Racism andSeparatism in Papua (2)
Papua was notcolonized by the Dutch? Among the Papuaninvolved in the separatist movement in West Irian, there is a view that theDutch had never colonized Papuan, meaning that they are not conscious and donot consider the Dutch state as a colonial and imperialist power. They talkabout "harmonious” existence under the Dutch rule. This view gives rise toa sector of citizens who are pro-colonial Dutch. A Papuanseparatist activist whom I happened to meet at the Fifth International Assemblyof the International League of People's Struggle (ILPS) in Hong Kong, July2019, said that Papuan people had never opposed to the Dutch. So, am I wrong ifI say that supporters of Papuan separatism are essentially pro- Dutch colonialism? Pro-Dutch colonialismcitizens are not only found in Papua. They can be found among the Mollucans, especiallythose who live in the Netherlands. Ithas led to separatism with its puppet state, the Republic of South Maluku(RMS). Also, among members of KNIL (Royal Dutch Indian Army) and the social stratumwhose lives depended and were closely intertwined with the colonial power ofthe Dutch East Indies. That there are strata of society that do not"feel" colonized does not mean that colonialism does not exist. Thefeeling of "not being colonized" does not erase the fact that sincemid-1936, the Nederlandsche Nieuw Guinea Petroleum Company had a headquartersin Babo, exploiting oil from the bowels of the earth and transported it out ofPapua to fill the coffers of Dutch capitalist investors. And that was carried out without the authorizationof the people of Papua. How do youexplain and justify that the Dutch (not Melanesians and their native country islocated 13,212 km from Papua) drilled and transported (read: robbed) the oil ofthe Papuan people freely, safely and securely???? Is that a sign of"harmony" between the Dutch colonial authorities and the people ofPapua? The existenceof this pro-Dutch view proves the unequal economic, social and politicaldevelopment in the archipelago during Dutch colonialism. Even now, under semi-feudaland semi-colonial system, imbalances and gaps in economic, social and politicaldevelopment cannot be overcome. The impact of uneven economic, social andpolitical development, among others, is reflected in the unequal politicalawareness of the broad masses of the people in various islands. Theaffirmation of a number of Papuan separatist figures on racial difference betweenthe Papuan population and the majority of the Indonesian population further showshow strong is the legacy of racism left by Dutch colonial rule. The fundamentalreason put forward by the Dutch for separating West Papua from Indonesia and therefusal to acknowledge Indonesia’s sovereignty on that island was that thePapuan are not of the same race as other Indonesians. In thediscussion on the territory of Indonesia, held on 10 and 11 July 1945, by theResearch Body for Preparation of Independence, Mohammad Hatta was expressinghis idea based also on race. Regarding Papua, there were essentially two opinionsrepresented by Mohammad Yamin and Mohammad Hatta. Yaminincluded Papua as part of Indonesia. Hatta did not agree that Papua wasincluded in Indonesian territory, on the ground of racial difference. Thisracial basis was also used by Hatta in choosing Malaya and North Borneo asIndonesian territory instead of Papua. Whereas Malaya and North Borneo were notDutch colonies. What makes more sense and in accordance with international lawthat recognizes the principle of Uti Possidetis Juris is that the Dutch EastIndies territory becomes Indonesian territory. And Papua was part of Dutch EastIndies. If not, how could Boven Digul be used as a concentration camp forIndonesian independence pioneers? This is what Sukarnosaid in his speech on May 4, 1963, in New Town, Jayapura: “And what is called the Indonesian homeland? TheIndonesian homeland is all the territory that was colonized by the Dutch, whichhad been called the Dutch East Indies, which used to be called NederlandsIndië. That's the territory of the Republic of Indonesia. Listencarefully to what I have said, that's the territory of the Republic ofIndonesia. It means that since August 17, 1945 West Irian has become partof the territory of the Republic of Indonesia. What has not happened? After theproclamation (of the independence) the Dutch colonialists were still runningits administration in West Irian; that’s why West Irian had not been includedin the territory of the Republic of Indonesia. So, our struggle, pay greatattention to this, brothers and sisters, was not to annex West Irian into theterritory of the Republic of Indonesia. Sometimes this error is stillcommitted. There are people who say, to struggle to incorporate West Irian intothe territory of the Republic of Indonesia. No! West Irian since August 17,1945 has been part of the territory of the Republic of Indonesia. Sometimespeople say, to include West Irian into the territory of the motherland. Wrong!No! West Irian since a long time ago had been part of the territory of theRepublic of Indonesia ... "(Quoted from Bung Karno's speech in New Town,Jayapura, dated May 4, 1963). Papua separatistfigure, Victor Yeimo, Chairperson of the KNPB (National Committee for theLiberation of Papua), in the 5th General Assembly of ILPS, in July 2019, inHong Kong, referred to Hatta to defend his separatist position. Dhandy Laksono,supporter of separatism, in his debate with Budiman Sudjat-miko, 22 September2019, referred also to Hatta. Again, racial view was presented as one of thebasic grounds for separating Papua from Indonesia. Undeniably,Hatta's view related to West Papua was in accordance with the Dutch desire tocontinue to be entrenched there. Hatta's attitude which tended to be pro-Dutch colonialwas clearly reflected in his actions throughout his life as politician andgovernment official. One clear example was the outcome of the Round TableConference (KMB) which obviously benefited the Netherlands and harmedIndonesia. Imagine, under his leadership, the Indonesian delegation acceptedthe article which required Indonesia to pay the debt of the Dutch colonialgovernment including the costs of two military aggressions launched in 1947 and48 by the Dutch to strangle Indonesia! HerbertFaith, in “The Decline of Constitutional Democracy in Indonesia”, 2006, wrote:“it was Hatta, more than any other Republican, who had inspired the trust, onthe part of the BFO, the Dutch and the Americans, which made the relativelyfavorable terms of the Round Table Agreement possible. To these various groupshe was acceptable because of his generally moderate position, his legalorientation, his hostility toward unplanned change, and his long-heldcommitment to the protection of foreign investment in Indonesia.” In the secondhalf of 1948, the US inspired and financed second white terror againstcommunists also occurred under the government of Mohammad Hatta. Tens ofthousands of communists and progressive military officers and soldiers werekilled and approximately 35.000 were arrested. Immediately after the destruction of revolutionary military forces, theDutch launched its second aggression against the Republic of Indonesia. Andthat led to the Round Table Conference in The Hague, 1949. In 1956,the Sukarno Government unilaterallycanceled the KMB agreement which was very detrimental to the interests of theIndonesian people. International Support to Separatism Itis unfortunate that there are a number of international, progressive andrevolutionarymasse and political organizations supporting West Papua separatism. Withoutadequate knowledge of the facts and history of the struggle of the Indonesianpeople to drive out the Dutch colonial power, they trytoapply the principle of self-determination by ignoring the principle of concreteanalysis of concrete situations. Byaccusing Indonesia of aggression and occupying Papua since1962,they makeno distinction between the Suhartogovernment and the anti-colonial andanti-imperialist Sukarno government. If Sukarno were the same as Suharto,what wouldbethe reason for the US-led imperialist forces to inspire and encourage Suharto'smilitary coup to destroy the PKI and the revolutionary people'smovement through the slaughter of 3 million people; the torture, imprisonment andenforced disappearance of hundreds of thousands of people who have never beenproven guilty? The1965-66 massacre was the most savage, bloodiest and largest genocide inIndonesia. Without the slightest intention to reduce the sufferingof the people of Papua under the New Order Regime without Suharto,objectively I woulddaresay that what is happening in Papua now can not becompared with what happened in 65-66. Theyconsciously neglect the fact that theCommunists had been fighting since 1926 to expel the Dutch colonials from theDutch East Indies. They ignore the fact that the PKI and various revolutionarymass organizations supported and actively participated in the West Irianliberation campaign launched by the Sukarno Government in the 60s.They also failed to acknowledge that the refusal of the Dutch to leave Papua hasinternationalized the issue and forced the government of Sukarno to accept theinvolvement of the US and the United Nation. That was a genuineself-determination action of the Indonesian people against the Dutchcolonialism. Sukarnoisarbitrarily accusedof being ultra-nationalist and deprived of the right to defend theterritorial integrity and the sovereignty of the Indonesian IndependentStatewhich was proclaimed on August 17, 1945. It means they do not recognizetheIndonesian independence and take the side of the Dutch colonialistswho since the 1949 Round Table Conference refused to leave West Irian. If they do recognized our Independence,they would not raise the problem of Papua, as West Papua has become part of theterritory of Indonesia since 1945. It was the refusal of the Dutch to leaveWest Papua that gave rise to the conflict which dragged on for years and the USand the United Nation became involved. Ina situation where the struggle of the Indonesian people to expel the Dutch fromWest Irian was increasingly gaining international sympathyand support,the Dutch used the tactics of self-determinationfor the people of West Papua. Sukarno, who was not a communist, was able to seethroughanddenouncedthe fake"self-determination"presented bythe Dutch colonialists. The following is the reactionof President Soekarno, September 1961, to the Queen Juliana's annual speechbefore the Dutch Parliament. "Iappreciate Queen Juliana's goodwill towards the West Irian problem. I know,Queen Juliana has in mind the so-called policy of"self-determination". Iknow also what such a policy of "self-determination" under foreignsupervision can bring about. The application of such a policy is not new forus. In Van Mook's time such a policy of so called"self-determination" resulted in the formation of a "Free EastSumatra", a "Free South Sumatra", a "Free Pasundan (WestJava)" a "Free East Java", a "Free Madura", a"Free East Kalimantan", a "Free EastIndonesia", and other so called autonomous territories. In doing so, VanMook actually balkanized Indonesia. Butin 1950, the united people ofIndonesia put an end to the life of these so called "Free States",and restored the unitarian Republic of Indonesia. Ireject this so called "self-determination" policy, of the DutchGovernment. This policy leads only to trouble in the future. Upholding Leninistprinciple of self-determination does not mean that we have to support allkinds of "self-determination", forgetting to analyzethe class character of the organizations leading that so-called self-determination.The interests of the working class come first. Do those organizations representthe interests of the working class in Papua? Do we have to support the aspirations of Papuan"self-determination" whose leaders openly declared race as fundamentalbase of the separation of Papua? One should remember that Papua has become homeof thousands of people from different ethnic groups. If the Leninistprinciple of self-determination means we have to support all kinds of secessionfrom a reactionary government, should we then support Dalai Lama? Should wesupport Taiwan and implement the policy of two Chinas? The discrimination andracism inherent to the actual regime is responded with separatism ignoring thefact that the working class of all other ethnic groups have been living underthe same exploitation and repression suffered by the Papuan people, in additionto discrimination and racism. Indonesia is asemi-colonial and semi-feudal country. Land grabbing, plundering of naturalresources, illegal logging the remaining tropical forests, gross violations ofhuman rights are occurring at every corner of Indonesia. Such is the enthusiasm of the supportersof separatism to apply the principle of "self determination" to the point that they forget the problem of land, which is the main contradiction whose solution must be prioritized. Instead of promotingand supporting the unity among the working class independently of theirethnicity in Papua, support to separatism has driven a wedge between localpopulation and settlers and led to horizontal conflicts. Perhaps the horizontalconflict in Wamena pleases supporters of separatism, as they feel that Papuans have the rightto retaliate racism of the government and reactionary elementsalso with racist acts and violence against settlers. According to the PapuaCivil Society Coalition, the violent repression of the State military apparatuses against anti-racism demonstrations inPapua resulted in 11 Papuan civilians and one soldierkilled and 71 injured, while in the riots in Wamena against settlers the death toll reached 41 deaths. 76 people were injured and 6311 displaced. We are witnessing a tit for tat strategy isbeing implemented in Papua. Horizontal conflict,mutual retaliation between local peopleand settlers will only be used by the New Order regime without Suharto to bring more troops andmilitary apparatus to Papua. And that would notmake easier the work of organizing the working people. Not all Papuans support separatism. Sincethe independence day of August 17, 1945 there have been important Papuan figures who took part in the struggle for the integration of West Papua toIndonesia. Separatism will create a greater friction and bitterness among local people, settlers and Indonesians as a whole. And most essentially, it distracts them from the main problem that actuallythreatens their survival, from developing class consciousnessand class struggle. The Dutch Governor, Van Mook, had moved to heaven or hell, but his dreamof dividing and separating Papua from Indonesia has the support of evenleftists and revolutionaries!!! Lucky him!! (Tatiana Lukman, October 2019).
