1) Forces
‘intimidate’ Papuan students in Bali
--------------------------------------------------------
http://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2013/10/07/forces-intimidate-papuan-students-bali.html
1) Forces ‘intimidate’ Papuan students in Bali
Bagus BT Saragih, The Jakarta Post, Nusa Dua, Bali | Business | Mon, October 07 2013, 11:59 AM
Students in Bali from the restive province of Papua have become the targets of raids by security forces that could view them as threats to Indonesia’s image during the prestigious APEC Summit.
While security officers were trying to prevent students from staging rallies during the summit to demand Papua’s independence from Indonesia, three Papuan students trespassed into the compound of the Australian Consulate General in the provincial capital of Denpasar.
The Australian Embassy confirmed the incident took place early on Sunday, saying the three were from Papua and West Papua provinces.
The embassy refused to detail how the students had entered the high security facility.
“We can confirm that three individuals from Papuan provinces delivered a protest letter at the Australian Consulate General in Bali this morning to Australia’s consul-general. The three men left the consulate voluntarily before 7:00 a.m.,” Ray Marcelo, a spokesperson from the Australian Embassy in Jakarta, told The Jakarta Post.
“The circumstances of the incident and issues associated with the security of the consulate general are being reviewed,” he added. Ray also reiterated the Australian government’s position on Papua.
“It is clear, we recognize and support Indonesia’s sovereignty.”
A release by the Papuan Students Alliance (AMP) claimed that the three, identified as Markus Jerewon, 29, Yuvensius Goo, 22 and Rofinus Yanggam, 30, scaled the two-meter high fence of the Australian compound in Bali’s Renon district.
The AMP said the Papuans did not demand the independence of Papua. They only asked Australia to help push the Indonesian government to “treat them like human beings” and “release all Papuan political prisoners and open the secretive province to foreign journalists.”
In the hand-written letter, the three wrote that they wanted to “seek refuge and to deliver our message to the APEC leaders in Bali, including US Secretary of State John Kerry and Australian Prime Minister Tony Abbott.”
Contacted over the phone, Melkias Dagai, the coordinator of Papuan students in Bali, said he did not recognize the three “intruders”.
“I am also shocked to hear this news from you,” he told the Post.
Hours after information about the incident circulated in Nusa Dua, the Papuan students’ dormitory in Bali was raided by the police.
“They intimidated us,” Melkias said.
Contacted by the Post in the afternoon, Lt. Gen. Lodewijk Freidrich Paulus, commander of the APEC Summit’s joint security operation, said he was still verifying the issue.
The Papuan students earlier complained about impromptu arrivals by people they believed to be intelligence officers.
“They have terrorized us at least five times since August,” Melkias said.
Lodewijk said last week it was not appropriate for students and activists to stage rallies during the summit, and launched attempts to prevent the rally.
“If your house is about to receive special guests, then it is obvious to sweep the floor of your house and do some cleaning to please your guest. Right?” said Lodewijk.
Activist Ni Luh Gede Yastini from the Bali Legal Aid Foundation said the plan to hold rallies on Monday and Tuesday to protest at the APEC Summit was still on the table.
“We’re still finalizing it,” she said, adding that US President Barack Obama’s absence and threats from security officers had not pressured them to call off the plan.
While security officers were trying to prevent students from staging rallies during the summit to demand Papua’s independence from Indonesia, three Papuan students trespassed into the compound of the Australian Consulate General in the provincial capital of Denpasar.
The Australian Embassy confirmed the incident took place early on Sunday, saying the three were from Papua and West Papua provinces.
The embassy refused to detail how the students had entered the high security facility.
“We can confirm that three individuals from Papuan provinces delivered a protest letter at the Australian Consulate General in Bali this morning to Australia’s consul-general. The three men left the consulate voluntarily before 7:00 a.m.,” Ray Marcelo, a spokesperson from the Australian Embassy in Jakarta, told The Jakarta Post.
“The circumstances of the incident and issues associated with the security of the consulate general are being reviewed,” he added. Ray also reiterated the Australian government’s position on Papua.
“It is clear, we recognize and support Indonesia’s sovereignty.”
A release by the Papuan Students Alliance (AMP) claimed that the three, identified as Markus Jerewon, 29, Yuvensius Goo, 22 and Rofinus Yanggam, 30, scaled the two-meter high fence of the Australian compound in Bali’s Renon district.
The AMP said the Papuans did not demand the independence of Papua. They only asked Australia to help push the Indonesian government to “treat them like human beings” and “release all Papuan political prisoners and open the secretive province to foreign journalists.”
In the hand-written letter, the three wrote that they wanted to “seek refuge and to deliver our message to the APEC leaders in Bali, including US Secretary of State John Kerry and Australian Prime Minister Tony Abbott.”
Contacted over the phone, Melkias Dagai, the coordinator of Papuan students in Bali, said he did not recognize the three “intruders”.
“I am also shocked to hear this news from you,” he told the Post.
Hours after information about the incident circulated in Nusa Dua, the Papuan students’ dormitory in Bali was raided by the police.
“They intimidated us,” Melkias said.
Contacted by the Post in the afternoon, Lt. Gen. Lodewijk Freidrich Paulus, commander of the APEC Summit’s joint security operation, said he was still verifying the issue.
The Papuan students earlier complained about impromptu arrivals by people they believed to be intelligence officers.
“They have terrorized us at least five times since August,” Melkias said.
Lodewijk said last week it was not appropriate for students and activists to stage rallies during the summit, and launched attempts to prevent the rally.
“If your house is about to receive special guests, then it is obvious to sweep the floor of your house and do some cleaning to please your guest. Right?” said Lodewijk.
Activist Ni Luh Gede Yastini from the Bali Legal Aid Foundation said the plan to hold rallies on Monday and Tuesday to protest at the APEC Summit was still on the table.
“We’re still finalizing it,” she said, adding that US President Barack Obama’s absence and threats from security officers had not pressured them to call off the plan.
----------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/oct/07/no-threats-west-papuans-consulate
2) No threats made against West Papuans in Australian Bali consulate, Dfat says
Consulate occupation organisers say protesters feared for their lives after a warning that Indonesian military would be called
The Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (Dfat) has denied that the Australian consul general in Bali threatened to call in the Indonesian military and police to expel three West Papuan students who occupied his consulate early on Sunday morning.
Markus Jerewon, 29, Yuvensius Goo, 22 and Rofinus Yanggam, 30, scaled the two-metre fence of the Australian compound in Bali’s Renon district at 3.20am local time (6.20am AEST) on Sunday morning. They left the compound three hours later and are now in hiding.
Two men involved with organising the action told Guardian Australia that the trio of West Papuans left the consulate because they were afraid for their lives after being warned by consulate staff that the police and military would be called in.
But a Dfat spokesperson said: "The consul general did not make threats. He explained to the individuals that they were free to leave voluntarily."
Tony Abbott, when asked about the incident at a press conference in Bali, repeated comments he made in Jakarta recently that Australia "would not give people a platform to grandstand against Indonesia".
The two co-organisers of the protest, who asked to be called John Stefanus and Rafael Willem to protect their real identities, spoke to Guardian Australia on Sunday night.
Stefanus explained that he got a call from one of the trio, Rofinus Yanggam, from inside the consulate early on Sunday morning. “Before 7am I got a phone call from Rofinus. His voice was different from usual. He’s usually confident, this time he was scared,” Stefanus said.
“Rofinus told me, ‘We are being asked by the consulate to leave the compound this morning. If we don’t, the consulate will call the Indonesian police and military to kick us out.’ There was an element of violence in the language, and there was a sense that there was going to be force used against them,” he said.
Stefanus said he told Yanggam that the consulate staff member was probably bluffing and that they should stand their ground and wait for an order from Canberra. But soon after this phone call, the three protesters fled.
Stefanus believes that it was specifically the mention of the Indonesian military that made the trio abandon their action and go into hiding.
“If you mention the words ‘Indonesian military’ in Papua, the two words are traumatising for us Papuans. We have long learned what those two words mean. They were under pressure, they were traumatised,” he said.
“They decided to leave without showing any resistance because the consulate was saying they would ask the Indonesian police and military to take them out.”
Yanggam spoke to Guardian Australia shortly after leaving the consulate and said the consul general, Brett Farmer, told the group the Indonesian police and army would be called.
“They told us, 'We don’t accept you to stay here. If you stay here for five minutes, I will call the Indonesian army to come and take you out,'” Yanggam said.
“I know that if I am arrested then my life will be over. I will have no control over my life any more. So better to get out now.”
Stefanus said the group had planned to stage a sit-in if consulate security attempted to force them out, but they were not expecting the Australians to call in Indonesian security forces, the very forces they were seeking safety from.
According to Andreas Harsono, Indonesia researcher for Human Rights Watch, Indonesian authorities cannot enter embassy and consulate grounds without Australian permission. “The Australians could invite Indonesian police to enter and to expel the Papuan protesters, but the Indonesian police cannot enter without an invitation,” he said.
Greens senator Richard Di Natale accused the consulate of effectively putting a gun to the protesters’ heads. He said: "After hearing directly from the West Papuans involved, we now know the truth is that they only [left] after being threatened with being handed over to the Indonesian police.
"They effectively had a gun to their head."
The trio and their spokesman, Rinto Kogoya, from the Alliance of Papuan Students, have now gone into hiding.
Neither Stefanus nor Willem has heard from them since Sunday, and remain deeply concerned for their safety.
Willem told Guardian Australia: “Yesterday when I went to the dorm [where the trio was supposed to be staying], as I was leaving in a taxi, I saw a soldier standing outside. He was looking into the dorm, staring in. I was thinking maybe he lived there, but when I made a U-turn, he was gone. I’m afraid he was a military intelligence officer.”
Stefanus believes the group is trying to organise to leave Bali. “I don’t think they have been arrested but I think they are under a lot of pressure,” he said.
“I’m waiting to be able to communicate with them. I’m worried because without knowing where they are and what they are doing, I can’t be certain what happened to them.”
Willem said he wished the group had never left the Australian consulate. “The safest place for them to be would be inside the consulate now. I really do hope that the four of them are safe. I hope that they are in a safe place.
“My concern is with other Papuan students in Bali. I think the movement of Papuan students in Bali will now be closely monitored by the military intelligence and the police,” he said.
“We also think the trio’s demands are important, and that the media should put more attention on what they are demanding.”
The group called on the Australian government to request that Indonesia release at least 55 political prisoners from Indonesian jails, including Filep Karma, who has been jailed for 15 years in Abepura prison, and open the province to foreign journalists.
They told Guardian Australia in an exclusive interview on Saturday that they just wanted a chance to lead a normal life, free from fear and intimidation by the Indonesian security forces.
----------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.thejakartaglobe.com/opinion/papua-indonesias-forbidden-island/
3) Papua: Indonesia’s Forbidden Island
On Sept. 23, two officers with the National Police’s Brigade Mobile (“Brimob”) fired into a stone-throwing crowd, killing a 17-year-old student and seriously wounding three other people. The police posted guards at the hospital where the wounded were being treated, and required visitors to leave their mobile phones at the entrance. Police reportedly confiscated the mobile phone of a nurse who had used it to take photos of the victims’ wounds.
That’s a story that some of the thousands of correspondents on Bali for the Oct. 5-8 Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation summit might want to follow up on. But that won’t happen because the incident occurred in the town of Waghete, in Indonesia’s far eastern Papua province, where foreign journalists are barred from going or reporting.
The Indonesian government effectively blocks foreign media from freely reporting in Papua by limiting access to only those foreign reporters who get special official permission to visit the island. The government rarely approves applications for foreign media access to Papua or delays processing for such applications, hampering efforts by journalists and civil society groups to report on breaking events. Those journalists who do get official permission are invariably shadowed by official minders who strictly control their movements and access to interviewees.
Although the government permits Indonesian domestic media to report from Papua, there are serious questions about their reliability in the face of government efforts to control the flow of information from the troubled region. Official documents leaked in 2011 indicate that the Indonesian military employs around two dozen Papua-based Indonesian journalists as informers, raising doubts about the objectivity of their reporting. The military has also financed and trained journalists and bloggers, warning them about alleged foreign interference in Papua, including by the US and other governments.
Such tactics don’t comport with Indonesia’s self-branding as a stable, progressive democracy which blends “dynamism and diversity.”
What does the government have to hide? A litany of violence and abuses.
The incident in Waghete — which the Indonesian government has yet to investigate if police used unnecessary lethal force — is just one of many troubling incidents of violence and impunity which have characterized life in Papua since Indonesian military forces deployed there in 1963 to counter a long-simmering independence movement.
The Free Papua Movement (OPM) is small and poorly organized, though it has increased in sophistication in recent years. Tensions heightened in Papua in 2013 following the Feb. 21 attack on Indonesian military forces by suspected elements of the separatist Free Papua Movement. The attack killed eight soldiers, the worst act of violence against the military in the area in more than ten years.
Human rights abuses remain rife in Papua. Over the last three years alone, Human Rights Watch has documented dozens of cases where police, military, intelligence officers, and prison guards have exercised excessive force when dealing with Papuans exercising their right to peaceful assembly.
On April 30, police fired on a group of Papuans who peacefully gathered in Aimas district, near Sorong, to protest the 50th anniversary of the 1963 handover of Papua from Dutch colonial control. Two men, Abner Malagawak and Thomas Blesia, were killed on the spot. A third victim, Salomina Kalaibin, died six days later from gunshot wounds. Police detained at least 22 individuals and charged seven of them with treason.
An Indonesian army battalion went on a rampage in Wamena on June 6, 2012, burning down 87 houses, injuring 13 native Papuans and killing one. Their attacks came after villagers had beaten two soldiers whose motorcycle had run over a Papuan child. One soldier died in the attack. Police arrested three Papuan suspects. On June 12, the military “solved” the incident with a traditional stone-burning ceremony in which the Papuan populace was asked to close the case. Not a single soldier was tried.
In August 2011, the Jayapura military tribunal convicted three soldiers from the same battalion after soldiers shot and killed the Rev. Kinderman Gire on the suspicion he was a Papuan separatist.
At the trial, the defendants claimed the Rev. Gire led them to believe he was a member of the rebel Free Papua Movement and tried to grab a rifle from one of them, who then shot him in the chest. They dumped the body in a river, after cutting cut off his head. Again, the tribunal convicted them of a lesser offense of “disobeying orders” and sentenced them respectively to just six, seven, and fifteen months in prison.
Impunity has become synonymous with the operations of security forces in Papua. While a handful of military tribunals have been held in Papua, the charges have been inadequate and soldiers who committed abuses continue to serve in the military.
In January 2011, a military tribunal in Jayapura, Papua, convicted three soldiers from the Nabire-based Battalion 753 and sentenced them to between eight to twelve months in prison for the brutal torture of two Papuan farmers, burning one farmer’s penis. Despite video showing the involvement of six soldiers, the tribunal tried only three of the six soldiers, and on lesser military discipline charges instead of torture. The soldiers have not been discharged from military service.
The government also consistently arrests and jails Papuan protesters for peacefully advocating for independence or other political change. Currently 55 Papuan activists are jailed for “treason.” They include Filep Karma, a Papuan civil servant, who serves 15 years in prison for raising the Morning Star flag — a West Papua independence symbol — in December 2004. The UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention said that Karma was not given a fair trial in Indonesia and asked the Indonesian government to immediately and unconditionally release Karma. Indonesia has refused the UN recommendation.
These incidents — and the inability of foreign media to cover them — have drawn international criticism, but not generated enough pressure to end the reporting ban.
During the Universal Periodic Review of Indonesia at the UN Human Rights Council on May 23, 2012, France called on Indonesia to ensure free access for civil society and journalists to Papua. The United Kingdom noted the “increase in violence” in Papua and “encouraged Indonesia to tackle violence against minority faiths and accept visit requests by Special Rapporteurs.” Austria, Chile, the Maldives, and South Korea called on Indonesia to accept standing invitations to the UN rights experts and groups known as special procedures. Mexico specifically asked the Indonesian government to invite the special rapporteurs to Papua. Germany asked Indonesia to release Papuan political prisoners including Filep Karma.
But the Indonesian government is adamant in its refusal to loosen its chokehold on journalists’ access to Papua. On July 16, 2013, Minister of Foreign Affairs Marty Natalegawa defended the foreign media ban by warning of unnamed “elements in Papua who are keen to gain international attention by doing harm to international personalities including journalists.”
Marty’s determination to keep Papua behind a censored curtain only fosters security forces’ impunity and fuels resentment among Papuans. It’s time for the Indonesian government to free the media and civil society to shine a light on conditions in Papua, good and bad.
Andreas Harsono is Human Rights Watch’s Indonesia researcher. Follow him on Twitter: @andreasharsono.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2013/10/07/abbott-s-pragmatism-has-set-scene.html
Abbott’s pragmatism has set the scene
Ross Taylor, Brisbane, Australia | Opinion | Mon, October 07 2013, 11:25 AM
Australia’s new Prime Minister, Tony Abbott, during the recent visit to Jakarta, exercised great humility and pragmatism toward a country that will play an enormous role in our region in the future. The visit had the potential to be a bilateral relations “nightmare”, but with a measured approach by the Prime Minister and guidance and planning by a very professional team at the Australian Embassy the trip is being seen broadly as a success.
But now that Abbott has formally acknowledged Australia’s mistakes in the handling of some aspects of the bilateral relationship, the issue is whether Indonesia needs to do the same?
Indonesia was right to feel very aggrieved over Australia’s handling of the live cattle export crisis, and also be annoyed at some of the more “radical” policies from their then opposition suggesting Australia could pay Indonesian village wardens to “dob-in” people smugglers, and buy back fishing boats, so it was important that Abbott acknowledged the harm that has been done.
The real challenge now is for Indonesia to acknowledge some of the key issues facing its people — at the start of what will be a very “robust” election cycle where nationalism is on the rise — and to recognize that Indonesia also has taken actions that have worked against its own best interests, including building closer relations with Australia and the region.
Indonesia with a fast growing middle-class — estimated to rise from the current level of 45 million people to 135 million in 2030 — faces enormous challenges in a number of critical areas including infrastructure, energy, education, health and in general business where there is a need to improve living standards and opportunities for its country.
There is perhaps no greater example of where a “partnership” approach with Australia could prove highly successful than within the agriculture sector.
Indonesia’s agriculture sector enjoys superb soils, abundant rainfall and plentiful labor; already employing 41 million people. The productivity of farms however, is extremely low with farmers generating around US$3,000 per year per farmer compared to $9,000 in Malaysia for example. Over 70 percent of all fresh produce found in Indonesia’s major supermarkets is imported.
A recent McKinsey Report showed that Indonesia, on current projections, would produce around 185 million ton of food by 2030. Yet with improved productivity that figure could be 310 million tons each year, providing not only enough food for Indonesia’s growing and increasingly wealthy population but also — and this is the key point — being able (with Australian partners and branding) to add-value and export “surplus” foods to third-party countries in the Middle-East and Northern Asia.
But to do this, Indonesia must acknowledge that government red-tape and bureaucracy, including a policy of increasing tariffs designed to protect poor agriculture practices, will only hold back the huge and necessary structural change that must be implemented in this sector.
So why is Indonesia’s food growing sector so unproductive? Indonesia lacks investment and expertise in rural infrastructure, training of farmers, cold supply chains, technology, irrigation, farm management and also access to good quality seed.
Australia is very good at all of these things; in fact Australia is arguably the best in the world, so why not put Australian knowledge and skills together with Indonesia’s soil, rainfall, abundant labor and strategic location, so that both countries win?
By working with Australia to transform its agriculture sector, the impact would be enormous for both countries. Indonesia doesn’t really have a choice if it wants to feed its growing middle-class in the future and Australia is perfectly placed to partner its neighbor in this critical area.
We should start with the cattle industry whereby Indonesia is now buying into Australian cattle stations, and Australian companies are being encouraged to take an interest in feedlots and processing companies in Indonesia. It makes good sense, and together we can meet Indonesia’s beef production needs well into the future whilst building a strong base for Australia-Indonesia “added value” produce to be exported around the region.
So following Abbott’s visit, the challenge is now not only for Australia, but for Indonesia to open-up this critical and large — but poor, over regulated and unproductive — agriculture sector, and in doing so create opportunities for business to form highly valuable partnerships.
The agriculture model can also apply to other critical areas facing Indonesia, including the resources sector, financial services, and manufacturing. It won’t be easy. Doing business here is not simple with, according to McKinsey, at least nine ‘procedures’ and an average of 33 days just to establish a commercial entity.
It will also need Indonesia to address the other “barriers-to-entry” that often act as a significant deterrent to doing business in Indonesia, including protectionist policies, inconsistent regulations and an unwieldy bureaucracy.
This will be the challenge for the incoming president and government over the next 12 months at a time when the indications are that politics in Indonesia is being influenced by “economic nationalism”.
My comments are not meant to present an opinion that is sombong (arrogant) towards this country that — as a young man — stole my heart, but rather as constructive suggestion as to how Indonesia can build on its truly amazing transformation, since the end of the Soeharto reign, and realize the dreams and aspirations of its people.
The writer is chairman of the Indonesia Institute (Inc.) and a former national vice-president of the Australia-Indonesia Business Council.
But now that Abbott has formally acknowledged Australia’s mistakes in the handling of some aspects of the bilateral relationship, the issue is whether Indonesia needs to do the same?
Indonesia was right to feel very aggrieved over Australia’s handling of the live cattle export crisis, and also be annoyed at some of the more “radical” policies from their then opposition suggesting Australia could pay Indonesian village wardens to “dob-in” people smugglers, and buy back fishing boats, so it was important that Abbott acknowledged the harm that has been done.
The real challenge now is for Indonesia to acknowledge some of the key issues facing its people — at the start of what will be a very “robust” election cycle where nationalism is on the rise — and to recognize that Indonesia also has taken actions that have worked against its own best interests, including building closer relations with Australia and the region.
Indonesia with a fast growing middle-class — estimated to rise from the current level of 45 million people to 135 million in 2030 — faces enormous challenges in a number of critical areas including infrastructure, energy, education, health and in general business where there is a need to improve living standards and opportunities for its country.
There is perhaps no greater example of where a “partnership” approach with Australia could prove highly successful than within the agriculture sector.
Indonesia’s agriculture sector enjoys superb soils, abundant rainfall and plentiful labor; already employing 41 million people. The productivity of farms however, is extremely low with farmers generating around US$3,000 per year per farmer compared to $9,000 in Malaysia for example. Over 70 percent of all fresh produce found in Indonesia’s major supermarkets is imported.
A recent McKinsey Report showed that Indonesia, on current projections, would produce around 185 million ton of food by 2030. Yet with improved productivity that figure could be 310 million tons each year, providing not only enough food for Indonesia’s growing and increasingly wealthy population but also — and this is the key point — being able (with Australian partners and branding) to add-value and export “surplus” foods to third-party countries in the Middle-East and Northern Asia.
But to do this, Indonesia must acknowledge that government red-tape and bureaucracy, including a policy of increasing tariffs designed to protect poor agriculture practices, will only hold back the huge and necessary structural change that must be implemented in this sector.
So why is Indonesia’s food growing sector so unproductive? Indonesia lacks investment and expertise in rural infrastructure, training of farmers, cold supply chains, technology, irrigation, farm management and also access to good quality seed.
Australia is very good at all of these things; in fact Australia is arguably the best in the world, so why not put Australian knowledge and skills together with Indonesia’s soil, rainfall, abundant labor and strategic location, so that both countries win?
By working with Australia to transform its agriculture sector, the impact would be enormous for both countries. Indonesia doesn’t really have a choice if it wants to feed its growing middle-class in the future and Australia is perfectly placed to partner its neighbor in this critical area.
We should start with the cattle industry whereby Indonesia is now buying into Australian cattle stations, and Australian companies are being encouraged to take an interest in feedlots and processing companies in Indonesia. It makes good sense, and together we can meet Indonesia’s beef production needs well into the future whilst building a strong base for Australia-Indonesia “added value” produce to be exported around the region.
So following Abbott’s visit, the challenge is now not only for Australia, but for Indonesia to open-up this critical and large — but poor, over regulated and unproductive — agriculture sector, and in doing so create opportunities for business to form highly valuable partnerships.
The agriculture model can also apply to other critical areas facing Indonesia, including the resources sector, financial services, and manufacturing. It won’t be easy. Doing business here is not simple with, according to McKinsey, at least nine ‘procedures’ and an average of 33 days just to establish a commercial entity.
It will also need Indonesia to address the other “barriers-to-entry” that often act as a significant deterrent to doing business in Indonesia, including protectionist policies, inconsistent regulations and an unwieldy bureaucracy.
This will be the challenge for the incoming president and government over the next 12 months at a time when the indications are that politics in Indonesia is being influenced by “economic nationalism”.
My comments are not meant to present an opinion that is sombong (arrogant) towards this country that — as a young man — stole my heart, but rather as constructive suggestion as to how Indonesia can build on its truly amazing transformation, since the end of the Soeharto reign, and realize the dreams and aspirations of its people.
The writer is chairman of the Indonesia Institute (Inc.) and a former national vice-president of the Australia-Indonesia Business Council.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.