Written by Lambang Triyono,
Peace in Papua still faces many obstacles, although there is also opportunity and hope. Papua is still vulnerable to the conflicts (prone to conflict), particularly separatist conflict, as well as local conflicts due to other unsolved problems of injustice and inequality of development, and political resistance associated with central policies that are counterproductive to the implementation of the Papua Special Autonomy . Still vulnerable conflict preventing peace in Papua, especially related to the following issues.
First, inequality, inequality and injustice of development in Papua. Included here is the disparity among regions and communities, between communities cities and the countryside, or the new settlers and indigenous people, in access to development. The potential conflict will be even greater if the gap is even more sharply is not resolved by the development, particularly policies Autonomy available. Especially not improved, or has not resolved the various socio-economic problems in rural areas, residents in the villages and districts that are still isolated by development, Otsus policies, or policies other centers, will make them accessible, which later became closer, to organizations independent Papua (OPM) which promises a better life for them.
Second, the implementation of Autonomy, with a mandate specifically to promote the indigenous Papuans and supported by the majority of Papuans, was still very weak and not satisfactory, yet supported institutional strengthening, MRP, adequate, and not able to improve the quality of life for the majority of Papuans, particularly in rural areas , the villages and districts. The majority of Papuans support Otsus, or Pro-Autonomy, be disappointed, if the central policy counterproductive or weaken Otsus, remain in effect, further increasing the bargaining power movement OPM continues to haunt them.
Third, OPM issues untouched, even by Autonomy though. They so far have not received Autonomy, and continued to launch an armed movement, although sporadic, disorganized, such as in Aceh, no representation or special support of the distribution of political seeds of Papua independence movement in the international and national levels. Peace without touching or involving the groups in conflict, especially the hard-liners in the conflict, such as OPM and its supporters, can not be realized. Peace in Aceh prove it, worked because the GAM signed in it, even though the original was so hard to do.
Fourth, because there is still sporadic, the OPM is not organized, and also because of the complexity of the conflict dynamics, associated with the many factions in the conflict due to the development gaps, lack of Autonomy, and counterproductive policy toward Otsus centers, such as conflicts of migrants and natives, the group Pro-Autonomy, could complicate the formation of groups representing the interests of Papua in a negotiation, dialogue or peace. Peace can only be done if there is representation adequate. In the case of Papua, Papua formation of groups representing very difficult, due to a mosaic of actors have conflict, and the complex linkages between the factions of the conflict there.
Fifth, related to the peace efforts still lack, or absence of systematic efforts and steps, on purpose, and direction done for peace of Papua. The central government itself has not committed to open dialogue, while in the area is also not developed an initiative seeking negotiations, dialogue and peace. Diplomatic efforts and opened negotiations or dialogue, especially with the OPM, has so far not done. Meanwhile, Autonomy policy that allows for open dialogue is not directed there, so that Papua ahead is still very vulnerable to the conflict.
Read More..
Rabu, 24 Maret 2010
Minggu, 21 Maret 2010
DIALOG PAPUA-JAKARTA: Still Full Suspicion & Concerns
by: andawat.papua
Now the issue of dialogue revolving so fast that sometimes some things of substance and some of the terms have not been agreed upon, refined, standardized and well understood in conjunction with already developed with a variety of perceptions. Technically this is still a lot of things that must be considered in order not to affect the substance and purpose of dialogue.
Dialogue Papua Jakarta have multiple interpretations. People arguing for the word of Papua or Jakarta first, there is the opinion of Papua said first mentioned to indicate where they are. When called dialogue Papua Jakarta there is a direct mean to the national dialogue, to participate call the press and the national dialogue as a developing news. Words as Papua and Jakarta were actually shown in 2 subjects and political territories in conflict: Papua and Jakarta. Jakarta as a center of power from the Indonesian government is continuously assessed heart failure in making and integrating Papua into Indonesia also ignores the existence of the Papuans even psychologically Jakarta is the personification of the oppressor group. While Papua entity represents the area and always had the practice of injustice, state violence, oppression, and sacrificed for the interests of Indonesia.
So that when called Dialogue Papua Jakarta indirectly defines the type of dialogue as a national dialogue. The demand for third party involvement and / or international parties or committed abroad, and given the title of an international dialogue that dialogue remains Papua and Jakarta. So the involvement of third-party claims and or international parties framed in an effort to inspire trust, neutrality and objectivity. Help create the conditions and situations that facilitate the process of dialogue rather than backing one party.
Bids dialogue also will be faced with a referendum issue by some groups of pro-independence papua. This is because there is still uncertainty about the dialogue and the perception of the referendum. Dialogue should be understood as a way to communicate problems, formulate and make choices. While the referendum or too NKRI, OTSUS etc. It is the result or the option of dialogue. So of course to put the dialog box is not equal to the box to put the referendum, the Republic of Indonesia, OTSUS or other options. Dialogue is a way or a way to arrive at the following boxes are. Referendum issue will also be exploited by groups that are pro-Republic of Indonesia to maintain the conflict among the papua.
Group wishes to support the dialogue must remain enriched by the realities and possibilities - possibilities that will be encountered. Because there is his hope that the dialogue is the last option to negotiate with Indonesia so worried if then the dialog will fail (again). There is also a very quick thinking and have more technical determine the location of the dialog or negotiator or a third party that argues that dialogue must be done quickly. There was a very agree but do not understand how to start and contribute to the dialogue that leave the task to the team formed by LIPI and Father Neles Tebay. Of course among the various expectations that have been there, there is also suspicion, rejection and even the campaign against the dialogue that continues to grow, so must be managed properly in order to support a growing dialogue. Campaigns pro dialogue should be done with a synergy through various opportunities available and made on purpose.
LIPI and Father Neles Tebay has initiated the meeting in Singapore last November 2009 with the involvement of NGO activists, youth, students, indigenous leaders and the next group of scholars formed papua Peace Network (JDP). JDP main agenda is to disseminate the concept of dialogue and gather input from the community of the dialogue bid. Efforts to internalize the support of the dialogue should start from the JDP team, the dialogue made an important agenda at the level of each institution and everyone involved was expected to reach maximum support appropriate capacity owned.
One of the JDP's agenda is to facilitate public consultation in several places in Papua and West Papua. Very risky indeed if the public consultation carried out is seen as the only step approach and forms of consolidation. For participants in public consultation is very limited though attended by people who played an important role in their community but there are many other important figures who were not involved, the avoidance or forgotten, for they all would require a different strategy approach.
Also realized that the polarization among people of Papua lately increased very sharply so many parties that had to be approached and invited to speak. The approach taken to the former political prisoners, prisoners and people of Papua in foreign countries must be balanced with the approach to the characters and the prisoners are political prisoners still in jail in the country. As with the communication with the movements of young people in Papua should be strengthened. Other groups have also seriously involved with the press is to oversee issues of dialogue and expand coverage of the pro-dialogue continuously. Because if every time the reader is presented information about the pro-dialogue will inevitably everyone will meet and interact with a variety of ideas pro-dialogue.
The next group should also be considered a comer. ALDP survey with Cordaid - Netherlands in 2009 in 3 (three) locations of Jayapura, Jayapura and Kab Kab Keerom indicates that the response to understand the problems of migrants in Papua has increased in line with their increasing role. Some people suggest that migrants papua engaged in resolving problems on the ground in accordance with the capacity papua and proportion. Father Neles Tebay in Dialogue Jakarta, Papua, Papua Perspective A also mentions the existence of migrants. Offer of dialogue for immigrants is still a fear. Dialogue seemed tantamount to an independent Papua, now the dialogue became sensitive issue for immigrants. So that communication is important to build a more intensive and open to newcomers about the humanitarian issues that occurred in Papua and the importance of dialogue to find solutions together.
The main principle when doing pro campaign dialogue is to provide opportunities for - great for anyone to develop initiatives, contribute to each other and bersinergis. Each process must be communicated to the public especially to make them feel involved in every process even invited to make a decision. Must be diligent to confirm and provide information. Perhaps the time will be longer but the support provided will be more powerful and real. All people should remain optimistic that promote critical and rational attitude. Many people have started to work and still need a lot more people because there are a lot of work. There are working diligently and openly, but some are done with perseverance and silently. May be preceded by a lot of insults rather than compliments therefore needed is consistency.
Read More..
Now the issue of dialogue revolving so fast that sometimes some things of substance and some of the terms have not been agreed upon, refined, standardized and well understood in conjunction with already developed with a variety of perceptions. Technically this is still a lot of things that must be considered in order not to affect the substance and purpose of dialogue.
Dialogue Papua Jakarta have multiple interpretations. People arguing for the word of Papua or Jakarta first, there is the opinion of Papua said first mentioned to indicate where they are. When called dialogue Papua Jakarta there is a direct mean to the national dialogue, to participate call the press and the national dialogue as a developing news. Words as Papua and Jakarta were actually shown in 2 subjects and political territories in conflict: Papua and Jakarta. Jakarta as a center of power from the Indonesian government is continuously assessed heart failure in making and integrating Papua into Indonesia also ignores the existence of the Papuans even psychologically Jakarta is the personification of the oppressor group. While Papua entity represents the area and always had the practice of injustice, state violence, oppression, and sacrificed for the interests of Indonesia.
So that when called Dialogue Papua Jakarta indirectly defines the type of dialogue as a national dialogue. The demand for third party involvement and / or international parties or committed abroad, and given the title of an international dialogue that dialogue remains Papua and Jakarta. So the involvement of third-party claims and or international parties framed in an effort to inspire trust, neutrality and objectivity. Help create the conditions and situations that facilitate the process of dialogue rather than backing one party.
Bids dialogue also will be faced with a referendum issue by some groups of pro-independence papua. This is because there is still uncertainty about the dialogue and the perception of the referendum. Dialogue should be understood as a way to communicate problems, formulate and make choices. While the referendum or too NKRI, OTSUS etc. It is the result or the option of dialogue. So of course to put the dialog box is not equal to the box to put the referendum, the Republic of Indonesia, OTSUS or other options. Dialogue is a way or a way to arrive at the following boxes are. Referendum issue will also be exploited by groups that are pro-Republic of Indonesia to maintain the conflict among the papua.
Group wishes to support the dialogue must remain enriched by the realities and possibilities - possibilities that will be encountered. Because there is his hope that the dialogue is the last option to negotiate with Indonesia so worried if then the dialog will fail (again). There is also a very quick thinking and have more technical determine the location of the dialog or negotiator or a third party that argues that dialogue must be done quickly. There was a very agree but do not understand how to start and contribute to the dialogue that leave the task to the team formed by LIPI and Father Neles Tebay. Of course among the various expectations that have been there, there is also suspicion, rejection and even the campaign against the dialogue that continues to grow, so must be managed properly in order to support a growing dialogue. Campaigns pro dialogue should be done with a synergy through various opportunities available and made on purpose.
LIPI and Father Neles Tebay has initiated the meeting in Singapore last November 2009 with the involvement of NGO activists, youth, students, indigenous leaders and the next group of scholars formed papua Peace Network (JDP). JDP main agenda is to disseminate the concept of dialogue and gather input from the community of the dialogue bid. Efforts to internalize the support of the dialogue should start from the JDP team, the dialogue made an important agenda at the level of each institution and everyone involved was expected to reach maximum support appropriate capacity owned.
One of the JDP's agenda is to facilitate public consultation in several places in Papua and West Papua. Very risky indeed if the public consultation carried out is seen as the only step approach and forms of consolidation. For participants in public consultation is very limited though attended by people who played an important role in their community but there are many other important figures who were not involved, the avoidance or forgotten, for they all would require a different strategy approach.
Also realized that the polarization among people of Papua lately increased very sharply so many parties that had to be approached and invited to speak. The approach taken to the former political prisoners, prisoners and people of Papua in foreign countries must be balanced with the approach to the characters and the prisoners are political prisoners still in jail in the country. As with the communication with the movements of young people in Papua should be strengthened. Other groups have also seriously involved with the press is to oversee issues of dialogue and expand coverage of the pro-dialogue continuously. Because if every time the reader is presented information about the pro-dialogue will inevitably everyone will meet and interact with a variety of ideas pro-dialogue.
The next group should also be considered a comer. ALDP survey with Cordaid - Netherlands in 2009 in 3 (three) locations of Jayapura, Jayapura and Kab Kab Keerom indicates that the response to understand the problems of migrants in Papua has increased in line with their increasing role. Some people suggest that migrants papua engaged in resolving problems on the ground in accordance with the capacity papua and proportion. Father Neles Tebay in Dialogue Jakarta, Papua, Papua Perspective A also mentions the existence of migrants. Offer of dialogue for immigrants is still a fear. Dialogue seemed tantamount to an independent Papua, now the dialogue became sensitive issue for immigrants. So that communication is important to build a more intensive and open to newcomers about the humanitarian issues that occurred in Papua and the importance of dialogue to find solutions together.
The main principle when doing pro campaign dialogue is to provide opportunities for - great for anyone to develop initiatives, contribute to each other and bersinergis. Each process must be communicated to the public especially to make them feel involved in every process even invited to make a decision. Must be diligent to confirm and provide information. Perhaps the time will be longer but the support provided will be more powerful and real. All people should remain optimistic that promote critical and rational attitude. Many people have started to work and still need a lot more people because there are a lot of work. There are working diligently and openly, but some are done with perseverance and silently. May be preceded by a lot of insults rather than compliments therefore needed is consistency.
Read More..
Minggu, 14 Maret 2010
The Prospects for Papuan-Indonesian Dialogue
Clifton
In many cases, conflict in the workplace just seems to be a fact of life. We've all seen situations where different people with different goals and needs have come into conflict. effective conflict resolution skills can make the difference between positive and negative outcomes.
The Sixth Indonesia President, Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono, who was elected in October 2004, has indicated that he is committed to implementing the special autonomy law for West Papua. The 2001 special autonomy law for West Papua was enacted in a move to assuage Papua’s desire for independence. We realize that the special autonomy law implementation still lack of Perfect because the core of problems in Papua are how to make trust building between Jakarta and Papua. If we discussed about Papua Road Map: Negotiating the Past, Improving the Present and Securing the Future. Editor: Muridan S Widjojo, Jakarta 2009. Published by LIPI, Yayasan TIFA and Yayasan Obor, stakeholders in Jakarta and Papua seems not agree if should involved international. Moreover, Indonesia has many experience in solving problems in Ace, Timor Leste, and Ambon, Special for Papua, The Indonesia Government seems not agree if invite international group as mediator in Jakarta-Papua dialogue.
As part of a move by Jakarta to reduce the powers of the central administration in the wake of Suharto’s downfall, a law to devolve certain powers to district administrations throughout the country was enacted. In recognition of the many problems that had dogged Aceh’s relations with Jakarta, a special autonomy law for Aceh was adopted in 2001, Law 18/2001. In the same year, West Papua was also granted special autonomy under Law 21/2001. In both cases, these special autonomy laws met with widespread dissatisfaction. According to the Papua Road Map, both laws lacked legitimacy in the eyes of their people because they had been drafted without the involvement of local political and social organisations and parties. It was not until Jakarta entered into talks in Helsinki with the Aceh independence movement, facilitated by the former president of Finland, that an agreement was reached between the two sides, resulting in a law on the Governance of Aceh. Shortly prior to the agreement, Aceh was devastated by a tsunami in December 2004 that left some 140,000 people dead, which increased the pressure on all sides to end the conflict.
The 2001 special autonomy law for West Papua was enacted in a move to assuage Papua’s desire for independence. It was regarded with deep suspicion by Indonesian nationalists and the armed forces. Having already been stung by the loss of East Timor, they regarded special autonomy (OTSUS) as an unwarranted gift to Papuan separatists. But neither were West Papuan nationalists satisfied with OTSUS, in particular for failing to confront their demand for independence.
Papua Road Map is the product of several years of research undertaken in West Papua by academics at LIPI, the Indonesian Institute of Sciences. According to the Papua Road Map, this was a missed opportunity. Because of the failure of the Indonesian side to recognize the traditional Papuan approach to negotiations and its failure to consider the possibility of reaching a compromise, the breakdown in the talks resulted in the conflict continuing up to the present day, as well as a deepening mistrust between the two sides. Talks must be regarded as involving a long process. The Indonesian side needs to recognize that there are serious problems in Papua.
As a prelude to its evaluation of the prospects for dialogue, the Papua Road Map gives an account of the impact of development in West Papua. Far from benefitting the local people, this has resulted in their marginalization and discrimination.
The education system is very unsatisfactory and has failed to produce Papuans with a decent level of education. Although plenty of schools have been built, there is a serious lack of teachers and school books. The LIPI team concluded that education is worse today than in the 1970s, largely because the private schools which were run by the churches have been closed down, giving way to _”_presidential instruction” (OTSUS) schools of indifferent quality. They point out that teachers produced under the earlier system were more dedicated to their vocation than those produced today. Certainly, a great level of dedication is required for teachers to live in remote villagers where they lack the facilities to which they are accustomed. (Most if not all the teachers are recruited from outside Papua.) The fees for local primary schools are far too high for many Papuans and the schools are too far away for the children to go to school every day, with little in the way of transportation.
According to a survey undertaken in 2006, 73,729 of the 432,122 children aged 7-15 years, of whom most were concentrated in the Central Highlands, had never been to school. While the statistics would suggest that the number of teachers is adequate, they rarely teach at schools in the interior as most of them prefer to live in urban areas. Many head teachers simply don’t bother to visit their school unless exams are taking place. A teacher at a secondary school in Merauke is quoted as saying that she couldn’t teach children who had already graduated from primary school because they couldn’t read, write, or count. In Yahukimo district, according to the 2006 survery, were more than 47 students per teacher.
Moreover, the allocation of OTSUS funds for education was far below that required by law. Education should have received 30 percent of the budget but its allocation in the provincial budget for 2008 was less than five percent.
As for economic empowerment, Papuans do not have the necessary business skills to compete with people who have migrated to the territory from other parts of Indonesia. Whereas in 1959, outsiders accounted for a mere 2 percent of the population, demographic experts expect it to increase to 53.5 percent by 2011. Although 48% of the villages in Papua province, and 37% of those in West Papua province, are below the poverty line, the territory is extremely rich in natural resources. A foreign multinational, Freeport-McMoran, is mining Papua’s copper and gold and is the largest taxpayer in the country. BP has also just begun to exploit Papua’s natural gas.
In order to address peacefully the injustice in West Papua Jakarta and Papua must do :
Seeking just and peaceful solution through an all-inclusive dialogue. All stakeholders representing Center and local government and the Papuans should participate in this dialogue. Such a dialogue would be a peaceful means for the Indonesia authorities and the Papuans to reach a common understanding on the problems that have to be addressedand a common agreement on the role of stakeholders.
The Indonesia government should encourage to implement without any delay and carry out supervisory institution to supervise implementation law number 21/2001 on Special Autonomy for West Papua for it addresses the neglect and marginalization of the socio-economic in Papua.
Dialogue should proceed through four stages: a national dialogue between the central government and Papuan representatives, dialogue between the Papuan representatives, dialogue within the Papuan elite who will be in charge of the political processes, and then dialogue between the Indonesian government Papuan representatives not involve international side in solution the Papua problems because Papua is part of NKRI. To incarnate trust and capacity building local government, all stakeholders in Jakarta and papua should Promote the capacity and opportunity of civil society organizations, to advocate for justice and ensure respect human rights in Papua.
Source : PapuaToday.com March 13, 2010
Read More..
In many cases, conflict in the workplace just seems to be a fact of life. We've all seen situations where different people with different goals and needs have come into conflict. effective conflict resolution skills can make the difference between positive and negative outcomes.
The Sixth Indonesia President, Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono, who was elected in October 2004, has indicated that he is committed to implementing the special autonomy law for West Papua. The 2001 special autonomy law for West Papua was enacted in a move to assuage Papua’s desire for independence. We realize that the special autonomy law implementation still lack of Perfect because the core of problems in Papua are how to make trust building between Jakarta and Papua. If we discussed about Papua Road Map: Negotiating the Past, Improving the Present and Securing the Future. Editor: Muridan S Widjojo, Jakarta 2009. Published by LIPI, Yayasan TIFA and Yayasan Obor, stakeholders in Jakarta and Papua seems not agree if should involved international. Moreover, Indonesia has many experience in solving problems in Ace, Timor Leste, and Ambon, Special for Papua, The Indonesia Government seems not agree if invite international group as mediator in Jakarta-Papua dialogue.
As part of a move by Jakarta to reduce the powers of the central administration in the wake of Suharto’s downfall, a law to devolve certain powers to district administrations throughout the country was enacted. In recognition of the many problems that had dogged Aceh’s relations with Jakarta, a special autonomy law for Aceh was adopted in 2001, Law 18/2001. In the same year, West Papua was also granted special autonomy under Law 21/2001. In both cases, these special autonomy laws met with widespread dissatisfaction. According to the Papua Road Map, both laws lacked legitimacy in the eyes of their people because they had been drafted without the involvement of local political and social organisations and parties. It was not until Jakarta entered into talks in Helsinki with the Aceh independence movement, facilitated by the former president of Finland, that an agreement was reached between the two sides, resulting in a law on the Governance of Aceh. Shortly prior to the agreement, Aceh was devastated by a tsunami in December 2004 that left some 140,000 people dead, which increased the pressure on all sides to end the conflict.
The 2001 special autonomy law for West Papua was enacted in a move to assuage Papua’s desire for independence. It was regarded with deep suspicion by Indonesian nationalists and the armed forces. Having already been stung by the loss of East Timor, they regarded special autonomy (OTSUS) as an unwarranted gift to Papuan separatists. But neither were West Papuan nationalists satisfied with OTSUS, in particular for failing to confront their demand for independence.
Papua Road Map is the product of several years of research undertaken in West Papua by academics at LIPI, the Indonesian Institute of Sciences. According to the Papua Road Map, this was a missed opportunity. Because of the failure of the Indonesian side to recognize the traditional Papuan approach to negotiations and its failure to consider the possibility of reaching a compromise, the breakdown in the talks resulted in the conflict continuing up to the present day, as well as a deepening mistrust between the two sides. Talks must be regarded as involving a long process. The Indonesian side needs to recognize that there are serious problems in Papua.
As a prelude to its evaluation of the prospects for dialogue, the Papua Road Map gives an account of the impact of development in West Papua. Far from benefitting the local people, this has resulted in their marginalization and discrimination.
The education system is very unsatisfactory and has failed to produce Papuans with a decent level of education. Although plenty of schools have been built, there is a serious lack of teachers and school books. The LIPI team concluded that education is worse today than in the 1970s, largely because the private schools which were run by the churches have been closed down, giving way to _”_presidential instruction” (OTSUS) schools of indifferent quality. They point out that teachers produced under the earlier system were more dedicated to their vocation than those produced today. Certainly, a great level of dedication is required for teachers to live in remote villagers where they lack the facilities to which they are accustomed. (Most if not all the teachers are recruited from outside Papua.) The fees for local primary schools are far too high for many Papuans and the schools are too far away for the children to go to school every day, with little in the way of transportation.
According to a survey undertaken in 2006, 73,729 of the 432,122 children aged 7-15 years, of whom most were concentrated in the Central Highlands, had never been to school. While the statistics would suggest that the number of teachers is adequate, they rarely teach at schools in the interior as most of them prefer to live in urban areas. Many head teachers simply don’t bother to visit their school unless exams are taking place. A teacher at a secondary school in Merauke is quoted as saying that she couldn’t teach children who had already graduated from primary school because they couldn’t read, write, or count. In Yahukimo district, according to the 2006 survery, were more than 47 students per teacher.
Moreover, the allocation of OTSUS funds for education was far below that required by law. Education should have received 30 percent of the budget but its allocation in the provincial budget for 2008 was less than five percent.
As for economic empowerment, Papuans do not have the necessary business skills to compete with people who have migrated to the territory from other parts of Indonesia. Whereas in 1959, outsiders accounted for a mere 2 percent of the population, demographic experts expect it to increase to 53.5 percent by 2011. Although 48% of the villages in Papua province, and 37% of those in West Papua province, are below the poverty line, the territory is extremely rich in natural resources. A foreign multinational, Freeport-McMoran, is mining Papua’s copper and gold and is the largest taxpayer in the country. BP has also just begun to exploit Papua’s natural gas.
In order to address peacefully the injustice in West Papua Jakarta and Papua must do :
Seeking just and peaceful solution through an all-inclusive dialogue. All stakeholders representing Center and local government and the Papuans should participate in this dialogue. Such a dialogue would be a peaceful means for the Indonesia authorities and the Papuans to reach a common understanding on the problems that have to be addressedand a common agreement on the role of stakeholders.
The Indonesia government should encourage to implement without any delay and carry out supervisory institution to supervise implementation law number 21/2001 on Special Autonomy for West Papua for it addresses the neglect and marginalization of the socio-economic in Papua.
Dialogue should proceed through four stages: a national dialogue between the central government and Papuan representatives, dialogue between the Papuan representatives, dialogue within the Papuan elite who will be in charge of the political processes, and then dialogue between the Indonesian government Papuan representatives not involve international side in solution the Papua problems because Papua is part of NKRI. To incarnate trust and capacity building local government, all stakeholders in Jakarta and papua should Promote the capacity and opportunity of civil society organizations, to advocate for justice and ensure respect human rights in Papua.
Source : PapuaToday.com March 13, 2010
Read More..
RI, PNG open border post at Sokau-Wutung
Indonesian and Papua New Guinean (PNG) governments have agreed on Friday to open an official border post at Sokau-Wutung between the two countries.
The agreement to open the border post was jointly signed by visiting Indonesian President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono and PNG Prime Minister Michael Somare after a bilateral meeting in Port Moresby on Friday.
Besides the border post agreement, three other memorandum of understandings on the prevention of double tax, defense and security cooperation, and and agriculture cooperation between the two governments were also signed by related ministers of the two countries.
At a joint press conference after the bilateral meeting, President Yudhoyono explained that the two countries had agreed to continue with the border management, in addition to police and military cooperation.
The president at a meeting with Indonesian community in PNG also said border issues between the two countries would continue to be improved to step up economic and social relations among the people living at the two countries border areas.
The agreement on the border issues, according to the president, should be based on demarcation regulation.
In economic field, President Yudhoyono said the two countries had agreed to step up cooperation in investment, trade, agriculture, transportation, micro credit and small medium enterprises.
Meanwhile, Prime Minister Michael Somare expressed hope that there would be a cooperation in trade and manufacture production such as machinery and textile equipment.
"We also need cooperation in liquefied natural gas (LNG) process and small medium business," Somare said.
Regarding the agreement on the prevention of double tax, President Yudhoyono said it would be made to avoid imposition of tax on Indonesian businessmen in PNG and PNG businessmen in Indonesia.
"It will make investment and business expansion in the two countries more expensive and inefficient, and therefore the detail of the agreement will be discussed in the ministerial meeting of the two countries," Yudhoyono said.
In addition, the two countries also agreed to cooperate in international forum on climate change and forest management.
Source : ANTARA - Friday, March 12, 2010 Port Moresby
Read More..
The agreement to open the border post was jointly signed by visiting Indonesian President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono and PNG Prime Minister Michael Somare after a bilateral meeting in Port Moresby on Friday.
Besides the border post agreement, three other memorandum of understandings on the prevention of double tax, defense and security cooperation, and and agriculture cooperation between the two governments were also signed by related ministers of the two countries.
At a joint press conference after the bilateral meeting, President Yudhoyono explained that the two countries had agreed to continue with the border management, in addition to police and military cooperation.
The president at a meeting with Indonesian community in PNG also said border issues between the two countries would continue to be improved to step up economic and social relations among the people living at the two countries border areas.
The agreement on the border issues, according to the president, should be based on demarcation regulation.
In economic field, President Yudhoyono said the two countries had agreed to step up cooperation in investment, trade, agriculture, transportation, micro credit and small medium enterprises.
Meanwhile, Prime Minister Michael Somare expressed hope that there would be a cooperation in trade and manufacture production such as machinery and textile equipment.
"We also need cooperation in liquefied natural gas (LNG) process and small medium business," Somare said.
Regarding the agreement on the prevention of double tax, President Yudhoyono said it would be made to avoid imposition of tax on Indonesian businessmen in PNG and PNG businessmen in Indonesia.
"It will make investment and business expansion in the two countries more expensive and inefficient, and therefore the detail of the agreement will be discussed in the ministerial meeting of the two countries," Yudhoyono said.
In addition, the two countries also agreed to cooperate in international forum on climate change and forest management.
Source : ANTARA - Friday, March 12, 2010 Port Moresby
Read More..
Langganan:
Postingan (Atom)
RSS Feed (xml)
