Tony, I certainly see where you are coming from. However, I think there is
an important difference between Indonesia and the other two. Russia was and
potentially still is a threat to western control within former soviet bloc
countries. Severing the ties with these countries and Russia is a way to
ensure all profits flow into the bank accounts of western corporations,
otherwise they are stuck sharing the spoils with Russia [or its oligarchs],
and having to deal with Russia having the power of turning the taps off or
on [at least for oil and gas]. Yugoslavia, on the other hand, has been
unwilling to bow down to western interests and therefore the whittling down
of the FRY into smaller more manageable pieces has been the preferred
option. Now Indonesia is different, ever since Suharto came to power
Indonesia has been very compliant in its accommodation to western wishes.
The reason that the west turned on Suharto is because he was no longer
effectively keeping control of the diverse area known as Indonesia, and if
Wahid is also unable to keep the region from being ripped apart then we will
be hearing more and more about the brutality of the Indonesian regime. The
fact of the matter though, is that the U.S desperately wants Indonesia to
stay together. One compliant country is much more suitable than a half dozen
or more independent wild cards. Not to mention that the Indonesian military,
that has direct links to the U.S and Australian militaries, needs to be kept
strong enough to dissuade China from any imperial adventures of its own. In
essence the west has what it wants, East Timor happened as it did simply
because of the timing in relation to Kosovo and the internal political
pressure in Australia. If disollution of Indonesia was really what was
wanted we would have seen the bombing of Jakarta.
Regards, Aaron
>Greetings, Aaron,
>
>It is true that the situation in East Timor has made for one of the most
>complicated political situations in the world. There is no doubt
>that Indonesia unleashed a brutal genocidal policy of mass murder to
>subdue the area, when it took contol over after the Portuguese left.
>And the imperialist countries looked on in acceptance.
>
>However, East Timor plays in some way for Indonesia, the same
>disintegrating effect that Slovenian independence had for Yugoslavia.
>This is no unimportant matter, though it is sluffed off as so by most
>western Leftists.
>
>To examine this in more detail, let us briefly visit a four paragraph
>introduction to Indonesia, that can be found on the 'Lonely Planet'
>site. It is illustrative, as I hope you will agree. Here it
>is , and we can continue the analysis afterwards....
>
><DESTINATION INDONESIA>
>
>The islands of the Indonesian archipelago stretch almost 5000km (3100mi)
>from the Asian mainland into the Pacific Ocean. Richly endowed with
>natural resources and hosting a phenomenal array of distinct cultures,
>for centuries they have been a magnet to Chinese and Indian traders,
>European colonisers, proselytising missionaries, wayward adventurers,
>mining companies, intrepid travellers and package tourists.
>
>The islands are inhabited by 300 ethnic groups with distinct cultures,
>speaking 365 languages and dialects. Despite the national motto `unity
>in diversity�, these cultures are under threat from Indonesianisation
>as the islands are gradually unified under centralised Javanese rule.
>The multicultural concept of strength in difference has been a hard one
>to maintain in the face of such geographic and cultural fragmentation,
>and the Indonesian government has opted for strong, centralised and
>undemocratic rule.
>
>The consolidation of the Indonesian empire has met with resistance and
>insurgencies but these have largely been ignored by the international
>community. The country was stable until the recent economic crisis,
>mainly because political opposition was repressed and government
>authority rested squarely on the foundation of military power. After
>Suharto's downfall, second guessing the direction Indonesia would take
>became every foreign correspondents' favourite pastime.
>
>Increasing tensions between Muslims and Christians, ethnic tensions in
>Kalimantan, and independence movements in Aceh and Irian Jaya certainly
>don't augur well for the new Habibe government but it is the East
>Timorese situation which buries any notion of a free and democratic
>Indonesia. East Timor's vote for independence lit a match to the
>inflammatory emotions of Indonesian nationalism. Patriotic militia went
>on a scorched earth rampage around East Timor and the country descended
>into chaos and martial law. An ugly brand of jingoism swept across most
>of Indonesia and westerners became the brunt of much wounded pride. This
>makes it a particularly unattractive travel destination for most western
>travellers.
>===============================
>
>OK, what was contained in this brief blurb? First of all, has to be
>the sheer scope of the problem. There are 300 ethnic groups with 365
>languages, and multiple religions, also.
>
>But what was presented as the problem? It was the central
>government. They don't respect diversity, so says our liberal
>blurb. Why? This Habibe is leader of an undemocratic
>government.
>
>A simple explanation, and true enough. But yet too simple.
>Because even more disrespective of diversity are the colonizers, that
>were briefly mentioned in passing, as being something that belonged to
>the past.
>
>But is that the way the Indonesian nation as a whole sees it? No.
>And that's why the blurb states... that Indonesia is now a dangeous
>place for First World adventurers, due to the resentment.
>
>Why the resentment? Doesn't it have to do with the US/ Australia
>lack of respect for Indonesian self determination. Why did the
>central government try to homogenize the Indonesian archipelago?
>It was due to that being seen as the only way to defend against
>outsiders from the region, that would continue to make use of splits and
>divisions to violate the area's self determination. This is seen by
>Indonesians themselves as the central danger, not their extremely
>disagreeable imperialist allied clique of a government.
>
>Is it 'jingoism' to be upset over Australia's move into East Timor?
>Just who is the imperialist country here?
>
>I happen to belong to a political group in the US that printed up a
>leaflet labelling Indonesia as being imperialist. UN troops under
>Aussie control were seen as defending East Timor from Indonesian
>imperialism!
>
>On the marxism list, a similar style twist was made by a comrade calling
>Russia a wannabe imperialist state (in his words)! What's that?
>Isn't Russia the country being reduced down to Third World status by
>imperialism?
>
>That's why I included East Timor in my comments. The same style
>illogic is at work here. Comrades are supporting self determination
>for one group or another in a Third World nation, while the dominant
>group in the region is itself under the gun from outside imperialist
>forces.
>
>Indonesia qualifies, as does Russia, as both are countries currently
>being torn apart by imperialist adventurism, and not just bad capitalist
>home governments. So it is important to talk about their self
>determination, too. Not just that of the Chechens or East Timorese.
>
>Comradely, Tony
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Crashlist resources: http://website.lineone.net/~resource_base
>To change your options or unsubscribe go to:
>http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/crashlist
________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com
_______________________________________________
Crashlist resources: http://website.lineone.net/~resource_base
To change your options or unsubscribe go to:
http://lists.wwpublish.com/mailman/listinfo/crashlist
