Activist minister Reverend Mua Strickson-Pua brandishes the petition against the AUKUS military pact at the launch in Auckland today. Auckland Peace Squadron campaigner Reverend George Armstrong is on the right. Image: David Robie/APR
By David Robie
Advocates and defenders of a nuclear-free Pacific have condemned the AUKUS military pact and warned New Zealand that the agreement would make the world “more dangerous” and should not join.
Participants at a Nuclear-Free and Independent Pacific (NFIP) movement teachers’ wānanga launched a petition against the pact with one of the “elders” among the activists, Hilda Halkyard-Harawira (Te Moana Nui a Kiwa), symbolically adding the first signature.
Speaking about the petition declaration in a ceremony on the steps of the Auckland Museum marking the 10 July 1985 bombing of the Greenpeace flagship Rainbow Warrior, Reverend Mua Strickson-Pua explained that the AUKUS agreement was a military pact between Australia-UK-US that was centred on Canberra’s acquisition of nuclear propelled submarines.
“The pact also includes sharing weapons and other military technologies,” Reverend Strickson-Pua said, reading from the declaration.
“The New Zealand government is considering joining part of this pact. This petition opposes AUKUS and calls for a foreign policy centred on an independent, demilitarised and nuclear-free Pacific.”
Reverend Strickson-Pua asked why this was important.
“AUKUS is an aggressive military pact. Security in New Zealand and the Pacific can only be ensured by centring sustainable development, Indigenous rights, and environmental protection.
‘Deepen geopolitical tensions’
“AUKUS makes the world more dangerous. New Zealand participation in AUKUS would deepen geopolitical tensions in the Pacific, and threaten Pacific nations’ long held policy of ‘friends to all and enemies to none’.
“AUKUS impedes climate action. Climate change remains the single greatest threat to the livelihoods, security and wellbeing of all peoples of the Pacific.
“The threat of climate change requires international diplomacy and cooperation, not militarism.
“AUKUS threatens our nuclear free legacy. Aotearoa New Zealand has a proud history of anti-nuclearism and solidarity with the Nuclear Free and Independent Pacific movement.”
Reverend Strickson-Pua also stressed that AUKUS was not based on public consultation.
“It accelerates climate injustice, violates our treaties and regional commitments, and erodes regional decolonisation efforts.”
The petition urges the New Zealand government to reject any role in the AUKUS military pact and condemns the use of nuclear weapons and non-peaceful nuclear technologies in the Pacific.
Nuclear Free and Independent Pacific Movement (NFIP) campaigners Hone Harawira, Hilda Halkyard-Harawira and Reverend Mua Strickson-Pua on the steps of Auckland Museum today. Image: David Robie/APR
‘French Letter’
After the reading of the declaration, participants sang the popular Herbs anti-nuclear song “French Letter.”
This petition is led by Te Kuaka and is addressed to Prime Minister Chris Hipkins, Foreign Affairs Minister Nanaia Mahuta, Minister of Defence Andrew Little, and Associate Foreign Affairs Minister (Pacific) Carmel Sepuloni.
The petition launch and Rainbow Warrior reflection followed the teachers’ wānanga which featured many veteran activists of the NFIP and New Zealand nuclear-free movements such as Hilda Halkyard-Harawira, Hone Harawira, Reverend George Armstrong and others discussing past actions and strategies for the future — such as linking with the climate crisis.
“Today we heard from movement elders and educators about the ongoing relevance of the history of the NFIP movement for Aotearoa,” said Marco de Jong, a Pacific historian working for WERO (Working to End Racial Oppression) who is the wānanga co-convener.
“Our nuclear-free legacy is an important part of national identity, but it is important to make sure we approach it critically so we are not teaching mythology to our learners.
“Today we heard about regional and Māori dimensions that might add diverse historical perspectives, tomorrow we will work on translating them into resources for a range of different learning environments.”
Former Komnas HAM chairperson Ahmad Taufan Damanik . . . "It is difficult to expect a strategic role for Komnas HAM - their position tends to just follow what is being done by the [Indonesian] government." Image: Indoleft News/Kompas
According to Damanik, who was chair 2017-2022, this is because the current Komnas HAM leadership has taken a position tending to follow the government line and “doesn’t have the courage” to resolve humanitarian problems in Papua.
Damanik cites as an example the “humanitarian pause” agreement that was unilaterally cancelled by Komnas HAM, which triggered an escalation of violence in Papua, including the seizing of the Susi Air pilot by rebels demanding Papuan independence.
The humanitarian pause in Papua was an agreement reached by the Komnas HAM leadership for the 2017-2022 period to temporarily halt armed contact between the conflicting groups in Papua.
“Since they unilaterally cancelled the humanitarian pause without any good reason, as well as the lack of communication between parties, especially with our Papuan friends, it is difficult to expect them to play a role in Papua,” Damanik said in a text message on Friday.
“The one-side cancellation caused anger among those who were pushing for a humanitarian pause in Papua.
“With such a position, it is difficult to expect a strategic role for Komnas HAM. Their position tends to just follow what is being done by the government,” he added.
Communications deadlock
Yet, according to Damanik, by maintaining the independence of its authority, the Komnas HAM could break the communication deadlock between the demands of the hostage takers, — the West Papua National Liberation Army armed wing of the Free Papua Organization (TPNPB–OPM) — and the government.
Hostage NZ pilot Philip Mehrtens as he appeared in a recent low resolution video . . . “There is no need [for Indonesia’s bombs], it is dangerous for me and everybody here.” Image: TPNPB screenshot APR
Moreover, there has been an offer by the TPNPB group led by Egianus Kogoya for the Papua Komnas HAM Representative Office to act as negotiator in the hostage case.“Including the [Philip Mehrtens] hostage negotiations, the Egianus group asked for the involvement of the Papua representative [office] head’s help. My hope is that the Komnas HAM national is welcomed in Papua, so it is better to provide full support to the Komnas HAM Papua representative office,” Damanik added.
Damanik also hopes that Komnas HAM, which is now headed up by Atnike Nova Sigiro, could be critical of central government policies that are wrong.
“Communicating criticism like this is what we used to do [when I served at Komnas HAM] and there is no need to worry about tension in the relationship [with the government]. That’s normal in relationships between institutions,” said Damanik.
Earlier, Sigiro said that the commission had entrusted all matters related to dealing with the New Zealand pilot’s hostage case to the government, saying they hoped that the case could be resolved peacefully.
Authority ‘with government’
“Authority for dealing with the hostage case is in the government’s hands,” said Sigiro earlier this month.
Mehrtens was taken hostage by the TPNPB on February 7 when his plane was set on fire after landing at the Paro airstrip in Nduga regency, Papua Highlands.
At the time, the plane was transporting five indigenous Papuan passengers. Mehrtens and the five passengers reportedly fled in different directions.
The five Papuans returned to their respective homes while Mehrtens was taken hostage by the pro-independence militants.
An Israeli armoured vehicle during this week's IDF attack on the Jenin refugee camp in Palestine's Occupied West Bank. Image: Jaafar Ashtiyeh/AFP/Werewolf
By Gordon Campbell
So far, the coverage of the Israeli Defence Forces (IDF) assault on the Jenin refugee camp has followed a familiar pattern. Images of explosions and rising plumes of smoke have been punctuated by footage of anguished/angry Palestinian civilians at funerals for family members and neighbours.
As the Columbia Journalism Review once noted, television news editors find it hard to resist images of rocket fire.
“Military action dominates breaking news coverage of conflicts overseas, which perpetuates old narratives. The focus becomes the latest violence, the number of rocket attacks, and the ensuing death toll. That framing omits critical perspectives from the communities themselves, and continues a trend of presenting half-true storylines.”
There is an obvious double standard in the media treatment of Ukraine and occupied Palestine. The same practices — the bombing of population centres, the collective punishment of civilians by destroying essential infrastructure — are treated very, very differently.
Russia’s brutal and illegal actions under international law are routinely denounced, as they should be. But Israel’s near-identical behaviours? Not so much.
In fact, the context-free narratives of Israeli “soldiers” versus Palestinian “militants” tends to be slotted into journalism’s beloved reduction of complex issues into tit-for-tat, this side/that side reportage. In occupied Palestine, this false equivalence ignores (a) the vast imbalance of military force in play and (b) the equally large imbalance in the deaths, injuries and habitat destruction. It also skates over the explicitly stated intentions of Israel’s National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir, as reported only a fortnight ago:
“Israel’s far-right national security minister has called for a wider military operation and intensive illegal settlement campaign in the occupied West Bank, according to local media.”
“‘There needs to be full settlement here. Not just here but on all the hilltops around us,’ said Itamar Ben-Gvir . . .
“‘We have to settle the land of Israel and at the same time need to launch a military campaign, blow up buildings, assassinate terrorists. Not one, or two, but dozens, hundreds, or if needed, thousands,” he added.”
Killing thousands, if that’s what it takes? In effect, Ben-Gvir was calling for a pogrom against those standing in the way of Israel fulfilling its mission to settle “the land of Israel.” Meanwhile, the world stands by wittering about how the West Bank settlements pose “an obstacle to peace” and to achieving the mythical “two state solution.”
Casualties of war The chronic casualty imbalance across the occupied West Bank and Gaza has always reflected a reality where stone-throwing Palestinian teenagers and a smattering of poorly armed Palestinian militia have been up against one of the world’s most powerful armies — a force willing to unleash air strikes, drone-fired missiles, tanks and snipers on crowded communities.
To some extent, that striking double standard between the coverage of Ukraine and Palestine has been a function of the media’s selective use of sources. Routinely, the Western media coverage gives more space — and thereby, credence — to the IDF and Israeli government narratives of the conflict.
Reports on Jenin by the BBC (carried on RNZ) have passively repeated Israeli claims that this is a “counter-offensive” inspired by Palestinian provocation, and aimed at rooting out “terrorists “and “militants.”
In a grotesque inversion, a BBC correspondent interviewed this week by RNZ spoke of the “targeting” of Israeli settlers by Palestinian youth. This is despite the escalating series of deadly attacks by settlers this year on dozens of small Palestinian villages, dotted across the West Bank.
Settlers (backed by the IDF) have systematically terrorised Palestinian families to enable the expansion of existing settlements on the West Bank, and the building of new ones.
International laws and outlaws Repeatedly, New Zealand talks up the need to support the norms of international law. Supposedly, small countries like ours depend on the maintenance of a rules-based international system. Yet we choose to support those norms very selectively.
China’s intimidatory actions in the South China Sea? We abhor them. Yet last November New Zealand abstained from a UN resolution that — among things — condemned Israel’s seizure in 1967 (and occupation ever since) of the West Bank and Gaza, while also denouncing Israel’s related failure to abide by the international laws incumbent on it as the occupying power.
New Zealand’s explanation for sitting on the fence was that (a) it hadn’t had time to consider the resolution properly(!) and (b) it had misgivings about the definition of “annexation” used in the UN resolution. Really?
Given that Israel has been the occupying power on the West Bank for the past 56 years, and given its long track record of expanding its settlements on Palestinian land, the sight of New Zealand taking fright about the threshold definition of “annexation” was shameful to behold.
For the record, on war crimes . . . The Jenin refugee camp was created in 1953, to house Palestinian refugees and their families displaced by the foundation of Israel in 1948, and by subsequent conflicts. Generations of Palestinians have known no other home. According to UNRWA estimates, some 13,000- 15,000 Palestinian refugees or 22,000 (according to Al Jazeera’s estimate) are packed into an area only a half a square kilometre in size.
Similarly, the people of Gaza are also penned into a confined area. The entire Gaza Strip holds an estimated 2 million Palestimians on some 365 square kilometres of land.
By some estimates, Gaza is the third most densely populated territory in the world.
Air strikes punish civilians
Air strikes on such dense population centres cannot help but (a) kill and injure large numbers of civilians, and (b) collectively punish civilians by destroying their homes, schools, hospitals, mosques, roads and capacity to generate electricity.
Reportedly, Israel’s current military operation in Jenin has trashed the refugee camp’s basic infrastructure.
Under international law, these collective punishments are war crimes. If we denounce such actions when Russia does them in Ukraine, why are our politicians — and media — so reluctant to do likewise when Israel happens to be the perpetrator?
Instead…. In reporting on the military attacks on these densely packed enclaves, the Western media has passively repeated Israeli propaganda that the IDF air raids, drone attacks, tank onslaughts etc on civilian homes and neighbourhoods are “pin point” and “precise” and “seek to avoid civilian casualties.”
Ultimately . . . Media accounts carried by NZ news outlets heavily rely on Israeli narratives and framing language, either directly, or via the BBC and US networks. These Israeli perspectives have dominated the reporting on the deadly raids on Gaza, the ongoing evictions of Palestinian families from East Jerusalem, and now, in Jenin.
As mentioned above, Palestinian voices are almost entirely absent, beyond the occasional soundbites from anguished victims.
Why are there so few appearances in our media by Palestinian journalists, academics or regional analysts? Such people exist. They’re out there every day challenging the version of events being put forward by the IDF (and Israeli government) sources. Why aren’t we hearing from them and reading them in our own news reports?
Protests over Shireen
To be fair, some journalists have jointly protested about the failures of the West’s media coverage of Palestine. The Columbia Journalism Review’sreport on last year’s killing of the prominent Palestinian journalist Shireen Abu Akleh by an IDF sniper placed the Western media’s spineless coverage of that killing, in the wider context of the deliberate targeting of journalists by the IDF:
Regardless, our media chooses to place its trust in the veracity of the agents of an administration that is violently hostile to the very existence of on-the-ground reporting in Palestine that strays beyond the official line. We all heard the fuss recently about RNZ’s unwitting promotion of Russian propaganda that allegedly, had been inserted by a rogue RNZ digital editor into dozens of news agency stories about Ukraine.
Yet as a matter of course, Western media — including RNZ — repeat Israel’s propaganda virtually unchallenged, and this can’t help but skew public understanding of one of the world’s major conflicts.
It is not as if Western journalists and news editors haven’t had the chance to learn on the job. The residents of Gaza have endured nearly two decades worth of economically devastating blockades, arbitrary restrictions on their movements and ferocious military assaults.
For over half a century, the West Bank has been occupied by Israel in defiance of international law. Within Israel, there have been further decades of ethnic discrimination encoded in laws that have drawn direct comparisons with the former apartheid regime in South Africa (see below).
Yet regardless, none of this seems capable of moving the needle on the accepted terms of media/diplomatic discourse regarding Palestine. If anything, the Labour-led government has pedalled away from New Zealand’s co-sponsorship in 2017 ( via then-Foreign Minister Murray McCully) of a UN resolution denouncing the growth of settlements in the occupied territories.
Footnote One: Nothing betrays the reliance on Israeli-generated framing language than the invocation of “militants” and “ Hamas” as rationales for further IDF/settler violence. In reality, Hamas is not simply an armed group, but a political party. It is also a social organisation that is among the few remnants of Palestinian civil society that Israel has not (yet) managed to entirely suppress. Being a Hamas “affiliate” therefore, tends to be a very elastic term :
“. . . Almost everyone and everything in Gaza can be considered a Hamas affiliate. This unchallenged, loose definition has enabled Israel’s war architects to widen the definition of legitimate targets to include civilians and civilian infrastructure, including mosques, schools, hospitals, banks, electricity lines and residential homes, all of which have been targeted.”
This week in Jenin, the television footage of the flattening by tanks of Palestinian residences — for the safety of IDF soldiers from retaliation — was shown without comment, let alone a denunciation. This may sound like a cracked record, but when an occupying power deliberately destroys civilian residences as part of its military operations, that is a war crime.
Destroying the homes of a subject civilian population is not a morally or legally acceptable form of security precaution.
Footnote Two: Should our media be willing to use the “apartheid” term when reporting on Israel’s domestic laws that discriminate on ethnic grounds? Given our commitment to Te Tiriti O Waitangi principles, we should be sensitive on this issue.
Twenty years ago, former US President Jimmy Carter created waves with his bookPalestine: Peace Not Apartheid In Carter’s view, Israel’s apartheid policies and laws are worse than those that used to prevail in South Africa.
In February of this year, the leading Israeli newspaper Haaretz published an editorial headlined “Israel’s Cabinet Just Advanced Full-Fledged Apartheid in the West Bank.” The Haaretz editorial denounced the current policies of the Netanyahu government as amounting to “a de jure annexation” of the West Bank. Moreover, Haaretz concluded:
“In light of the fact that there is no intention of granting civil rights to the millions of Palestinians living in the West Bank, the result of the agreement is a formal, full-fledged apartheid regime.”
Memo to Foreign Minister Nanaia Mahuta: we used to oppose apartheid and its policies of ethnic supremacy in South Africa. An entire generation of New Zealanders continue to bang on about their Springbok tour heroics.
With that history in mind, why are our diplomats not being encouraged to denounce the apartheid rule to which Palestinians are currently subjected? At the very least, New Zealand should be voting in the UN accordingly.
The Global Voices news site has just published an eloquent account of the family evictions of Palestinians from areas of East Jerusalem, along with an analysis of some of Israel’s discriminatory laws. A more academic analysis of the discriminatory laws relevant to the East Jerusalem evictions can be found here.
A brief outline of the evictions plan now being pursued in East Jerusalem can be found here. A useful Human Rights Watch history of the Israel/Palestine conflict and the emergence of the apartheid state can be found here.
Footnote Three: Finally, some notes on those casualty figures. As Al Jazeera reported in late May:
“Since the start of 2023, Israeli forces have killed at least 156 Palestinians, including 26 children. The death toll includes 36 Palestinians killed by the Israeli army during a four-day assault on the besieged Gaza Strip between May 9 and 13.”
Over the same January to early June period of this year, 19 Israelis and foreigners had been killed in violent attacks. In the course of the IDF “Cast Lead” military assault on Gaza in the winter of 2008/2009 ,the corresponding figures were even worse.
Amnesty International later reported that 1,400 Palestinians were killed in that 22 day operation by the IDF, including 300 children, 115 women and 85 men aged 50 or over. (Reportedly, 83 percent of those killed in the Cast Lead campaign were civilians.)
The same Amnesty report on the Cast Lead assault also found that three Israeli citizens were killed by retaliatory Palestinian rocket fire, four IDF soldiers were killed by Palestinian gunfire and four other Israeli soldiers were killed by the IDF’s own friendly fire.
Over the subsequent 15 years, not much has changed in the lopsided nature of the casualty figures.
No matter how dutifully our news coverage clings to the media doctrine of “both sides-ism”. . . the situation in Palestine has never been anything like a level playing field. Basically, journalism should be treating Israel’s apologists with the same healthy scepticism as we now treat climate change deniers.
Gordon Campbell is an independent progressive journalist and editor of Scoop’s Werewolf magazine. This article has been republished with the author’s permission.
The international spokesperson of the West Papua National Committee, Victor Yeimo (seated and wearing glasses), in a detention vehicle after attending his treason trial appeal hearing at Jayapura District Court, on Tuesday. Image: West Papua National Committee/KNPB
The Jayapura High Court has found West Papuan human rights and social justice activist Victor Yeimo guilty of treason and sentenced him to one year in prison in an appeal judgement this week.
The verdict was delivered during a public session held by the panel of judges headed by Paluko Hutagalung, with Adrianus Agung Putrantono and Sigit Pangudianto, serving as member judges.
The charges against Yeimo, the international spokesperson of the West Papua National Committee, stem from his alleged involvement in the Papuan anti-racism protest condemning racial slurs targeting Papuan students at the Kamasan III Student Dormitory in Surabaya on August 16, 2019.
Yeimo was accused of leading the demonstrations that occurred in Jayapura City on August 19 and 29, 2019.
The Jayapura High Court imposed a harsher criminal sentence than the previous verdict on May 5, 2023.
In the previous ruling, the court found Victor Yeimo guilty of violating Article 155 paragraph (1) of the Criminal Code, which pertains to the public display of writings or images containing expressions of hostility, hatred, or contempt towards the Indonesian government.
Yeimo was then sentenced to 8 months’ imprisonment.
Stirred controversy
The earlier verdict stirred controversy because the charge of Article 155 paragraph (1) of the Criminal Code was not initially brought against Victor Yeimo. Also, the legal article used to sentence him had already been invalidated by the Constitutional Court.
On May 12, 2023, both the public prosecutor and the Coalition of Law Enforcement and Human Rights for Papua, representing Yeimo as his legal counsel, appealed against the court ruling.
In the appeal decision, the Jayapura High Court overturned the previous decision, found Yeimo guilty of treason, and upheld the initial one-year prison sentence requested by the public prosecutor.
The panel of judges at the Jayapura High Court stated that the time Yeimo had already spent in arrest and detention would be fully deducted from the imposed sentence and ordered him to remain in detention.
A West Papuan mother, Kapusina Gwijangge, was shot by the Indonesian military in Nduga during the bombing of villages on 25 March 2019. She was carried to safety in the same way that Papuans helped wounded American, Australian and New Zealand soldiers during World War Two. Image: Open letter to Australia's Governor-General/AWPA
An Australian human rights author and poet has accused successive federal governments of “deliberately aiding and abetting” the 1969 annexation of West Papua by Indonesia and enabling the “stifling” of the Melanesian people’s right to self-determination.
In reaffirming his appeal last May for a royal commission into Australia’s policies over West Papua, author and activist Jim Aubrey alleged Canberra had been a party to “criminal actions” over the Papuan right to UN decolonisation.
In a damning letter to Governor-General David Hurley, Aubrey — author-editor of the 1998 book Free East Timor: Australia’s culpability in East Timor’s genocide, also about Indonesian colonialism — has appealed for the establishment of a royal commission to examine the Australian federal government’s “role as a criminal accessory to Indonesia’s illegal annexation of West Papua and as an accomplice” to more than six decades of “crimes against humanity” in the region.
Author and activist Jim Aubrey . . . “Indonesian thugs and terrorists wanted the Australian government’s collusion … and the Australian government provided it.” Image: Jim Aubrey
The killings were – like many others in West Papua – were carried out with impunity. Papuan human rights groups claim the Biak death toll was actually 150.
In his document, Aubrey has also accused the Australian government of “maliciously destroying” in 2014 prima facie photographic evidence of the 1998 Biak massacre.
“At the request of the Indonesian government in 1969, the Australian government prevented West Papuan political leaders from travelling to the United Nations in New York City to appeal for assistance to the members of the General Assembly,” Aubrey claimed.
“They wanted to tell the honourable members of the UN General Assembly that the Indonesian military occupation force was murdering West Papuan men.
‘Crimes against humanity’
“They wanted to tell the honourable members of the UN General Assembly that the Indonesian military occupation force was raping West Papuan women.
“These crimes against humanity were being committed to stifle West Papua’s cry for
freedom as a universal right of the UN decolonisation process.
“Indonesian thugs and terrorists wanted the Australian government’s
collusion … and the Australian government provided it.”
The 68-page open letter to Australian Governor-General David Hurley appealing for a royal commission into Canberra’s conduct . . . an indictment of Indonesian atrocities in West Papua. Image: Screenshot APR
Aubrey has long been a critic of the Australian government over its handling of the West Papua issue and has spoken out in support of the West Papua Movement – OPM.
In a separate statement today about the Biak massacre, OPM leader Jeffrey Bomanak called on Papua New Guinean Prime Minister James Marape to “remember his Melanesian heritage and his Papuan brothers and sisters’ war of liberation against Indonesia’s illegal invasion and occupation of half of the island of New Guinea”.
Mehrtens has been held captive by West Papuan pro-independence rebels in the Papuan highlands rainforests since February 7. The rebels demand negotiations on independence .
‘150 massacred’
“On July 6, 1998, over 600 Indonesian defence and security forces tortured, mutilated and massacred 150 West Papuan people for raising the West Papuan flag and peacefully protesting for independence,” said Bomanak in his statement.
About the Australian government’s alleged concealment in 1998 — and destruction in 2014 — of a roll of film depicting the victims of the Biak island massacre, Bomanak declared: “We are your closest neighbour, the Papuan race across Melanesia.
“We did not desert you in your war against the Imperial Japanese Empire on our ancestral island, and many of your wounded lived because of our care and dedication.”
In Aubrey’s statement accusing Canberra of “collusion” with Jakarta, he said that at the Indonesian government’s request, the Australian government had prevented West Papuan leaders William Zonggonao and Clemens Runaweri from providing testimony of Indonesian crimes against humanity to the United Nations in 1969.
“If this is not treacherous enough, another Australian government remained silent about the 1998 Biak island massacre even though that federal government was in possession of the roll of film depicting the massacre’s crimes.
“The federal government in office in 2014 is responsible for the destruction of this roll
of film and photographs printed from the film,” claimed Aubrey.
Aubrey’s 68-page open letter to Governor-General Hurley is a damning indictment of Indonesian atrocities during its colonial rule of West Papua.
Suspended Papua Governor Lukas Enembe in court (bearded, centre) in Jakarta in a hearing on Monday last week over his corruption charges which he denies. Image: Kompas.com
SPECIAL REPORT: By Yamin Kogoya
An Indonesian court hearing was held at Tipikor Court, Jakarta, last week when suspended Papuan Governor Lukas Enembe was arraigned before a panel of judges on allegations of bribery and gratification over the Papua provincial infrastructure project.
The panel of judges refused Enembe’s exception, or memorandum of objection, to the charges after finding sufficient evidence to reject the governor’s arguments.
However, given the governor’s ill health, the judges ruled to prioritise his health and grant his request to suspend proceedings until he is medically fit to stand trial.
The governor’s request to have his son’s Melbourne-based university student bank account unblocked to continue his studies was not granted, and his legal case is pending.
The following three points were determined by the judges last Monday week (24 June 2023):
1. Granted the access request of the defendant/the defendant’s legal advisory team;
2. Ordered the Public Prosecutor at the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) to object to the detention of Lukas Enembe from 26 June to 9 July 2023; and
3. Ordered the Public Prosecutor at the commission to report on the progress of the defendant’s health to court.
Abandoned in Indonesia’s military hospital
Governor Lukas Enembe is now being held in Indonesia’s military hospital (Gatot Soebroto Army Hospital) in Jakarta.
The governor repeatedly informed the Indonesian authorities that he was in need of medical treatment and needed to be monitored in Singapore by his regular medical specialists. These requests, however, have been rejected to date.
Psychologically, his treatment in Singapore is completely different from that in Jakarta. The governor is constantly being monitored by KPK, treated by KPK’s appointed doctors in military-controlled hospitals.
It is highly unlikely that these environments are ideal for his recovery. The hospital where he is currently being held is named after a national hero of Indonesia, Gatot Soebroto.
The ailing accused Papua Governor Lukas Enembe in a wheelchair and handcuffed . . . his defence lawyers and family accuse Indonesia’s anti-corruption agency of ill treatment. Image: Odiyaiwuu.com
In 1819, the hospital was established as the main hospital for the Indonesian Army. The hospital also provides limited services for civilians. Papua’s governor, the head of the Papuan tribes, is now being held in this military hospital.
The governor’s family complains about the ongoing inhumane treatment.
The governor’s family admits that it was difficult for them to care for him while he was abandoned at Gatot Subroto Army Central Hospital, as determined by a panel of judges from the Jakarta Corruption Court (Tipikor).
Restrictions imposed
Governor Enembe’s family said the detention officers imposed restrictions on them.
Elius Enembe, the governor’s brother, and family spokesperson, said: “KPK Detention Centre regulations allow us to visit Mr Lukas only on Mondays. It was only for two hours.”
According to Elius, the family feels that two hours of treatment a week are not adequate and not optimal for treatment, reports Odiyaiwuu.com.
Governor Enembe is currently under the custody of the judicial system, not KPK. Thus it is the judge, and not the KPK, who has the authority to determine when and how long the family is allowed to visit Enembe.
“But why are we restricted by KPK detention officers now?” Elius said.
Even in the courtroom, the judge explained that Mr Lukas’ treatment at the hospital follows standard hospital operating procedures and not KPK detention procedures.
Moreover, the KPK prosecutor was present in the courtroom and was able to hear the judge’s statement that Lukas Enembe’s delivery followed hospital procedures, not those at the KPK detention facility.
Family objections
Because of this, Elius said, the family strongly objected to the restrictions placed by KPK detention officers on the days and hours of Enembe’s visit.
According to Elius, Lukas Enembe’s ongoing trial would undoubtedly be a unique legal cases both in Indonesia and internationally.
Lukas Enembe, who suffers from various serious health conditions, such as chronic kidney disease — stage 5, suffered four strokes, and has hepatitis, and is being abandoned at Gatot Soebroto Hospital. His physical condition is very poor, and his legs are swollen.
He is the only defendant who has appeared before the court barefoot and wearing training pants. As well as being the only defendant accompanied by a lawyer in the defendant’s seat, he was also the only defendant whose defence memorandum was not read by himself or by a lawyer.
Governor Lukas Enembe has difficulty speaking after suffering the strokes and needs to use the bathroom frequently.
“This will undoubtedly be a historical record in itself, a citizen of this country [with senior official roles] . . . ranging from the Deputy Regent of Puncak to the two-term Governor of Papua, and yet has been treated as a criminal,” said Enembe’s younger brother in Jakarta, reports Kompas.com.
KPK continues to issue new accusations and allegations, which are being widely reported by Indonesia’s national media.
Case takes new turn
The corruption case against Governor Lukas Enembe, however, took a new turn when allegations of misappropriation of the Papuan Regional Budget (APBD) funds emerged, according to Busnis.com.
The governor’s senior lawyer, Professor O C Kaligis, challenged KPK’s new allegations as “tendentious and misleading”, reports Innews.co.
KPK is now investigating a massive sport, cultural, and recreational complex built under Lukas Enembe’s administration and named the Lukas Enembe Stadium.
The governor has only been given until July 6 to get some treatment for his deteriorating health.
There is an element of brutality, savagery, and mercilessness in Jakarta’s treatment of this Papuan leader.
The once highly acclaimed Papuan tribal chief, governor, and leader not just of his people, but of Indonesians and Melanesian as well many people, is being locked up and tortured in Jakarta as if he is a “dangerous terrorist’.
As his family, Papuans, lawyers, and he himself have warned, if he dies the KPK would be responsible for his death.
Yamin Kogoya is a West Papuan academic/activist who has a Master of Applied Anthropology and Participatory Development from the Australian National University and who contributes to Asia Pacific Report. From the Lani tribe in the Papuan Highlands, he is currently living in Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
Burnt-out cars in the Northern suburbs of Paris, Sarcelles . . . "Throughout the past 40 years in France, urban revolts have been dominated by the rage of young people who attack the symbols of order and the state: town halls, social centres, schools, and shops." Image: Bertrand Guay/AFP/Université de Bourdeaux/The Conversation
ANALYSIS:By François Dubet
Although they never fail to take us aback, French riots have followed the same distinct pattern ever since protests broke out in the eastern suburbs of Lyon in 1981, an episode known as the “summer of Minguettes”: a young person is killed or seriously injured by the police, triggering an outpouring of violence in the affected neighbourhood and nearby.
Sometimes, as in the case of the 2005 riots and of this past week’s, it is every rough neighbourhood that flares up.
Throughout the past 40 years in France, urban revolts have been dominated by the rage of young people who attack the symbols of order and the state: town halls, social centres, schools, and shops.
An institutional and political vacuum That rage is the kind that leads one to destroy one’s own neighbourhood, for all to see.
Residents condemn these acts, but can also understand the motivation. Elected representatives, associations, churches and mosques, social workers and teachers admit their powerlessness, revealing an institutional and political vacuum.
Of all the revolts, the summer of the Minguettes was the only one to pave the way to a social movement: the March for Equality and Against Racism in December 1983.
Numbering more than 100,000 people and prominently covered by the media, it was France’s first demonstration of its kind. Left-leaning newspaper Libération nicknamed it “La Marche des Beurs”, a colloquial term that refers to Europeans whose parents or grandparents are from the Maghreb.
In the demonstrations that followed, no similar movement appears to have emerged from the ashes.
At each riot, politicians are quick to play well-worn roles: the right denounces the violence and goes on to stigmatise neighbourhoods and police victims; the left denounces injustice and promises social policies in the neighbourhoods.
In 2005, then Interior Minister Nicolas Sarkozy sided with the police. France’s current President, Emmanuel Macron, has expressed compassion for the teenager killed by the police in Nanterre, but politicians and presidents are hardly heard in the neighbourhoods concerned.
We then wait for silence to set in until the next time the problems of the banlieues (French suburbs) and its police are rediscovered by society at large.
Lessons to be learned The recurrence of urban riots in France and their scenarios yield some relatively simple lessons.
First, the country’s urban policies miss their targets. Over the last 40 years, considerable efforts have been made to improve housing and facilities. Apartments are of better quality, there are social centres, schools, colleges and public transportation.
It would be wrong to say that these neighbourhoods have been abandoned.
On the other hand, the social and cultural diversity of disadvantaged suburbs has deteriorated. More often than not, the residents are poor or financially insecure, and are either descendants of immigrants or immigrants themselves.
Above all, when given the opportunity and the resources, those who can leave the banlieues soon do, only to be replaced by even poorer residents from further afield. Thus while the built environment is improving, the social environment is unravelling.
However reluctant people may be to talk about France’s disadvantaged neighbourhoods, the social process at work here is indeed one of ghettoisation – i.e., a growing divide between neighbourhoods and their environment, a self-containment reinforced from within. You go to the same school, the same social centre, you socialise with the same individuals, and you participate in the same more or less legal economy.
In spite of the cash and local representatives’ goodwill, people still feel excluded from society because of their origins, culture or religion. In spite of social policies and councillors’ work, the neighbourhoods have no institutional or political resources of their own.
Whereas the often communist-led “banlieues rouges” (“red suburbs”) benefited from the strong support of left-leaning political parties, trade unions and popular education movements, today’s banlieues hardly have any spokespeople. Social workers and teachers are full of goodwill, but many don’t live in the neighbourhoods where they work.
This disconnect works both ways, and the past days’ riots revealed that elected representatives and associations don’t have any hold on neighbourhoods where residents feel ignored and abandoned. Appeals for calm are going unheeded. The rift is not just social, it’s also political.
A constant face-off With this in mind, we are increasingly seeing young people face off with the police. The two groups function like “gangs”, complete with their own hatreds and territories.
In this landscape, the state is reduced to legal violence and young people to their actual or potential delinquency.
The police are judged to be “mechanically” racist on the grounds that any young person is a priori a suspect. Young people feel hatred for the police, fuelling further police racism and youth violence.
Older residents would like to see more police officers to uphold order, but also support their own children and the frustrations and anger they feel.
This “war” is usually played out at a low level. When a young person dies, however, everything explodes and it’s back to the drawing board until the next uprising, which will surprise us just as much as the previous ones.
But there is something new in this tragic repetition. The first element is the rise of the far right — and not just on that side of the political spectrum. Racist accounts of the uprisings are taking hold, one that speaks of “barbarians” and immigration, and there’s fear that this could lead to success at the ballot box.
The second is the political and intellectual paralysis of the political left. While it denounces injustice and sometimes supports the riots, it does not appear to have put forward any political solution other than police reform.
So long as the process of ghettoisation continues, as France’s young people and security forces face off time and time again, it is hard to see how the next police blunder and the riots that follow won’t be just around the corner.
Journalists say they have been directly fired at by Israeli troops while they have been covering the new attack on the Jenin refugee camp in Occupied Palestine. Image: Al Jazeera screenshot APR
COMMENTARY: By John Minto
No government likes to be called out for human rights abuses and it’s uncomfortable to do so, particularly when the abuser is either a friend or a country with which we have strong economic links.
In our relations with China, this is a difficult issue for us.
However, we should always expect our government to speak out for human rights and the case can be made that Chris Hipkins was too soft on his visit to China last week. The impression was of a laid-back Prime Minister failing to convey any of the serious concerns expressed by credible and principled human rights organisations such as Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International.
It seems New Zealand is leaving the heavy lifting on human rights to Foreign Minister Nanaia Mahuta who, in her own words, had a robust discussion with China’s Minister of Foreign Affairs on these issues earlier this year.
An Australian report said she was “harangued” from the Chinese side, although this was denied by Mahuta.
Hipkins, as Prime Minister, has our loudest voice and he should have publicly backed up our Foreign Minister.
If we want to be regarded as a good global citizen, we have to speak out clearly and act consistently, irrespective of where human rights abuses take place. This is where New Zealand has fallen down repeatedly.
Looking the other way
We have been happy to strongly condemn Russia and announced economic and diplomatic sanctions within a few hours of its invasion of Ukraine but we look the other way when a country guilty of abuses is close to the US.
In regard to the longest military occupation in modern history, Israel’s occupation of Palestine, we have been weak and inconsistent over many decades in calling for Palestinian human rights.
It hasn’t always been like that.
In late 2016, the National government, under John Key as prime minister, co-sponsored a United Nations Security Council resolution (UNSC2334 – NZ was a security council member at the time) which was passed in a 14–0 vote. The US abstained.
The resolution states that, in the occupied Palestinian territories, Israeli settlements had “no legal validity” and constituted “a flagrant violation under international law”. It said they were a “major obstacle to the achievement of the two-state solution and a just, lasting and comprehensive peace” in the Middle East.
Video shows the moment journalists said they were directly fired at by Israeli soldiers whilst they were covering the raid in Jenin refugee camp ⤵️ pic.twitter.com/OBQ5aS5c0A
Because Israel has elected a new extremist government that has declared its intention to make illegal settlement building on Palestinian land its “top priority”. Early this week it announced plans for 5000 more homes for these illegal settlements, which a Palestinian official described as “part of an open war against the Palestinian people”.
Israel shows world middle finger
Israel is showing Palestinians, and the world, its middle finger.
At least nine people have been killed and scores wounded in the latest Israeli military attack on Palestinians in what is being described as a “real massacre” in Jenin refugee camp.
UNSC 2334 didn’t just criticise Israel. It called for action. It also asked member countries of the United Nations “to distinguish, in their relevant dealings, between the territory of the State of Israel and the territories occupied since 1967″.
In practical terms, this means requiring our government and local authorities to refuse to purchase any goods or services from companies (both Israeli and foreign-owned) that operate in illegal Israeli settlements.
A map showing the location of the Jenin refugee camp in Israeli Occupied Palestine . . . 5.9 Palestinian refugees comprise the world’s largest stateless community. Map: Al Jazeera/Creative Commons
This ban should also be extended to the 112 companies identified by the UN Human Rights Council as complicit in the building and maintenance of these illegal Israeli settlements.
The government should be actively discouraging our Superannuation Fund and KiwiSaver providers from investing in these complicit companies but an analysis earlier this year showed the Super Fund investments in these companies have close to doubled in the past two years.
Some countries have begun following through on UNSC 2334 but New Zealand has been inert. We have not been prepared to back up our words at the United Nations with action here.
West Papua deserves our voice
Following through would mean we were standing up for human rights for everyone living in Palestine. We could expect our government to face false smears of anti-semitism from Israel’s leaders and their friends here but we would receive heartfelt thanks from a people who have suffered immeasurably for 75 years.
Palestinians are the largest group of refugees internationally — 5.9 million — after being driven off their land by Israeli militias in 1947-1949. Every day, more of their land is stolen for illegal settlements while we avert our gaze.
The Indonesian military occupation of West Papua and Morocco’s occupation of Western Sahara also deserve our voice on the side of the victims.
Standing up for human rights is not comfortable when it means challenging supposed friends or allies. But we owe it to ourselves, and to those being brutally oppressed, to do more than mouth platitudes.
These peoples deserve our support and solidarity. Let’s not look the other way. Let’s act.
John Minto is a political activist and commentator, and spokesperson for Palestine Solidarity Network Aotearoa. This article is republished from The New Zealand Herald with the author’s permission.
According to Stats NZ, around 155,000 households feel their incomes aren’t sufficient to meet everyday basic needs. Foodbanks report ever-rising numbers of families unable to feed themselves. Image: Getty Images/The Conversation
ANALYSIS: By Susan St John
The Green Party made waves recently when it proposed to tax net wealth more than NZ$2 million for individuals and $4 million for couples. As part of a broad range of actions, the policy aims to “end poverty”.
Reactions ranged from endorsement to accusations it was fuelled by envy, but the debate signalled what could become a major election issue: the wealth gap and how to fix it.
The claim it amounts to an “envy tax” assumes all wealth has been fully earned and fully taxed in the first place. But we know that’s not the case.
A good portion of the wealth accumulated at the top is attributable to fortunate circumstances generating significant tax-free gains.
Inland Revenue’s recent survey of the wealthiest 311 New Zealand families revealed an average net worth of $276 million. At the same time, we know many households are struggling with the rising cost of living.
According to Stats NZ, around 155,000 households feel their incomes aren’t sufficient to meet everyday basic needs. Foodbanks report ever-rising numbers of families unable to feed themselves.
The major source of this lopsided wealth is the housing market. New Zealand has seen the biggest housing boom in the Western world. Property owners have ridden the wave to make large tax-free capital gains, while others languish in substandard emergency housing or are forced to live in garages and cars.
Far too much of our scarce labour, building materials, imported fixtures and land have been diverted to unproductive high-end housing, leaving too little to meet the real housing need. Because it isn’t taxed properly, investing in housing has been encouraged as a way to accumulate wealth.
Right now, there is enough money tied up in untaxed wealth to lift every single family in this country out of poverty.#nzpolpic.twitter.com/f3ODNOK9hH
The trouble with a wealth tax While the Greens’ wealth tax is a useful start to a wider discussion about inequality, it inevitably creates obstacles that in the end may be too difficult to overcome.
Probably the biggest hurdle is that this kind of tax can be incredibly complex and would provoke endless debate about what should be included.
The Greens’ proposal, for example, would capture business assets, shares, art above a certain value, and cars above $50,000. But what if you have two cars worth $49,000 each — why should they be excluded when one valued at $80,000 is included?
And how is debt factored into calculations of net wealth? House mortgages may be straightforward, but what about credit card debt, car finance or borrowing to finance overseas travel?
Not a capital gains tax For all these reasons, it’s time to get away from debating notions of a confiscatory wealth tax and make the issue simply one of treating all income the same for tax purposes.
Instead of a complicated net wealth tax on everything, let’s start with the biggest culprit — housing. This would address the under-taxation of income from holding housing as an asset.
This is not the same as a capital gains tax — those days are over. Numerous tax working groups have failed over 30 years to make headway on this. Politically it is a dead duck.
Besides, the real problems — inequality and misallocation of resources — wouldn’t be touched by a capital gains tax. Such a tax can only apply to gains made on houses sold in the future, not the accumulated gains over many years, and it will always exempt the family home.
How a house tax works Instead, let’s take the total value of all housing held by each individual, subtract registered first mortgages, and allow a $1 million exemption to reflect that everyone is entitled to a basic family home.
Then we treat this net equity as if it was in a term deposit generating a taxable interest return. When houses are held in trusts and companies, in most cases the income would be taxed at the trust or company rate with no exemption.
Calculated annually and pegged to the capital value of properties, this effective income would be taxed at the person’s marginal tax rate. It would affect those with second homes, multiple rentals, high-value properties — but without significantly affecting the great majority of homeowners who have much less than $1 million of net equity.
Thus a couple living in a $3 million house with a $1 million mortgage would fall under the threshold.
This approach would help put investment in housing, after a basic home, on the same footing as money in the bank or in shares. Better choices for the use of scarce housing resources should follow.
Landlords would no longer need expensive accountants to minimise taxable rental income. And it would reduce the blight of “ghost houses” and residential land-banking.
A circuit breaker The simplicity of this income approach means the government can build on the existing tax system. It lives up to the mantra of a “broad base, low rate” tax system and affects only the very wealthy and those whose tax rates are highest.
Moreover, it is possible to implement quickly, using existing property valuations and registered mortgages, unlike a net wealth tax where the devil is in the contentious detail.
The effect should be positive for those struggling in the housing market, as more housing for sale or rent is opened up. Good landlords should welcome the greater simplicity.
In the longer term, the extra taxable income could produce revenue for redistribution and social investment. Critically, however, it would start to give the right price signals to reduce the over-investment in luxury housing and real estate held for capital gain.
The approach is essentially a circuit breaker that can simply and quickly address the accumulation of wealth by a small group of people.
Crucially, it has a sound economic rationale. By taking the first step and including luxury and investment housing returns that are currently under the radar, it reduces the advantages of holding housing rather than more productive investments.
General Seth Rumkorem and Jacob Prai declared it, defended it, and received official recognition. Dakar, Senegal, was among them, the first international diplomatic office opened by OPM shortly after the declaration.
As Papuans resisted the invasion, they sought refuge in the Netherlands, Papua New Guinea, Vanuatu, Sweden, Australia, and Greece. All joined, at least in spirit, under the name OPM.
Its spirit of revolution that bonded West Papua and Vanuatu with those across Europe, Oceania, and Africa. This was a time of decolonisation, revolution, and a Cold War.
The decolonisation movement back then was more conscious in heart and mind of humanity than now.
Rex Rumakiek’s ‘sacred connection’
Rex Rumakiek (now aged 78), a long time OPM fighter alongside others, established this sacred connection in 1978.
In Papua New Guinea, Rumakiek met with students from Vanuatu studying at the University of Papua New Guinea and shared the OPM’s revolutionary victory, tragedy, and solution.
These students later took prominent roles in the formation of the independent state of Vanuatu — became part of the solution — laid a foundation of hope.
A common spirit emerged between the OPM’s resistance to Indonesian colonisation and Vanuatu’s struggle for freedom from long-term European (French and English) confederation rule.
A brutal system of dual rule known as Condominium — critics called it “Pandemonium” (chaos and disorder).
West Papua, a land known as “little heaven” is indeed like a Garden of Eden in Milton’s epic Paradise Lost poem.
To restore freedom and justice to that betrayed, lost paradise was the foundation of Vanuatu and West Papua’s relationship. For more than 40 years Vanuatu has been a beacon of hope.
Deep connections
Both shared deep religious metaphysical, cultural, and political connections.
On a metaphysical level, Vanuatu became a place of hope and redemption. Apart from supporting the West Papua freedom fighters, Vanuatu played a critical role in the reconciliation of Papuans who split off in various directions due to internal conflicts over numerous issues, including ideologies and strategies.
A tragedy of internal disputes and conflicts that placed a long-lasting strain on their collective war against Indonesian occupation.
This can be seen from Vanuatu’s decades-long effort to invite two key leaders of the West Papuan Provisional Parliament — General Seth Rumkorem and Jacob Prai.
In 1985, Vanuatu brought the two conflicting leaders of OPM, Mr. Jacob Prai and Gen. Seth Rumkorem, to Vanuatu and ended their differences so that they could work together (p. 217).
In 2000, Vanuatu invited the OPM leaders and Papua’s Presidium Council (PDP) to sign a memorandum of understanding. The year 2008 was also a year of reconciliation, which led to the formation of the West Papua Nation Coalition of Liberation (WPNCL).
In 2014, there was another big reconciliation summit in Port Vila, which led to the formation of the United Liberation Movement for West Papua (ULMWP).
Melanesian identity
Culturally, Vanuatu and West Papua share a deep sense of Melanesian identity — a common bond from shared experiences of colonisation, racism, mistreatment, dehumanisation, and slavery.
This bond, however, is strengthened far beyond these European and Indonesian atrocities as Barak Sope, one of Melanesia’s key thinkers and prominent supporters of West Papua put it in 2017, Papuans and Vanuatu and all Melanesians in Oceania have deep ancient roots. There are deep Melanesian links that connect our ancestors. Europeans came and destroyed that connection by rewriting our history because they had the power of written language, and we did not.
Our connections were recorded in myths, legends, songs, dances, and culture. It is our duty now to revive that ancient link (Conversation with Yamin Kogoya in Port Vila, December 2017).
Politically, Vanuatu and West Papua also share a common sense of resistance to both European and Indonesian colonisations.
Father Walter Lini, founder of Vanuatu and MSG, later became Prime Minister. Following its renaming as the Vanua’aku Pati in 1974, Lini’s party pushed hard for independence — the Republic of Vanuatu was formally established in 1980.
The OPM and Black Brothers helped shape this new nation and were part of a force that created a pan-Melanesian identity through music.
“Vanuatu will not be completely free until all Melanesia is free from colonialism” is Walter Lini’s famous saying, which has been used by West Papua and New Caledonian Kanaks in their struggle for liberation against Indonesian and French colonisation.
A just world
During this long journey, a profound bond and sense of connection and a shared cause, and destiny for a just world was born between Vanuatu and West Papua and the greater Oceania. A kind of Messianic hope developed with name Vanuatu that Papuans a hope that deliverance would come from Vanuatu.
Papuans can only express their gratitude in social media through their artistic works and heartfelt thanksgiving messages.
Ahead of the upcoming MSG summit, the Free West Papua Campaign Facebook page has posted the following image showing a Papuan with Morning Star clothing crossing a cliff on the back of a larger and taller figure representing Vanuatu.
In politics, it is all about diplomacy, networks, and cooperation, as the famous PNG politicians’ mantra in their foreign policy, “Friend to all and enemy to none.” This is such an ironic and tragic position to be in when half of PNG’s country men are “going extinct”, and they know how and why?
Sometimes the only solution is to confront such an evil head on when/if innocent lives are at risk. The notion of being friends with everyone and enemies with nobody has no virtue, value, substance, or essence.
In the real-world, humans have friends and enemies. The only question is, we must not only choose between friends and foes but also understand the difference between them.
No human, whether realist, idealist, traditionalist, or transcendentalist, who sincerely believes, can make a neutral virtue less stand — where right and wrong are neither right nor wrong at the same time. Human agents must make choices. Being able to choose and know the difference and reasons why, is what makes us human — this is where value is contested, for and against.
Stand up for something
In the current world climate, someone must stand up for something — for the oppressed, for the marginalised, the abused, the persecuted, the land, for the planet and for humanity.
This tiny island country, Vanuatu has exhibited that warrior spirit for many years. In March, Vanuatu spearheaded a UN resolution on climate change. Nina Lakhani in The Guardian wrote:
“The UN general assembly adopted by consensus the resolution spearheaded by Vanuatu, a tiny Pacific island nation vulnerable to extreme climate effects, and youth activists to secure a legal opinion from the international court of justice (ICJ) to clarify states’ obligations to tackle the climate crisis — and specify any consequences countries should face for inaction.”
More than 60 years ago, when West Papua was kicked around like a football by the imperial West and East, Indonesia, the Netherlands, the United Nations and the illegal UN-sponsored sham referendum of 1969, no one on this planet dared to stand up for West Papua.
West Papua was abandoned by the world.
The Dutch attempted to safeguard that “sacred trust” by enlisting West Papua into the UN Decolonisation list under article 73 of the UN charter. The Dutch did the right thing.
The sacred trust, however, was betrayed when West Papua was transferred to the United Temporary Executive (UNTEA) following the infamous New York Agreement on 15 August 1962.
This sacred trust was to be protected by the UNTEA but it was betrayed when it was handed over to Indonesia in May 1963, resulting in Indonesia’s invasion of West Papua.
This invasion instilled fear throughout West Papua, paving the way for the 1969 referendum to be held under incredible fear and gunpoint of the already intimidated 1025 Papuan elders.
In 1969, instead of protecting the trust, the UN betrayed it by being complicit in the whole tragic events unfolding.
OPM’s answer to the illegal referendum — The Act of Free Choice
OPM’s proclamation on 1 July 1971 was the answer to the (rejection of that illegal and fraudulent) referendum, known as the Penentuan Pendapat Rakyat-Pepera in 1969.
In protest, out of fear, and in resistance to one of the most tragic betrayals and tragedies in human history, an overwhelming number of Papuans left West Papua during this period. Several countries opened their arms to West Papua, including Vanuatu.
A major split occurred in OPM camps due to internal conflict and disagreement between the two key founding members. The legacy of this tragedy has been disastrous for future Papuan resistance fighters.
Papuans are partly responsible for betraying that sacred trust as well. This realisation is critical for Papuan-self redemption. That is the secret, redemption, and genuine reconciliation.
Every time a high-profile figure from Vanuatu or any Melanesian country engages internationally, Papuans feel extremely anxious. Amid the historical betrayals, Papuans wonder, “Will they betray us or rescue us?”
This tiny doubt eats at the soul of humankind. It is always toxic, a seed that contaminates and derails human trust.
In such difficult times, it is crucial for Papuans to reflect sincerely and ask, “where are we?” Are we doing, okay? What’s going on? Are we making the right decisions, are our collective defence systems secure?
Vanuatu’s historic visit to Jakarta
Jotham Napat, the Foreign Minister of Vanuatu, visited Indonesian Foreign Minister Retno Marsudi on 16 June 2023. The main topic of discussion was bilateral relations between the two countries.
It is the first visit by a Vanuatu foreign minister to Indonesia in more than a decade. This marks an important milestone.
According to Retno, “I am delighted to hear about Vanuatu’s plan to open an embassy in Indonesia, and I welcome the idea of holding annual consultations between the two countries,” in her statement.
At Monday’s meeting, Napat expressed urgency to build a sound partnership between Vanuatu and Indonesia and expressed his eagerness to recover trust. The minister also expressed his country’s eagerness to create a technical cooperation agreement between the two countries and to establish sister city and sister province partnerships, which he said could begin with Papua.
During a joint press conference with Indonesian Vice-President Ma’ruf Amin, Napat expressed his commitment to the “Melanesian way”.
Welcoming DPM/FM Jotham Napat of Vanuatu🇻🇺 on his 1st official visit to Indonesia🇮🇩 – the 1st visit of FM🇻🇺 in more than a decade
An important milestone in our bilateral relations, based on respect to sovereignty, territorial integrity & principles of mutual interests & benefits pic.twitter.com/Y8GkpwxvQC
— Menteri Luar Negeri Republik Indonesia (@Menlu_RI) June 16, 2023
Vanuatu’s Napat meets Indonesian Vice-President
In response to Minister Napat’s visit to West Papua, Benny Wenda of the United Liberation Movement of West Papua (ULMWP) said he welcomed the minister’s remarks on the “Melanesian Way”. Though it isn’t really clear what the Melanesian way is all about?
“Melanesian Way” is a complicated term. Although intuitively, everyone in the Melanesian context assumes to know it. Bernard Narakobi, the person who coined the term refused to define it. It has been described by Narakobi as being comparable to Moses asking God to explain who God was to him.
“God did not reveal himself by a definition, but by a statement that I am who I am,” wrote Narakobi.
Because God is the archetypical ultimate, infallible, eternal, omnipresent, alpha and omega. Narakobi’s statement about the God and Moses analogy is true that God cannot be defined by any point of reference; God is the point of reference.
For Melanesians, however, we are not God. We are mortal, unpredictable, flawed, with aspects of both malevolence and goodness. Therefore, to state that “we are who we are” could mean anything.
We (especially those in decision-making power) need a deeper understand of not just who but what we are and what we are becoming — either a force of evil or good. Be the witness of Truth or Falsehood. This is where the real war is.
Continuing his search for a path for Melanesia, Narakobi wrote:
“Melanesian voice is meant to be a force for truth. It is meant to give witness to the truth. Whereas the final or the ultimate truth is the divine source, the syllogistically or the logical truth is dependent on the basic premises one adopts. The Melanesian voice is meant to be a forum of Melanesian wisdom and values, based on Melanesian experience.”
It seems that these truths and virtues as outlined by this great Melanesian philosopher do not have a common shared value system that binds the states of the MSG together.
‘Bought for 30 pieces of silver’
Following the rejection of ULMWP’s membership bid in Honiara in 2016, Vanuatu’s then Deputy Prime Minister, Joe Natuman, stated,
“Our Prime Minister was the only one talking in support of full membership for West Papua in the MSG, the Solomon Islands Prime Minister couldn’t say very much because he is the chairman.
“Prime Minister Charlot Salwai was the only one defending Melanesians and the history of Melanesian people in the recent MSG meeting in Honiara.
“The MSG, I must repeat, the MSG, which I was a pioneer in setting up, was established for the protection of the identity of the Melanesian people, the promotion of their culture and defending their rights. Right to self-determination, right to land and right to their resources.
“Now it appears other people are trying to use the MSG to drive their own agendas and I am sorry, but I will insist that MSG is being bought by others.
“It is just like Jesus Christ who was bought for 30 pieces of silver. This is what is happening in the MSG. I am very upset about this, and we need to correct this issue.
“Because if our friends in Fiji and Papua New Guinea have a different agenda, we need to sit down and talk very seriously about what is happening within the organisation.”
Principles or a facade?
Whatever agenda Minister Napat had in mind when he travelled to Jakarta on June 16 — in a capital of rulers whose policies have resulted in fatalistic and genocidal outcomes for West Papuans for 60 years — these wisdoms from Melanesian elders will either be his guiding principle, or he will use the term “Melanesian Way” as a facade to conceal different intents not in agreement with these Melanesian values.
These are the types of questions that are at stake for West Papua, Vanuatu, and Melanesians, particularly in a world which is rapidly changing, including ourselves and our values.
In an interview with Island Business published on 3 February 2023, Minister Napat stated his priority for the 100-day work plan.
“Vanuatu has, like other Pacific countries, too often in the past been seen in the international limelight as a subservient associate to others’ interests and agendas, this must change if Vanuatu is to take its rightful place as an equal partner in the international arena.
“The creation and implementation of a new National Foreign Policy must take into account current global geopolitical trends”.
Minister Napat continued:
“The global geopolitical environment has and will continue to change. Our government must implement foreign policy directions which will have as its first priority, the best interests of the nation and people of Vanuatu.
“Since the original foreign policy directions after independence, Vanuatu’s foreign policy approaches in the last 30 years have been at times unclear, ad hoc, and reactive to circumstances and influences. It is time we set our own course and become proactive at all times”.
Vanuatu only support
The minister did not rule out West Papua as one of the countries that influences Vanuatu’s engagement with the world. As anyone familiar with West Papua’s plight knows, Vanuatu is the only sovereign UN member country that has publicly supported West Papua.
There is no indication as to whether those “other interests” and “agendas” pertain to West Papua, Indonesia, MSG, the USA, China, or Australia.
If the minister’s trip to Jakarta was demonstrative of his pragmatic words and West Papua is one of the external interferences the Minister has implied, then Papuans can only hope for the best, that new developing relationships between Jakarta and Port Vila will not be another major betrayal for Papuans.
Minister Napa’s pragmatic approach to adapting to an unpredictable changing world is crucial for the country. Especially since Oceania is becoming increasingly similar to the New Middle East as China and the United States continue to compete, contest, revive or renew their engagement with island nations.
There is also another major player in the region, Indonesia, which has its own interests.
The government and the people of Vanuatu have a duty and responsibility to ensure they must be ready to face these vulgar threats, they pose as stated by the Minister. For persecuted Papuans, their only wish is: Please don’t betray us — the Sacred Trust.
West Papua will always remain a lingering issue — a unresolved murder mystery that has been swept under the rug. For a long time, the Vanuatu government and its people have decided to resolve this issue.
Vanuatu’s Wantok Blong Yumi Bill – Sacred Trust
On 19 June 2010, this sacred trust was protected when the notion regarding West Papua was passed by Vanuatu’s Parliament. The purpose of the “Wantok blong yumi” Bill was to allow the government of Vanuatu to develop specific policies regarding the support of West Papua’s independence struggle.
Then, both the government under the late Prime Minister Edward Natape and his opposition leader, Maxime Carlot Korman, united and sponsored the motion to be drafted by one of the young proponents of West Papua’s cause, Ralph Regevanu, on behalf of the people of Vanuatu and West Papua.
In fact, this was a historic and extraordinary event. It was called a “Parliament extraordinary session” — a sacred session. This Act is an analogy to the declaration of war by tiny young ancient Jews against the giant Goliath and his fearsome army. With a slingshot, David defeated Goliath, not with a giant weapon, bomb, or money, but with courage, bravery and faith.
The Wantok Bill was Vanuatu’s slingshot to fight against and defeat the might of pandemonium warlords and Goliath armies that tortured Papuans everyday while scavenging the richness of this paradise land that has been continuously betrayed.
After the success of the motion, the prime minister promised to sponsor the issue of West Papua at the MSG and PIF meetings.
This promise was partially fulfilled when West Papua was granted observer status in the MSG in 2015. Tragically, this courageous figure passed away on 28 July 2015 (aged 61) just a few days after West Papua was granted observer status by the MSG on June 26.
Furthermore, West Papua has seen some positive developments at an international level. In September 2016, seven Pacific Island countries raised the plight and struggle of the West Papuan people at the UN General Assembly.
A resolution was passed by the PIF in 2019 regarding West Papua.
During the ninth ACP summit of heads of state and government, Ralph Regevanu and Benny Wenda succeeded in convincing the group to pass a resolution calling for urgent attention to be paid to the rights situation in Indonesia-ruled Papua.
Vanuatu also made it possible for Pacific leaders to request that the UN Human Rights Commissioner visit West Papua in 2019. Ralph Regevanu, then Vanuatu’s Foreign Minister, drafted the wording of the PIF’s Communique.
Edward Natape also said his government would apply to the UN Decolonisation Committee for West Papua to be relisted so the territory could undergo the due process of decolonisation.
West Papuans still wait for the UN’s promised decolonisation A long time OPM representative from West Papua, Dr John Otto Ondawame, and Andy Ayamiseba, were among those who witnessed and assisted in this victory. Sadly, both of them have since died.
Dr Ondawame died in 2014 and Andy Ayamiseba in 2020.
Both of these figures, as well as others, were long-time residents of Vanuatu since the 1980s. With their Vanuatu, Melanesia, and Oceania Wantoks, they had tirelessly fought for the rights of West Papua.
The people of West Papua continue to look towards Vanuatu and Melanesia and pray, just as the exiled diaspora of persecuted Jews looked towards Jerusalem and prayed. Vanuatu remains a beacon of hope for West Papua
Papuans’ greatest task, challenge and responsibility is to determine where to go from here.
This spirit of revolution was ignited by the OPM elders, and many brave young men, women, and elderly are fighting for it in West Papua today.
There are also many brave men and women spreading the words of West Papua’s genocide at national, regional, and international levels. The Papuan freedom fighters, irrespective of their faction, don’t have much room for mistake. A mistake made by Papuans will lead to enemies turning us into pieces without mercy.
Mistakes, whether reckless decisions, slander, internal disputes, or hatred; poor individual decisions directly impact on our lives and the existence of West Papua’s independence struggle.
On 30 June 2023, the MSG Foreign Ministers Meeting (FMM) concluded successfully with members approving the outcomes of the MSG senior officials meeting (SOM) at the MSG secretariat in Port Vila, Vanuatu. A traditional welcome ceremony was conducted for the delegates.
A progress report by the MSG Director-General was presented to the SOM, along with the secretariat’s annual reports for 2020 and 2021, a calendar of events for 2023, a proposal to establish MSG supporting offices in member countries and a draft of the MSG secretariat’s work programme and budget for 2023.
The same people who were seen in Jakarta dancing, singing and propagated imageries of gestures, symbols, images, and rhetoric are the ones driving this MSG meeting. Indonesia’s delegation with the red and white flag is also seen sitting inside the MSG’s headquarters — the sacred place, sacred building, of the Melanesian people.
The test for Vanuatu is so high at the moment — reaching a climactic decision for West Papua. Hundreds of Free West Papua social media campaigns groups are inundated with so much optimistic images, symbols, cartoon drawing, words, prayers.
Giving this connection and high emancipation with the upcoming MSG summit, Minister Jotham Napat’s visit to Jakarta was indeed a huge shock for Papuans.
For Papuans, this is a stressful time for such a visit. Pressures, anticipation, prayers, and anxiety for MSG is too high.
Adding to this, this year the Chairmanship and Leaders’ Summit of the MSG are being entrusted to Vanuatu and Vanuatu is also the home base of MSG.
One of the moments West Papua have been waiting for
In the upcoming MSG games, Vanuatu had all the best cards at her disposal to achieve something big for Papuans. Vanuatu was one of key founding fathers of MSG, the MSG embeds Vanuatu’s spirit and values.
There is much more at stake in this war, this fight, and this choice than a membership issue, it is a choice between right and wrong. Ultimately, the issue is about defending the sacred MSG — the home of Melanesian people, culture, and language as well as thousands of rich and diverse islands and spices.
It would be “THE” long-awaited moment for Papuans to enter into MSG as Papuans have been insisting that their Melanesian family has been left out for decades.
Social media images and small videos of Vanuatu’s delegation, MSG’s leader and Papuans who support the Indonesian occupation of West Papua dancing and singing during the visit was indeed disheartening for Papuans.
The imagery and propaganda of the visit spread through the media. They intended to dim Vanuatu’s dawn Morning Star. A sacred beacon of light where tortured West Papuans look to, every morning, and pray for deliverance.
Vanuatu’s “Messianic hope” for West Papua in a world where almost no nations, empires, kingdoms, and institutions such as the UN offer refuge, to listen to and seeing such propaganda imageries spread through social media is dispiriting.
Whatever the reason for this visit might be, Papuans who simply just want their freedom from Indonesia, seeing such a visit and display of their trusted friend at the headquarters of their tormentors prompts immediate questions: What happened and why?
“Bring West Papua back to the Melanesian family”. Image: West Papua-Melanesia Facebook
‘Liklil Hope Tasol’ (Little Hope At All)
Dan McGarry, former media director of the Vanuatu Daily Post, writes:
“One of the more popular songs Ayamiseba wrote for the Black Brothers is ‘Liklik Hope Tasol’, a ballad written in Tok Pisin whose title translates as ‘Little Hope At All’. Its narrator lies awake in the early morning hours, the victim of despair.
The vision of the Morning Star and a songbird breaking the pre-dawn hush provide the impetus to survive another day. The song, with its clear political imagery and simplistic evocation of strength in adversity, is clearly autobiographical. It is, arguably, the anthem which animated Ayamiseba’s lifelong pursuit of freedom.”
Such an extravagant display of rhetoric and imagery in the capital of the Pandemonium army that has mercilessly been hunting down “Papuans” on “their ancient timeless land”, New Guinea, as PNG philosopher Narakobi described it, or “little heaven” as Papuans referred to it, can only mean two things: either destroy that “little hope” or “rescue it”.
Only God knows the answer to this question as well of the real intent of the visit and what outcome will emerge from it — will it bring disappearance or hope for Papuans.
The late Pastor Allen Nafuki, a key figure in Vanuatu responsible for bringing warring factions of Papuan resistance groups together in Port Vila in 2014, which helped precipitate much of the ULMWP’s international success, left his last message on West Papua before he died: “God will never sleep for West Papua.”
Papuans appreciated and were encouraged by the pastor’s message. What is at stake is to make sure we don’t fall asleep in this fight.
Vanuatu is a sovereign independent country and as a sovereign nation, Vanuatu has every right to choose to whom she wants to be friends with, visit and sign any treaties and agreements with.
However, when the sacred trust of hope for the betrayed, rejected, persecuted nation like West Papuans is entrusted to them either by choice, force, or compassion, then the choice is clear: You either betray that trust, compromise it, or protect it.
The seed of the sacred bond planted by legendary OPM freedom fighters when the nation of Vanuatu was founded, before MSG was founded, will be either dimmed, betrayed, or resurrected.
The 2010 “Wantok Blong Yumi” Bill should be resurrected and protection given for the “Sacred Trust” (The Sovereignty of West Papua) that has been betrayed for more than 60 years.
The United Nations was the place that the Sacred Trust was betrayed and Vanuatu as a new Guardian of this Trust should restore that trust in the same institution. The statement by the former UN Secretary-General, Ban Ki Moon, during the Pacific Islands Forum (PIF) Summit in Auckland stated: “West Papua is an issue; the right place for it to be discussed, is the Decolonisation Committee of UNGA”.
Yamin Kogoya is a West Papuan academic who has a Master of Applied Anthropology and Participatory Development from the Australian National University and who contributes to Asia Pacific Report. From the Lani tribe in the Papuan Highlands, he is currently living in Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
Vanuatu Deputy Prime Minister Jotham Napat and the MSG Director-General while visiting the Gelora Bung Karno Stadium and meeting with representatives of the Indonesian soccer team companied by the Indonesian foreign affairs minister. Image: Jubi/Twitter.
