East Timor: send aid, not troops! FROM GREEN LEFT WEEKLY #350 http://www.peg.apc.org/~greenleft Green Left Weekly's JON LAND spoke to MAX LANE, national secretary of Action in Solidarity with Indonesia and East Timor about the latest developments towards self-determination for East Timor, and the Australian government's response. Question: On February 14, John Howard warned supporters of independence for East Timor that such a move would �cost� Australia. What is your reaction? The East Timorese would be totally justified if they demanded war reparations from the Australian government. Since Jakarta's invasion of East Timor in December 1975, the Suharto dictatorship, and now the Habibie regime, has been at war with East Timor, which had become an independent nation in November, 1975. It has been a war of occupation. Successive Australian governments have acted as military allies of Jakarta's invading forces by providing military equipment and training, and financial aid direct to the dictatorship. This links these Australian governments to the deaths of 300,000 East Timorese who have been killed in the war or died because of famine and illness caused by the war. I am sure Australian workers would be pleased to see some of their taxes go to help the East Timorese people reconstruct their country. It is only the mean-spirited rich, like Howard and his friends, who begrudge such aid. But the vast bulk of aid should be drawn from a special levy on all Australian and Australia-based businesses which have benefited from successive Australian governments' cosy relationship with Suharto and his cronies. An East Timor war reparations tax should be immediately imposed on all such businesses. The Australia-Indonesia Business Council, representing Australian big business, was always one of the most consistent supporters of Australian government's policies towards Suharto. Question: Do you think the Habibie regime's change of heart on East Timor is genuine? There has been no change of heart; the regime is as heartless as ever. People are still being killed in East Timor by arms supplied by Jakarta, as they are in Aceh and West Papua. In Indonesia, workers were attacked by police in Surabaya and the army has issued a shoot to kill order for so-called anarchistic demonstrators. Rather, the regime has been defeated by the East Timorese resistance. The resilience in struggle of the East Timorese meant that East Timor was becoming more and more ungovernable. The diplomatic struggle received a big boost by the decision of the East Timorese leadership to internationalise the struggle through their protests at foreign embassies in Jakarta. On top of that, the overthrow of Suharto by the mass uprising in Indonesia last May meant the new regime was much weaker. Of course, the Indonesian military is still strong, with bases and command posts at every level of Indonesian society. It is like a parallel government to the civilian state apparatus. But it is on the defensive now. Its murder of students in Jakarta in May, its kidnapping and �disappearing� of activists, the discovery of mass graves in Aceh, and its complicity in the organisation of attacks on Chinese Indonesians in the May riots have put it under huge pressure. The demand for the end of any role for the military in politics has become widespread. Question: But this demand has not been met. No, not yet. Some minor concessions have been won; the role of the army in the parliament will be less now. But the all-pervasive military command structure remains. The army still plays the role of a political police. However, for the moment at least, all out systematic repression of political activity is not possible. Last week, for example, 150,000 East Timorese were able to hold a peaceful rally as a part of a funeral and protest for an East Timorese shot by security forces. That would have been impossible under Suharto. Indonesian society has been awakened; political parties are springing up everywhere, alongside new student, worker and farmer groups. The military is under constant political attack. Habibie will look for every way to restore the old system, but there are fewer and fewer opportunities for him while the political mobilisation and organisation continues. Question: Both Habibie and his foreign minister say they still want East Timor as part of Indonesia. Why? Their stance keeps their options open. Some in the regime, and some outside it, like Megawati Sukarnoputri, still hope that something will happen in East Timor which will discredit the East Timorese resistance leadership -- civil war or unrest or splits, anything that will discredit the resistance in the eyes of Washington, London, Tokyo and Canberra. This is why the resistance still cannot relax, nor can the international solidarity movement. The pressure must be maintained, especially to get the vigilantes operating in East Timor disarmed. At the same time, by saying it is still pushing for autonomy, the Habibie regime can save face and pretend it is acting out of a democratic spirit. Question: The regime's change of policy seemed very sudden. Yes. Xanana Gusmao wrote in January that he thought the Habibie regime would have to be replaced before any real change happened. I thought that as well. But it seems that too many problems have piled up for the regime to handle. The change took place shortly after the devastating riots in Ambon, which were just one more reminder for the regime that it faces massive problems on every front. There is Aceh and West Papua, and labour and rural unrest in which many police stations and government offices have been burned down or attacked. As well, in the upcoming election, Habibie's party Golkar is going to have massive problems maintaining any kind of serious vote. It still has money, but no support. Its traditional backer, the military, is politically on the defensive. To attempt furthe repression in East Timor to quell the people's rejection of automony in favour of independence was going to be too much. Question: Why is Megawati Sukarnoputri, a key figure in the popular movement in Indonesia, backing the continued occupation of East Timor? Megawati emerged as a powerful symbol of resistance to Suharto because of her own persistence, in the face of all kinds of repression from Suharto, in defending her position as head of the Indonesian Democratic Party. At a time when there was no mainstream figure offering such resistance, many people rallied to her cause. But Megawati never attempted to organise the people to defend their rights. She was never a leader of the people's resistance, just a rallying symbol. Now that Suharto is gone, she is being forced to take stands on key issues, such as East Timor, and it has exposed her as a real conservative. She has played no role in helping to strengthen the mass movement against the military's role in politics and has even welcomed into her party's leadership former military officers who were responsible for many crimes in East Timor. The backbone of the popular movement today is the student movement and parties such as the People's Democratic Party, which stands firm in its solidarity with the East Timorese. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ GREEN LEFT WEEKLY Australia's leading alternative newsweekly Break the media monopoly: read it, buy it, write for it, sell it. http://www.peg.apc.org/~greenleft [EMAIL PROTECTED] SPECIAL INTRODUCTORY SUBSCRIPTION: $10 FOR 10 ISSUES ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Leftlink - Australia's Broad Left Mailing List mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.alexia.net.au/~www/mhutton/index.html Sponsored by Melbourne's New International Bookshop Subscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?Body=subscribe%20leftlink Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?Body=unsubscribe%20leftlink
