The issue of West Papua‘s independence is a crucial and deeply complex one that demands our attention and support. For far too long, the Melanesian people of West Papua have suffered under Indonesian rule, facing a myriad of human rights abuses and political oppression. It is time that we stand in solidarity with our Melanesian brothers and sisters and advocate for their right to self-determination.
To truly understand the significance of advocating for West Papua’s independence, we must first delve into the historical context of the Melanesian peoples in the region. The Melanesian people have a rich and vibrant history, with deep cultural ties that span across West Papua, Papua New Guinea, Fiji, Vanuatu, and the Solomon Islands. These countries share a common heritage and identity, and yet, West Papua remains a glaring exception as it continues to be colonized and oppressed by Indonesia.
Indonesia’s annexation of West Papua in the 1960s was marred by violence, coercion, and human rights abuses. The Act of Free Choice in 1969, which was supposed to determine the future of West Papua, was a sham, with only a select group of handpicked individuals allowed to vote under the watchful eye of the Indonesian military. This blatant violation of international law and the will of the West Papuan people has led to decades of suffering and struggle for independence.
The current situation in West Papua is dire, with reports of ongoing human rights abuses, including extrajudicial killings, torture, and suppression of freedom of speech and expression. The Indonesian government’s heavy-handed approach to dissent has only fueled the flames of resistance among the West Papuan people, who continue to demand their right to self-determination.
Advocating for West Papua’s independence is not only a moral imperative but also a legal one. The United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples recognizes the right of indigenous peoples to self-determination, including the right to autonomy and self-governance. Indonesia’s continued occupation of West Papua is a violation of international law and a gross infringement on the rights of the West Papuan people.
While there may be challenges and counterarguments to the cause of West Papua’s independence, including concerns about the region’s economic stability or potential for conflict, we cannot ignore the fundamental right of the West Papuan people to determine their own future. By standing in solidarity with them and advocating for their independence, we are sending a powerful message that human rights and self-determination are non-negotiable principles that must be upheld.
As individuals living in a globalized world, we have a responsibility to support the cause of West Papua’s independence and shine a light on the injustices faced by the Melanesian people. By raising awareness, promoting dialogue, and advocating for change, we can help bring about a more just and equitable future for West Papua and its people.
In conclusion, the significance of advocating for West Papua’s independence cannot be understated. It is a cause that speaks to the heart of human rights, self-determination, and justice. Let us stand together in solidarity with the Melanesian people of West Papua and support their journey towards freedom and autonomy. The time for action is now.
3 comments
I am very moved by the supporter and God bless you!
Here is a comment on YouTube channel that we find interesting to read:
Please ignore Cammi’s version of history. The suggestion that international law considers West Papua part of Indonesia is a fiction, and the reference to a General Assembly ‘note’ is also misdirection – the General Assembly only noted that something that Indonesia called ‘act of free choice’ had been performed and the Netherlands was not in dispute with Indonesia; there was no note about what the ‘act of free choice’ was.
Like the British territories (India, Pakistan, Burma), the Republic of Indonesia was another fascist state, politically Sukarno was using his demand for western Papua as a scapegoat to blame economic failure on the Dutch withholding west Papua from Indonesia, also he wanted to grab any additional lands it could and its foreign minister in 1950 stated they wanted Western Papua, Eastern Papua, northern Borneo, and East Timor. Indonesia sent at least six military insurgencies (probably probes) between 1950 and September 1961; in 1957 the Soviets began supplying arms, and in March 1960 Soviet premier Khrushchev declared Soviet endorsement of the Indonesian demands for West Papua.
Standard Oil had known about West Papua’s vast wealth of gold, silver and copper since 1936, in violation of Dutch law the discovery & survey of the deposits were not reported to the Dutch government, and with Japanese and then German war the deposits could not be mined until after WW-II at which point the Ford Foundation proposed a scheme to create an American version of the Dutch East Indies corporate business model in which a over populated Java would seize colonial control of surrounding territories and provide US corporations with cheap mining and business licenses. Though the Dutch declared they were required by the United Nations Charter to bring the East Indies to full self government, Sukarno had launched a war obstructing consultations and referendums , the Dutch arranged independent governments for the surrounding territories and in 1949 Sukarno agreed to be part of a United States of Indonesia federation recognized by the United Nation, then Sukarno began threatening and absorbing the fifteen other States and around July 1950 declared the entire region was now part of his Republic of Indonesia; being a internal civil war the United Nations did not interfere and accepted the Republic as the unapprosed government of the former United States of Indonesia.
Sukarno/Indonesia wanted West Papua because they are fascists wanting any territory they can, and Standard Oil wanted a favorable mining license for the gold and copper; in March 1959 the Dutch announced they knew there was a massive gold deposit that they were looking for, a few weeks later a joint mining interest of the Rockeffellers (Standard Oil) and the cold-war architect Robert Lovett, Freeport Sulphur flew one of its directors to claim the Ertsberg and Grasberg area from the Dutch as a “possible copper reserve” while also secretly negotiating with Sukarno for the territory. In May 1959 an American lawyer at the US Embassy in Jakarta proposed an illegal or “special United Nations trusteeship of West New Guinea” by which a third party could take temporary control and then in effect give West Papua’s “sovereignty” to Indonesia irrespective of Papuan wishes. During 1960 the US discovered neither Australia nor Malaysia were willing to be the temporary administrator, the the proposal was amended to ask the United Nations itself to be the temporary administrator (UNTEA) who would then appoint Indonesia as administrator of the colony. The 1959 or ‘New York Agreement’ scheme then hit a problem when the US elected a John F Kennedy as President, although Robert Lovett was able to tell Kennedy who to appoint as the new US cabinet including Lovett’s protégé McGeorge Bundy as the new US national security adviser, during 1961 Kennedy would not authorize the proposal ; in response the proposal was presented to Indonesian officials who indicated they like the proposal, and six months later the UN Secretary General was killed and replaced by Sukarno’s friend U Thant.
During December 1961 the new Non-Align bloc demonstrated that it was able to block UN Security Council motions and supported India’s invasion of Goa and Indonesia’s invasion of West Papua. At this time U Thant pressed UN member to help Indonesia, and the Kennedy administration then relented and pressed the Netherlands to sign the ‘New York Agreement’ asking the UN General Assembly to authorisze the United Nations to invade and subjugate West Papua with intention of then appointing Indonesia as the new administrator.
Indonesia has remain the UN appointed administrator of West New Guinea (West Papua) since 1963, and in violation of the UN Charter (article 85(2)) has hidden the UN General Assembly authorization of the UN administration of the colony from the agenda of the UN Trusteeship Council for the past sixty years.
Another YOUTUBE Comment here
@jennyhaines8299 2 years ago
The Australian Govt and bureaucracy is biased in favour of Indonesia. They are reluctant to do anything to upset the Indonesians eg East Timor, although it became an exception with Interfet. Indonesia does have huge problems with population and they need more space. But none of that justifies the human rights abuses committed by the Indonesians in West Papua. There are independence arrangements that could be made between the Indonesians and West Papua. Where theres a will theres a way