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