Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.
To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to upgrade your browser.
2014, Pacific Politics: Political news and analysis brought to you by the Pacific Institute of Public Policy
…
8 pages
1 file
A struggle for 'truth' and the media myopic over Fiji and West Papua: On the eve of a vital meeting in Port Vila planning a more unified stance over independence in West Papua by disparate Melanesian solidarity groups earlier this month, the issue of Papua and Indonesian human rights violations was also the topic of a conference almost 2200 km away in New Zealand. In Vila, the United Liberation Movement for West Papua emerged as the umbrella organisation to carry forward Papuan aspirations and to negotiate with the Melanesian Spearhead Group. Comprising the National Committee for West Papua (KNPB), West Papuan National Coalition for Liberation and the Federal Republic of West Papua, the group wants to reverse the MSG refusal last year to grant membership status without it becoming “more representative”.
The West Papuan movement for freedom is growing. And a wave of support is building across the Pacific. The human rights situation in West Papua, however, is deteriorating. Instead of embracing the United Liberation Movement for West Papua as a partner, the body that best represents the aspirations of the West Papuan people, Indonesian President Joko Widodo has criminalised the ULMWP, fomented nationalist militia groups and created conditions that encourage state violence against the Papuan people. The fact that the Papuans have been pursuing their aspirations through a combination of nonviolent action and domestic and international diplomacy further illustrates the total failure of the Indonesian government’s willingness and ability to protect their citizens in West Papua. Pacific Island nations are ideally placed to address this situation. Individual Pacific leaders have already acted morally and courageously to help constrain Indonesian violence. In doing so they have compelled the Indonesian government to respond to persistent and serious concerns Pacific peoples have about West Papua and West Papuans, a people who are embraced as family members. An opportunity exists to elevate Pacific ways of resolving conflict and doing diplomacy and embed these in regional and sub-regional forum. By pursuing independent human rights missions, raising the issue of West Papua at the United Nations, formally including the ULMWP in the Pacific Island Forum, and granting full membership of the ULMWP in the Melanesian Spearhead Group, Pacific Island states can help constrain Indonesian state violence and create the conditions for the peaceful and dignified resolution of the conflict in West Papua. Geopolitical power and influence concerning West Papua has shifted from ‘Western countries’ to the Pacific. With that comes a unique historical choice for the members of the Pacific Island Forum and other sub-regional bodies, including the Melanesian Spearhead Group: to support the West Papuan aspirations to peacefully determine their own future or to side with the forces of empire. Pacific Island leaders can turn their backs or ‘bring West Papua back to the family’.
West Papua remains one of the most omit issues that defies the territorial integrity of Indonesia and arguably one of the most under-reported cases of human right of the 21st Century. Its integration into Indonesia overseen by the United Nations remains disputable due to the distorted procedure in which it was conducted. West Papua witnessed a mass influx of migrants from other overpopulated areas of Indonesia who has quickly overtaken the economic sector, at the cost of the marginalized indigenous Papuan. The annexation of the territory by Indonesia in 1963 was very obnoxious with pervasive raiding, human rights abuses, the diminishing of civil liberties, and displacement of West Papuan seeking refuge across the border in PNG as well as in other parts of the world. Discernment on the insufficiency of economic opportunities within this thriving resources base economy has also created a pan-Papua identity resisting the Indonesian rule and inflamed a louder call for independence in conjunction with arising political violence. With their racial and ethnic distinction from other regions, most West Papuan does not identify themselves with the Indonesian state but with the rest of Melanesian countries. For West Papua, a membership in the Melanesian Spearhead Group (MSG) will be a stepping stone to international recognition of their right to self-determination. Yet the skepticism is whether Indonesia would be willing to give independence to this territory whose resources generate back huge substantial amount of wealth back to Jakarta.
2010
This report addresses the momentous events that have transpired in West Papua and its diaspora in recent months. A response to the recent International Crisis Group (ICG) report entitled Radicalisation and Dialogue in Papua1 is also necessary as it is being used as justification by the Indonesian government in two serious initiatives currently underway: the prosecution of activist leader Victor Yeimo on charges of 'rebellion' and the unfolding TNI military operations in the highlands of West Papua. One initiative may unjustly deprive a man of his liberty; the other will almost certainly cost the lives and livelihoods of innocent Papuan civilians. The ICG report is biased, poorly conceived and researched. Its conclusions are therefore questionable even while the consequences of those conclusions are potentially so dire. A rebuttal is essential.
2010
This report addresses the momentous events that have transpired in West Papua and its diaspora in recent months. A response to the recent International Crisis Group (ICG) report entitled Radicalisation and Dialogue in Papua1 is also necessary as it is being used as justification by the Indonesian government in two serious initiatives currently underway: the prosecution of activist leader Victor Yeimo on charges of 'rebellion' and the unfolding TNI military operations in the highlands of West Papua. One initiative may unjustly deprive a man of his liberty; the other will almost certainly cost the lives and livelihoods of innocent Papuan civilians. The ICG report is biased, poorly conceived and researched. Its conclusions are therefore questionable even while the consequences of those conclusions are potentially so dire. A rebuttal is essential.
Pacific Journalism Review, 2018
Papua Blood: A Photographer’s Eyewitness Account of West Papua Over 30 Years, by Peter Bang. Copenhagen, Denmark: Remote Frontlines, 2018. 248 pages. ISBN 978-87-430-0101-0 See No Evil: New Zealand’s Betrayal of the People of West Papua, by Maire Leadbeater. Dunedin, NZ: Otago University Press, 2018. 310 pages. ISBN 978-1-98-853121-2 TWO damning and contrasting books about Indonesian colonialism in the Pacific, both by activist participants in Europe and New Zealand, have recently been published. Overall, they are excellent exposés of the harsh repression of the Melanesian people of West Papua and a world that has largely turned a blind eye to to human rights violations.
Pacific Journalism Review : Te Koakoa
Indonesia is trying to build an international reputation as a nascent democracy and is proud of having been re-elected in 2007 to the United Nations Human Rights Council for a three-year term. But the problems in West Papua make this democratic reform story questionable. While Indonesiakeeps this troubled province off limits to foreign journaluists and human rights investigators, Indonesia’s human rights credibility should be critically examined. Indonesia’s incorporation of West Papua has been contested ever since it took control in 1963. West Papua’s fate was sealed by a 1969 ‘Act of Free Choice’ which is known as the ‘Act of No Choice’ by the Papuans, since it was carried out under extreme duress and only 1022 men were allowed to vote (Saltford, 2003). The province remains heavily militarised and opposition to Indonesia’s rule persists.
2019
This paper examines the shift in legal status that should have occurred, under the United Nations (‘UN’) Charter, with the transfer of West Papua from the Netherlands to the United Nations in 1962 via the ‘Indonesia and Netherlands Agreement (with annex) concerning West New Guinea (West Irian)’. It advances that this agreement must be a Trusteeship Agreement shifting West Papua’s legal status from a Non-Self-Governing Territory of the Netherlands to a Trust Territory of the United Nations. As such, the United Nations via the Trusteeship Council was, and remains, responsible to ensure the West Papuan people attain self-government or independence as required under Article 76(b) of the Charter. The argument is based upon Chapters XI, XII, and XIII of the UN Charter governing decolonisation and is further supported by admissions contained in now-declassified secret American, Australian, and United Nations documents from the period. A legal path to assist the people of West Papua to atta...
körper – tanz – bewegung, 2014
Geosphere, 2018
BOLETÍN AMERICANISTA, 2024
Journal of Service Science and Management
Decision Sciences, 1981
Drug discovery today. Disease mechanisms, 2010
Digital Journalism, 2018
Canadian Journal of Anesthesia/Journal canadien d'anesthésie, 2006
J Appl Mech, 2007
BMC Geriatrics, 2009
Düzce Tıp Fakültesi Dergisi
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 2011
Annals of Cardiac Anaesthesia, 2018
Journal of Parkinson's Disease, 2021