treated. The picture he paints is of a place where institutional racism is rife, and where the the indigenous people are regularly beaten, sexually assaulted and tortured, without provocation. As a child, he claims to have to have seen countless atrocities, from his village being razed to the ground during an Indonesian air strike, to family members being murdered and raped in front of him, and "has lived with that trauma all my life." Today, he believes, the situation is "even worse".

What actually goes in in West Papua is, however, difficult to know; a ban on foreign media, as well as many charitable organisations, means life there is shrouded in secrecy. This, Wenda believes, is why international awareness of the situation is so low. “Because the media are banned, because groups like the Red Cross and Amnesty are banned, no one knows what’s happening.That’s what lets them get away away with it.

"It’s a silent genocide of my people. Just last month, three people peacefully protesting were killed, and hundreds detained, beaten and tortured. No one’s been charged. No one’s been arrested – just a few police questioned."

Wenda’s quest to tell the world about the fate of Papua will certainly be weakened by the Interpol alert; fear of arrest means that foreign travel is now out of the question. Alongside the campaign group Fair Trials International however, he hopes to be able to pressure Interpol to remove the notice, and until then will continue fighting his corner from Oxford, where he lives with his wife, Maria, and six children.

Does he find it difficult, I ask, working so many thousands of miles from his homeland? “Physically, it is hard being away from the people,” he concedes. “But I’m in regular communication, and I am watching 24 hours to see what’s going on."

One day, he hopes to return to his homeland. "But only," he says firmly, "when it is free

A War between Indonesia Military and TPN/OPM Wednesday, 21 December 2011, 12:47 pm Press Release: International Forum For West Papua

A War between Indonesia Military and West Papuan Liberation Army in Paniai, West Papua

International Forum for West Papua (INFO_WP)

December 20, 2011

Fourteen Paniai residents died as National Liberation Army of Free Papua Organisation (TPN/OPM), the second division in Eduda Hill headquarter and 47 villages in the area were burnt down by the Indonesian security forces last week.

The brutal attacks that started on December 13 have been conducted by combined Indonesian Police Mobile Brigade unit (BRIMOB), military and Indonesian police of Anti-Terrorist unit, Detachment 88. Five helicopters have also been used to support the attacks.

It resulted of displacement up to 542 civilians in the area. They have moved to Enarotali, Paniai district capital, and other 10,000 residents escaped to the jungle. Three women died: a two year old Otolince Degei was killed on December 9, and Yulimina Gobay, (4) and Anna Degei (47) were also killed on December 14.

“This brutal attack is a violation of human rights” said Papuana Mote, the Women Affairs Coordinator of International Forum for West Papua (INFO_WP). “They need to be protected from any cruel and brutal acts.”

The Australian government is responsible to the attack, as both Australia and United States of America have funded Detachment 88. The Detachment 88 is responsible to the killing of freedom fighters and innocent West Papuans

Amatus Douw, President of INFO_WP, said “guerrilla war between Indonesia and West Papuan freedom fighters will not end until there is a third party intervention”. “I have direct contact with the commander of TPN/OPM, John Yogi who told me that they are ready to fight against the Indonesian government to get our independence. The TPN/OPM calls international peace keeping force and UNs fact finding team to monitor the situation”.

******

ENDS

West Papua: How to lose a country

  Opini: By Jason Macleod

When Julia Gillard meet Indonesian President Susilo Bambang Yudhuyono in Bali on the weekend West Papua barely got a mention. Although the text messages inside West Papua went into overdrive with the rumour that the reason Australia and the United States were stationing 2,500 U.S Marines in Darwin was to prepare for military intervention in West Papua.
I told my friends in West Papua it wasn’t true.
But then I got thinking. Actually Australia is doing a lot to help Indonesia loosen their grip on the troubled territory. Not by design of course. But the effect is much the same as if the Government suddenly adopted a radical pro-independence policy.
Confused? Let me explain.
Last month the Indonesian police and military fired live rounds into an unarmed crowd of civilians in West Papua, killing five. The Army and Police then tried to make out that it wasn’t them, that what had taken place was a coup by the Papuan Liberation Army; that it was the Papuans who were doing the shooting. Yudhuyono tried to sell Obama and Gillard a version of that story in Bali on the weekend. That might have washed twenty years ago but in this age of social media and smart phones it is much more difficult to hide the evidence.
Since the killing of five Papuans on October 19, the wounding of scores more and the arrest of six Papuan leaders, international media coverage of West Papua has spiked and Indonesia’s international standing has taken a beating. The Army, Police and President’s denials and attempts at cover-up have not helped the government’s reputation.
The killings have also generated outrage and division within Indonesia. And October 19 was not an isolated incident. A series of shocking acts of torture of Papuans by the Indonesian military have been captured on video and recently released. And when I speak of outrage I am not talking about protests from human rights groups. National legislators from a range of Indonesian political parties have begun to publicly criticise the Indonesian military, police and even the President over the government’s policy, or lack of it, in West Papua. Even the cautious Indonesian Bishop’s Conference urged Indonesian President Susilo Bambang Yudhuyono to hold a third party mediated dialogue without delay.
Indonesian critics recognise that the political crisis in West Papua is spiralling out of control and that the central government and the security forces are making things worse. Indonesian journalist Bramantyo Prijosusilo writing in the Jakarta Globe went as far as saying that the “powerful forces bent on forcing Papuans to separate from Indonesia are none other than the central government, especially its military and police force.”
He has a point. West Papua teeters on the brink of open rebellion. After the shooting on October 19 one student previously uninvolved with politics told me “if the police and military thought they could shoot us dead like animals and we would somehow stop pressing for freedom, they are wrong. We don’t care about the military; we don’t care about the police. We are not afraid anymore.” Days later he was on the streets along with 3,000 other Papuans calling for a referendum.
This is not just about political insurrection. The economy is on the brink as well.
Consider the massive Freeport/Rio Tinto gold and copper mine. Eight thousand mine workers there have been on strike since July. Freeport’s pipeline has been cut in more than 20 places, the company has been unable to deliver on its contracts, the local government in Mimika which depends on revenue from the mine to supply services is cash strapped, and Freeport itself is losing billions.
That could mean Australian jobs are affected. Over 800 Australian companies supply the mine through Cairns and Darwin. The Australian owned company International Purveying Incorporated sends everything from Toyota’s, heavy mining equipment, and frozen beef dinners to Freeport every few days.
How long shareholders and investors will put up with heavy loses and adverse economic risk is any ones guess. But it won’t be forever. And it is not just Freeport / Rio Tinto that is in the firing line. BP, Clive Palmer’s nickel businesses in Raja Ampat, and logging interests are all the target of a torrent of anger from landowners. CEOs like Palmer and Freeport’s Bob Moffet may not ask the Indonesian government to negotiate with Papuans demanding political freedoms but sooner or later shareholders and investors will demand just that.
So how is the Australian government responding to these shifting power dynamics? Well that is the problem. They are not. The government’s position is the same as it has always been: continued support for the Indonesian military / police unhinged from any tangible improvements in human rights such as guarantees of free speech, release of political prisoners or moves towards supporting political dialogue.
No matter what side of the political fence you sit this is not smart policy.
For years Papuans have been telling our leaders that Special Autonomy had failed, that the Freeport mine was a source of conflict, and that the military and police were killing them. Just in case we were not paying attention they described the situation as “slow motion genocide”.
So for those realists out there who think an independent West Papua would be a mistake, here’s some free policy advice: stop funding the armed group splitting Indonesia apart.
Giving a blank cheque to the Indonesian military while there is continued suppression of political freedoms in West Papua is the surest way for Australia to help Indonesia lose a country.
It seems the Australian government might be eager to usher in freedom in West Papua after all.
Jason MacLeod is the newest blogger on This Blog Harms. Jason will be blogging mostly about civil resistance, particularly the use of people power in self-determination struggles in places such as West Papua. 

Comments (9) | Permalink

9 Comments

1. 1
   CTar1
   Posted November 25, 2011 at 8:58 pm | Permalink
   This really has the potential to be very troublesome.
   
2. 2
   Danuarta Roger
   Posted November 27, 2011 at 8:22 pm | Permalink
   LOL, this article if full of gross miscomprehension of the entire Papuan situation.
   Firstly, the strike and sabotage faced by Freeport is not done by native Papuans or by the separatists, instead it is being led by a Javanese employee with military connections, Mr Sudiro.
   I believe this whole strike and sabotage episode is an underhanded attempt by Indonesian government (President Yudhoyono in particular) to force Freeport to provide more money to the government in view of approaching 2014 elections. These foreign mining companies has always been milk-cow for Indonesian politicians.
   President Yudhoyono has noted how his opponent Mr Aburizal Bakrie has been able to enrich himself by forcing Australian mining company to sell their gigantic coal mine in Sangatta (East Kalimantan) by using similar tactics of strikes and sabotage.
   Secondly, the Papuan separatists did try to make some rioting to attract attention of world leaders who were in Indonesia for East Asia Summit. However, the Indonesian police has been remarkably composed in face of these provocations. The perpetrators of rioting are now safely behind bars, and not a single foreign leader even took notice of the childish theatrics of the Papuan separatists.
   In short, it seems Freeport would need to reduce its net profit and surrender larger portions of its revenue to remain within Indonesia. Not bad, it is about time for Indonesia to grab larger share of Freeport’s revenues.
   
3. 3
   Andrew
   Posted November 27, 2011 at 9:40 pm | Permalink
   While Indonesia’s conflict resolution record is not impeccable, there has been a relative success story in relation to the special autonomy region of Aceh and has resulted in a large reduction of violent conflict in that region. The implementation of the special autonomy arrangements between Aceh and Papua has some differences though, such as the central government permitting Aceh to keep a sizable amount of it’s resources, granting Aceh’s own law system (sharia), and the pull out of a large majority of the Indonesian Military that were posted there.
   I do not believe that this has occurred in West Papua yet and maybe a special autonomy resolution that involves some of these circumstances might help reduce the debilitating conflict that has occurred in the area for some years. Perhaps upon this stepping stone of special autonomy, which would hopefully include a wealthier, more educated and more empowered West Papuan society, the eventual and hopefully peaceful transition to independence could occur. Alas, the transmigration program, originally implemented by the dutch colonial government and continued by subsequent Indonesian governments, might hinder a future independence movement and seemingly complicates the matter even further.
   Perhaps the Australian government should start off with baby steps in the direction of independence by pushing for greater autonomy, and the cessation of the transmigration program with the eventual goal of independence that might result in less blood shed over a longer, maybe more realistic timescale? at the moment the Indonesian government seemingly has no intention to let Papua have it’s independence, perhaps this could change in the future with a sway of Indonesian public opinion? It seems that in periods of great social revolution the local populace, and neighboring countries seem to bear the social and economic costs such as was the case with East Timor where Australia still has a military presence after 10+ years.
   forgive the rambling incoherent nature of this blurb I just though I might add some info to the discussion. I am in no way an expert on Aceh or Papua, just an interested Australian.
   
4. 4
   Andrew
   Posted November 28, 2011 at 10:53 pm | Permalink
   @Danartu
   Thanks for the comments Danartu. I thinks its great to have a discussion with an Indonesian on this subject and to have your (nationalistic) perspective voiced.
   Perhaps you may believe that Papua belongs to Indonesia for time immemorial, but but others have a different perspective and believe that the original inhabitants of West New Guinea have only ever wanted independence from colonial powers be it Dutch or Indonesian. here is a few things to remember when thinking about “racially intolerant” Papuans who might be a little pissed off at military/transmigrants entering what they think is there country… the so called plebiscite in 196something was fully engineered by the Indonesian government and ended up with roughly 1000 key Papuan individuals voting to remain part of Indonesia. Hardly a plebiscite if you ask me. Not to mention USA support for the assimilation of Papua into Indonesia because of the fear of Indonesia turning into a communist nation which was never realized as the communist party was destroyed in 1965, and many ethnic Chinese in the process by intolerant ethnic Indonesians (using ur logic).
   In response to your second claim that the transmigration is not a government funded program, could you please read the governments agenda on their official website. I suppose you can speak and understand bahasa indonesian? Maybe you would like to go to the Government Website of Manpower and TRANSMIGRATION (http://bto.depnakertrans.go.id/tentang/sejarah.php) and read the History of the Transmigration program (Transmigrasi sejarah) and also the description in registering for the website in order to TRANSMIGRATE under government FACILITATION. And have a look at the different aide and support that is given citizens wishing to transmigrate.
   Again, a few random incoherent comments, but hey this is a blog. i can’t be bothered to reply in essay form. but seriously to just dismiss Papuans aspirations for independence as primitive tribalism of a stone aged society, and to try and obscure an inherently damaging government policy of transmigration as ordinary indonesians just trying to get along in the world is really just… well bullshit.
   
5. 5
   Jason Macleod
   Posted November 29, 2011 at 1:05 pm | Permalink
   Great to see the discussion.
   In regards to the Freeport strike. Danuarto is correct, the strike leader is indeed a Javanese man by the name of Sudiro. However, the bulk of the workforce on strike are Papuans and three-quarters of the “foremen” are Papuans. The point about the local and central government deserving a greater share of the profits from Freeport remains.
   The comments about the Indonesian government not tolerating separatism misses the point. There are a whole range of things the Indonesian (and foreign governments) can do to address the root political causes of the conflict within the framework of the Indonesian state. That includes allowing free speech, releasing political prisoners and beginning a dialogue process.
   As for the Papuans rioting on October 19, you’ve got to be kidding?! The Papuans held a nonviolent political rally and the Indonesian police opened fire after it had finished – while people were still singing and dancing. The police and military shot dead three and fatally stabbed two others. Now the organisers are in jail while those members of the security forces who killed the Papuans get a written warning.
   Is it any surprise the Papuans want freedom?
   
6. 6
   Andrew
   Posted November 29, 2011 at 3:00 pm | Permalink
   Godwins law must be right…
   http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_law
   
7. 7
   Danuarta Roger
   Posted November 30, 2011 at 1:29 am | Permalink
   @MacLeod:
   So, you admitted that you are wrong to connect the recent strikes with “separatism”. Instead, the strike is an effort led by a Javanese who are very successfully leading a majority ethnic-Papuan workforce is getting Freeport to sacrifice its fat profit margin and leaving a larger bulk of its revenuew within Indonesia.
   In terms of “dialogue”, Indonesian govt is always open for discussion but will never budge one inch regarding the final and internationally-acknowledged integration of Papua within Indonesian Republic. We just treat such “demands” as joke, just as if some Aborigines demand whites to start “dialogue” whereby the topic is demanding whites to leave Australia. Indonesian govt will only entertain reasonable dialogue and will never submit to intimidation, violence, or extremist demands from “separatists”.
   In terms of “peaceful” demonstration, are you being fed another dose of fairy-tale myths by separatists? I guess you would describe the 2006 rioting whereby a violent mob beat unarmed policeman and some non-Papuan civilians as “non-violent”. We Indonesians are not gullible donkeys that just accept the childish lies of separatist propaganda. No wonder these dumb separatists never accomplish anything for all their “efforts” for the past 50 years. LOL
   
8. 8
   Jason Macleod
   Posted November 30, 2011 at 1:12 pm | Permalink
   Not so Danuarta. The Freeport strike may be lead by a Javanese but many of the leadership are also Papuans, that includes 3/4 of the nearly 300 section leaders. Moreover, leaders from the seven tribes and their communities also support the strike. The strike may be about higher wages and better conditions but issues of economic injustice need to be seen in the context of wider grievances. The issues of economic justice and freedom are separate but they are also connected. Just ask any Papuan.
   Now to the Papuan Congress.
   Yes it was peaceful. 100% so – on the Papuans side, at least. It was the Indonesian police and military who shot and stabbed people to death.
   And many Indonesians, including politicians, are outraged at security forced violence.
   Violence needs to be condemned – whoever perpetrates it. I say the same thing about 2006.
   You seem like an Indonesian nationalist. Nothing wrong with that. And i hear your anger. Nothing wrong with strong views either, although your comments about “dumb” and “stone age” Papuans are inflammatory. They discredit your arguments and are offensive.
   It also sounds like you condone security forces killing Papuans nonviolently exercising their right to free speech? Is this the kind of Indonesia you really want?
   It is these views and unwillingness by Indonesians to sit down and talk about the root causes that is driving so called separatism in Papua.
   In that respect you are supporting the independence cause. Ironic really.
   
9. 9
   NAJ Taylor
   Posted December 1, 2011 at 11:56 am | Permalink
   @Danuarta I don’t think you are adding much to this discussion by referring to groups and people in derogatory terms.
   Refer to the blog’s “moderation guidelines“.
   NAJ Taylor