Monday, May 12, 2025

1) ‘Fighting more frequent now’ – researcher warns of escalating West Papua conflict

 


2)  Generations speak out at the UN on the West Papuan struggle

3) Indonesia's old guard wants its old world back

4) Albanese’s visit shows Indonesia is still a foreign policy priority 

----------------------------------

https://asiapacificreport.nz/2025/05/12/fighting-more-frequent-now-researcher-warns-of-escalating-west-papua-conflict/

1) ‘Fighting more frequent now’ – researcher warns of escalating West Papua conflict

By  - 
  

By Caleb Fotheringham, RNZ Pacific journalist

The escalation of violence in West Papua is on par with some of the most intense times of conflict over the past six decades, a human rights researcher says.

The United Liberation Movement for West Papua (ULMWP) claims that Indonesia killed at least one civilian and severely injured another last Tuesday in Puncak Regency.

In a statement, ULMWP interim president Benny Wenda said Deris Kogoya, 18, was killed by a rocket attack from a helicopter while riding his motorbike near Kelanungin Village.

Jemi Waker, meanwhile, sustained severe violent injuries, including to both his legs.

The statement said Waker had refused to go to hospital, fearing he would be killed if he went.

Human Rights Watch researcher Andreas Harsono said that over the past month he had received an unusually high number of messages accompanied by gruesome photos showing either Indonesian soldiers or civilians being killed.


“The fighting is much more frequent now,” Harsono said.

More Indonesian soldiers
“There are more and more Indonesian soldiers sent to West Papua under President Pradowo.

“At the same time, indigenous Papuans are also gaining more and more men, unfortunately also boys, to join the fight in the jungle.”

He said the escalation could match similarly intense periods of conflict in 1977, 1984, and 2004.

A spokesperson for Indonesia’s Embassy in Wellington said they could not confirm if there had been a military attack in Puncak Regency on Tuesday.

However, they said all actions conducted by Indonesia’s military were in line with international law.

They said there were attacks in March and April of this year, instigated by an “armed criminal group” targeting Indonesian workers and civilians.

Harsono said if the attack was on civilians, it would be a clear breach of human rights.

Confirmation difficult
However, he said it was difficult to confirm due to the remoteness of the area. He said it was common for civilians to wear army camouflage because of surplus Indonesian uniforms.

ULMWP’s Benny Wenda said West Papuans were “a forgotten, voiceless people”.

“Where is the attention of the media and the international community? How many children must be killed before they notice we are dying?”

Wenda compared the lack of attention with the Russia-Ukraine war and the Israel-Palestine conflict that was getting more media attention.

He said Indonesia had banned media “to prevent journalists from telling the world what is really going on”.

The Indonesian Embassy spokesperson said foreign journalists were not allowed in the area for their own safety.

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

------------------------------------



Video


Te Ao Māori News

2)  Generations speak out at the UN on the West Papuan struggle
Monday, 12 May 2025


Te Ao Māori News interviewed Octovianus Mote and Defe Wabiser at the very site where, sixty-three years ago, the New York Agreement was signed, granting Indonesia administrative control over the region.
“We strongly believe that we’re not going extinct,” Wabiser said.
“West Papua is not an empty land, there are generations through generations within the forests... with our own history, our own spiritual connection with the land because we are living integrated with the lands.”

Elder Octo Mote remembers the day Indonesia invaded his village in 1968; he was fishing after Sunday mass when he saw the troops land. 
“When I was in middle school... you would see the military personnel put dead bodies in the rice bag and come out of the forest like they were hunting deer.” 
In the 1970s and 80s, people from other provinces told him how their family members were killed by the military. 
During his university years, Papuan leaders wound up dead and were believed to be assassinated by the Indonesian forces, such as Papuan cultural revival leader, anthropologist, and musician Arnold Ap.
Mote, a former journalist, was briefly appointed as a West Papuan expert after Suharto’s fall, but fled to the U.S. in 1999 for his safety.
He recalls how, in his youth, access to historical documents was nearly impossible. Today, younger generations can learn their history and connect more easily. He admires the ongoing creativity and resilience of his people across generations.

“Now Defe’s generation, they see their friends slaughtered, beat up in front of them in demonstrations, and that act is heroism that they continue.”
Defe Wabiser, a young member of the Yali tribe, was born and raised in Jayapura and now works in Jakarta for a civil society organisation that advocates for Indigenous rights and environmental protection in West Papua. 
She often reads about communities displaced by development projects.
Wabiser says her parents laid the foundation for her activism, and with today’s technology, it’s easier than ever to connect with people in Papua, the diaspora, and other Indigenous youth around the world.
She always thinks of the question of why she took up the cause, and what is the role of her generation in the West Papuan struggle. 
“I work for my people as a human rights defender,” she said, “I realise that I became an activist as a coping mechanism.”

As a child, Wabiser said, witnessing human rights violations was part of daily life—military patrols, massacres, and corpses found near plantations. 
“It’s something common that we hear on the news, an uncle has been shot,” she said.
Such incidents represent serious human rights violations and breaches of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP). 
While UNDRIP affirms Indigenous peoples’ rights to their lands, territories, and resources, Indonesia, though a signatory, does not fully recognize the concept of Indigenous identity.

He tohe mō te mana motuhake

Me te aha, kei te tohe tonutia e ngā iwi o Papua mō tō rātou mana motuhake.
Ko tā te atikara tuangahuru o UNDRIP, me kaua ngā kāwanatanga o te ao e kāhaki i te iwi taketake i ō rātou whenua ki te kore rātou e whakaae, ā, me whai wāhi hoki ngā iwi taketake ki te wānanga i ngā kaupapa here e pākia ai rātou.
“When you’re not recognised as a person, there is no self-determination,” te kī a Octo Mote.
Hei tā Wabiser, he waimārie nōna ki ngā wheakoranga nō tā wāhi, me tana ako hoki me pēhea te whawhai mō ngā motika iwi taketake.
“We have the right to live, we have human rights.”

They set their recommendations to the UN:
  • Honour the Responsibility to Protect (R2P), which states that if a state fails to protect its people, it is the responsibility of the other states to take collective action. R2P was endorsed by the UN General Assembly in 2005 to address concerns to prevent genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing, and crimes against humanity. 
  • Rather than treating human rights violations and ecocide as isolated cases, Mote urged the UN Secretary-General to mandate the High Commissioner to issue a comprehensive report.
  • Follow up on Valmaine Toki’s 2013 study on the Decolonisation of the Pacific region.
  • Returning West Papua to the UN’s decolonisation committee’s list - known as C24, which focuses on territories identified as “non-self-governing”. 
Te Aniwaniwa Paterson Te Aniwaniwa is a digital producer for Te Ao Māori News.         

——————————————————————
Duncan Graham

3) Indonesia's old guard wants its old world back
May 13, 2025 

Anthony Albanese’s pilgrimage to Jakarta this week as the new prime minister follows the standard post-election Hi Neighbours goodwill wave. But this time the parades and handshakes may get blurred by heat from Indonesia’s simmering Constitutional crisis.
The issue

Formal demands have been lodged by 332 retired senior soldiers and cops to sack Indonesia’s vice-president, and return the 25-year-old democracy to military rule – cries that should frighten Australia’s new government.

Yesteryear’s warriors want a return “to the original 1945 Constitution as the political legal system and government order”. The founding document has been amended four times since it was first written in 1945.

Till now the oldies’ move has been mainly the rattling of walking sticks; now its powerful Forum Purnawirawan TNI-Polri (Forum of Retired Military and Police) has reportedly asked the Parliament to dismiss Vice-President Gibran Rakabuming, former president Joko ‘Jokowi’ Widodo’s eldest son.

The complainants assert Gibran was illegally allowed to partner disgraced former general Prabowo Subianto at last year’s Presidential election in a nepotistic deal.

This was allegedly engineered by Jokowi in return for guarantees work would continue on his unfinished legacy project Nusantara, the US$36 billion new capital in Kalimantan on Borneo Island to replace overcrowded and sinking Jakarta. As usual, costs are blowing out.

Why stir?

The reasons behind the supposed reformers’ eight points for removing Gibran from the nation’s second-most important position are complex and ideological.

Their motives are also suspect. They haven’t yet suggested a replacement or called for a re-election. Gibran’s other faults are that he’s never worn a uniform, and comes from a civilian small-business background.

More seriously they’re not concerned with what Gibran has done – which is little. His principal error is that he got his job through a relative.

Gibran was barred from standing for election last year because he was under 40. That problem was fixed by his uncle Anwar Usman, the chair of the Constitutional Court.

He ruled that his nephew was immune from the ban because he’d been mayor of the small Central Java city of Solo.

The judge later lost his position for what his colleagues considered an unethical ruling – but his finding wasn’t rescinded. The critics want that changed.

Anwar’s decision meant Prabowo had what he needed for his 58% election success in a three-way contest. The law allows a president only two five-year terms so Jokowi could not recontest.

Why Gibran?

Campaign tacticians reckoned popular predecessor Jokowi lending his eldest to the race would draw youth to the ballot box, for voting isn’t compulsory.

The calculator-stabbers were probably right in drafting Gibran because more than 50% of electors were under 40, and thus had little experience of last century’s autocracy.

Now the vice-president is considered surplus to requirements, his continuing presence arousing envy. At 37, he’s nimble and half the age of his plump leader Prabowo, 73.

Gibran’s other flaws are that he’s rarely heard and seldom seen and then only when cutting ribbons. He comes across as a dour man who doesn’t enjoy his job, blinking in the sunlight of political reality.

It was different when he was shoulder tapped, shining with 21st century cool. By his side were TV presenter and beauty contest winner wife Selvi Ananda and two kids. The ad men salivated.

In normal times, such family qualities would be outstanding credentials in a country where personalities matter more than policies, but Gibran’s beloved came with baggage: She was a Catholic.

Not so good in a country where tolerance is claimed but rare; mosque influence is almost equal to that of the military. Love and ambition were stronger than faith, so Selvi converted.

Prabowo is often out of the country when the vice-president would be exercising his delegate’s powers – though probably mindful of early advice from his Dad who allegedly told him:

“Ojo kemajon” (don’t cross the line). This is typically cryptic Javanese, and Jokowi is a master of ambiguous statements.

Commentators reckon Papa was warning his commercial caterer offspring to remember his place and never eclipse the authoritarian and mercurial Prabowo who is known for going alone. Like Trump, he rarely consults his “ bloated Cabinet” of 48 ministers and 58 vice–ministers.(Jokowi had 34 ministers and 30 vice-ministers.)

Conspiracy theorists suggest Prabowo wants Gibran gone because he’s Jowowi’s secret agent – and who better to help open the door than soldiers.

The reaction

Prabowo could have intervened personally in the clamour and forcefully backed his vice-president, rebuked the stirrers (mainly former colleagues) and crushed the undermining gossip.

Instead, he got an eight-man leadership education agency he controls – the National Resilience Institute (Lembaga Ketahanan Nasional ) to declare that the vice-president’s election was valid.

Not being independent Constitutional academics, their leave-well-alone reasoning was suspect.

Prabowo also tossed another yesteryear warrior into the ring – not to heal, but confuse. Wiranto, 78, special adviser to the president for Politics and Security is a controversial figure allegedly involved in human rights abuses in East Timor like his boss – charges he’s denied.

In 1998, after the fall of Suharto, the role of Armed Forces Commander, sought by Prabowo, was landed by Wiranto. He later made an unsuccessful pitch for the presidency.

Wiranto has told the media that Prabowo “respects the aspirations” of the Forum and wants time to consider their concerns.

“(The President must) study them one by one, because these are not trivial issues, very fundamental issues … his power is also limited. In a country that adheres to the trias politica, there is a separation between the executive, legislative, and judiciary, they cannot interfere with each other there.

“The president’s attitude (is) not to disrupt, but to still respect."

The Chinese

If the petition to the legislature succeeds, neighbour Australia will have to recalibrate policies with the world’s largest population of Muslims; the PRC will be dragged in and outraged because his old mates also want Chinese workers deported. Their urgings fit a resurgence of Sinophobia and the march back to army control.

Prabowo has been cosying up to Beijing — his first overseas stop as president last November — and so he wants to stay sweet with the big funder.

The nickel mines in Sulawesi, which have put Australian smelters out of business by undermining prices, are believed to be largely managed by Chinese engineers and administrators. They’ve been funded by Beijing and the wheelchair battalions still hate Reds.

Dr Vedi Hadiz, professor of Asian Studies at Melbourne University, told Michael West Media that it’s in Prabowo’s interest to gradually sideline Gibran. “But he can’t risk the instability of a Constitutional crisis now, with the economy going the way it is.

“The Chinese will be concerned and look at Indonesian developments with a watchful eye. But they also know that no government can just suddenly expel them from nickel mining in which they allegedly have 75% control.”

As Canberra’s foreign affairs gurus open their keyboards, they’ll be asking AI: Is Indonesia coming apart – and if so, are we prepared? As relations with the folk next door have been ill-maintained for years, a ready-to-hand Plan B is unlikely.

In the 1965 coup, an estimated 500,000 were slaughtered in a military-organised genocide against real or imagined communists exposed by Australian academic Dr Jess Melvin. Be the deity Muslim, Christian or something else, the prayers will be for no-repeat – ever.

Duncan Graham 
Duncan Graham has been a journalist for more than 40 years in print, radio and TV. He is the author of People Next Door (UWA Press). He is now writing for the English language media in Indonesia from within Indonesia. Duncan Graham has an MPhil degree, a Walkley Award, two Human Rights Commission awards and other prizes for his radio, TV and print journalism in Australia. He lives in East Java.
------------------------------------------------------


4) Albanese’s visit shows Indonesia is still a foreign policy priority 
12 May 2025|Gatra Priyandita
As Anthony Albanese prepares to travel to Jakarta for his first state visit in his second term, the symbolism is clear: Indonesia remains a cornerstone of Australia’s foreign policy.
Since taking office, the Albanese government has prioritised Southeast Asia, laying important groundwork through initiatives such as the 2024 Defence Cooperation Agreement with Indonesia and the Southeast Asia Economic Strategy. But the tangible reality of the relationship with Indonesia remains limited by diverging strategic visions, misaligned expectations and a reluctance to address hard topics.
This means the prime minister’s visit must go beyond symbolism. If this partnership is to mature, both sides must start talking honestly about where they differ, where they want to go and how best to get there in lock-step. That’s because beneath the surface of two democracies, the two countries have taken different paths when it comes to issues such as dealing with Russia after the 2022 Ukraine invasion and the region’s most pressing strategic question: how to deal with China.
Since entering office, the Albanese government has approached its China policy through the prism of stabilisation—along with the formula of cooperating where we can, disagreeing where we must, and engaging in the national interest. At the same time, through AUKUS and its support for the Quad, Canberra has doubled down on its alliance with the United States and its commitment to a balance-of-power strategy in the Indo-Pacific. It believes US military presence is essential to maintaining regional stability, and it is prepared to take risks to preserve that status quo. Indonesia does not see conflict as inevitable. Instead, it wants to keep both the US and China engaged in multilateral diplomacy, with ASEAN as the central platform. It sees minilateral groupings such as AUKUS and the Quad as challenges to ASEAN’s relevance and Indonesia’s role as a regional power.
Even as Indonesian officials cautiously welcome some aspects of these arrangements, such as the potential for technology sharing or regional deterrence, they remain uneasy about their long-term impact. This divergence is not academic. It affects how each country responds to crises, how they define regional order and how they prioritise partnerships.
Australia is comfortable with hard-edge strategic competition. Indonesia is not. This difference in world views can’t be papered over with warm language or economic initiatives. It needs to be acknowledged, discussed and managed. The recent controversy over claims (subsequently retracted) by outgoing opposition leader Peter Dutton that Indonesian President Prabowo Subianto had publicly announced a request by Russia to host a naval base in Biak is a case in point. The episode revealed a deeper problem: a lack of trust in how each country interprets and communicates security concerns. In Indonesia, the hosting of any foreign military base—whether Australian, American, Chinese or Russian—is politically toxic and constitutionally restricted.
Suggesting otherwise touches a raw nerve. But not talking at all about the extent of Indonesia’s diplomatic and military relationships with China and Russia is not in Australia’s interests either. If both sides don’t learn to talk more candidly about these issues, they risk fuelling misunderstanding, strategic surprise and backlash.
Beyond differing approaches to strategic competition, the Australia-Indonesia relationship remains hampered by persistent misperceptions. In Indonesia, Australia is still often viewed as a ‘deputy sheriff’ of the US, with lingering suspicions about its intentions toward Indonesian sovereignty. Conversely, many in Australia continue to see Indonesia as vulnerable—both in terms of susceptibility to elite capture and manipulation by malign powers, as well as being too sensitive to any uncomfortable diplomatic discussions. This is why Albanese’s visit must be more than ceremonial. It should mark the start of a more honest phase in the relationship—one where the differences are not hidden but worked through. Albanese and Prabowo must reflect on how their comprehensive strategic partnership can become more strategic rather than just comprehensive; characterised by enduring, persistent and tangible gains.
There is plenty to celebrate. The DCA institutionalised what has been a growing defence partnership, including joint training, maritime cooperation and disaster response. It also allows for a larger number of joint exercises. Economically, Australia’s Southeast Asia strategy acknowledges Indonesia as a top-tier priority, backed by new investment and commercial ties. In this context, Albanese’s decision to return to Jakarta sends the right signal. It shows Indonesia matters.
Prabowo’s positive view of Australia also creates a window of opportunity. He has spoken warmly of Australia in the past, often referencing Canberra’s support for Indonesian independence. His new role as president gives him a chance to reset the tone in Jakarta, after a decade in which relations were cordial but limited in strategic depth. Albanese and Prabowo both want to work together—but goodwill alone is not a strategy.
That means augmenting the standard regular, senior-level dialogues and engagements on strategic affairs, not just trade and investment, to deliver tangible solutions to common threats and challenges. These should address hybrid threats, climate security, and the misuse of emerging technologies such as artificial intelligence. In the past, Australia and Indonesia have successfully cooperated on issues such as counterterrorism and people smuggling—there’s no reason we can’t do the same on today’s emerging risks, risks that will determine future sovereignty and prosperity for both countries.
Tangible cooperation breaks down misperceptions and builds strategic trust—so capability, distinct from intent (on both sides), is consistently understood. This gives Indonesia space to confidently articulate its concerns about regional order. And it allows Australia to assure Indonesia it does not seek to fuel bloc-based confrontation. The prime minister has an opportunity to shape how the Australian system conceives of Indonesia—not as a reluctant participant or passive neighbour, but as a strategic partner in its own right.

Gatra Priyandita is a senior analyst at ASPI. This article was originally published in The Australian.   Image of Prabowo meeting with Marles at the 9th ASEAN Defence Ministers’ Meeting: Kym Smith/Department of Defence.
-----------------------
Posted by at

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)