https://humanrightsmonitor.org/case/military-drone-attack-on-civilian-house-in-dekai-kills-papuan-17-year-old-pupil-one-person-injured/
1) Military drone attack on civilian house in Dekai kills Papuan 17-year-old pupil – one person injured
Photos taken at the site of incident immediately after the detonation
Remains of the explosive found at the detonation site
Relatives and community members carrying Listin Sam’s body away from the RSUD Dekai
Listin Sam’s relative speaking about the drone attack at the RSUD Dekai, Yahukimo Regency. He stressed that Listin Sam is a civilian victim, 26 November 2025
Relatives of Listin Sam mourn at the RSUD Dekai, 26 November 2025
Location: Dekai, Yahukimo regency, Highland Papua, Indonesia (-4.8638158, 139.4837298) Jalan Gunung, Dekai
Region: Indonesia, Highland Papua, Yahukimo, Dekai
Total number of victims: 2
| # | Number of Victims | Name, Details | Gender | Age | Group Affiliation | Violations |
| 1. | 1 | Listin Sam | male | 17 | Indigenous Peoples | execution, right to life, unlawful killing |
| 2. | 1 | Yondinus Dapla | male | adult | Indigenous Peoples | ill-treatment |
Perpetrator: , Indonesian Military (TNI)
https://tvwan.com.pg/news/7020?fbclid=IwY2xjawOULwpleHRuA2FlbQIxMABicmlkETF1NFQzQmlGQzJHR3pobzVic3J0YwZhcHBfaWQQMjIyMDM5MTc4ODIwMDg5MgABHlonWt226mA0a_LC-fu78cUM2ImZ8C5ZEUpxOQ-7eMNyGukzhwiDpbrqAGX0_aem_Zg0YU743huIK_SoAKz3UFg
He directed his questions to Prime Minister James Marape, seeking clarity on how the Papua New Guinea government is helping to advocate for West Papua amidst its ongoing statements to countries around the world involved in conflicts.
“Almost 5,000 people of West Papua have been killed fighting for their freedom.
“Mr Speaker, these are our brothers and we share the same land borders.
“What is the Government's stand on the issue of West Papua?” Donald asked.
In his response, Prime Minister Marape reassured the Parliament that Papua New Guinea has not forgotten the plight of the people in West Papua.
He emphasized the government’s commitment to upholding human rights and acknowledged PNG’s obligations to international treatirs, particularly the United Nations.
“PNG’s commitment to United Nations on human rights stands and we have never forgotten the issue of West Papua.”
The Prime Minister further highlighted the importance of maintaining a principled stance on human rights issues and highlighted the government's ongoing engagement with the topic at both national and international levels.
Colonel Donny Pramono, head of the Army Information Service, said the dual strategy has improved safety on the ground while helping stimulate the local economy and strengthen public welfare.
On the security front, the Army continues to deploy personnel across Papua and expand operations other than war (OMSP).
“These OMSP tasks include the RI-PNG border security mission, protection of national vital assets, safeguarding inhabited outermost islands, and providing VVIP security,” Pramono said.
The second pillar of the approach focuses on territorial development through community programs such as the TNI Manunggal Membangun Desa (TMMD) village development initiative, water-intake construction, and the clearing of farmland for local use.
Pramono said the strategy reinforces public trust by showing the government's presence through the Army, delivering both security and economic support.
Related news: Indonesian troops expand lifesaving medical outreach in Papua Highland
“This approach aims to build trust, expand access to basic services, and promote long-term stability,” he said, adding that the measures will continue to maintain a safe and conducive environment in Papua.
Defense Minister Sjafrie Sjamsoeddin previously said the Army would implement a “smart approach” to sustain security in the region.
“We will deploy troops in Papua and use a method called the smart approach, combining a soft approach, a territorial approach, and a hard approach involving tactical operations,” he said after a meeting with the House of Representatives’ Commission I on November 24.
He said the soft or territorial component consists of humanitarian-focused activities designed to support communities.
Related news: Fourteen armed rebels killed in Papua linked to deadly attacks: TNI
Translator: Resinta Sulistiyandari
Editor: Rahmad Nasution
Australia’s new security agreement with Indonesia comes at a critical moment. Jakarta’s non-aligned tradition offers lessons for a country still tied to a lopsided alliance with the US.
On 12 November, Australia and Indonesia announced a security agreement between the two governments. The agreement will be formally signed when the prime minister visits Jakarta early in the New Year.
It is not well understood in this country just how significant Indonesia is for Australia’s regional security. Despite a promising start to the relationship when Indonesia achieved independence from the Dutch in 1945, ties between Jakarta and Canberra since then have often been tense, largely because of Australia’s ham-fisted Asian diplomacy, although the Indonesians share some of the blame too.
Is the latest joint security agreement a signal that Australia is trying to balance its diplomacy with the Indonesians, while tracking towards a more independent course for itself in regional politics? Maybe. Foreign Minister Penny Wong recently claimed that the government has assumed the role of a “regional architect,” nurturing multi-lateral alliances across the South Pacific and Southeast Asia. The rhetoric is hopeful, but more hard work needs to be done to give substance to this foreign policy rhetoric. Indonesia has lessons to teach Australia on this score.
As a founding member of the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) Indonesia carefully avoided making alliances with either of the two emergent superpowers, the Soviet Union and the USA. It maintained its independence in the context of post-War anti-colonial movements leading countries like India, Vietnam and Indonesia to successfully resist attempts by their former European colonisers to return to their former colonies, following the defeat of the Japanese at the end of the Pacific War.
NAM was formalised at a conference in Bandung in 1955. Its membership was made up of mainly newly independent countries from the Global South. Three leaders stood out at Bandung: Tito of Yugoslavia, Nehru of India, and Sukarno of Indonesia. NAM’s ideals are worth recalling.
From the outset, NAM was a movement that rejected allying with big states trying to impose an “international rules based order” which overwhelmingly benefitted those big states, but which was (and is) indifferent at best, often exploitive, and at worst hostile to states in the Global South. The history of the Cold War is replete with attempts by the superpowers to persuade, bully, or bludgeon NAM states into choosing between their spheres of influence – attempts that many NAM states bravely resisted. NAM also championed policies and agreements promoting post-colonial security and economic development. It became a voice for the Global South struggling to be heard by the superpowers and their hangers-on in the Global North, including Australia.
Yet the superpowers were loftily unmoved by NAM’s desire to be heard. They ridiculed the idea that non-alignment was a realistic policy and sought to undermine the movement, even sometimes colluding to undermine what the NAM states were advocating. While the superpower bullies were able to relegate NAM to the margins of global politics, the ideals of NAM have persisted. Indonesia remains steadfast in resisting the siren songs of the big power alliances.
Australia should learn from Indonesia as it struggles to sustain its lop-sided security dependence on the United States. Keeping all big powers at arm’s length is a worthy NAM principle, especially when big power allies become erratic and more selfishly-focused (isolationist), while upping the ante on what they expect from their dependent allies. This is precisely what America is doing to Australia right now as Washington plays a cat and mouse game over the ludicrous AUKUS deal.
It’s time for Australia to detach itself from its dependency alliance with the United States. Indonesia can show us that it is possible to live without such an alliance. Indeed, because Jakarta has successfully resisted a formal alliance with Washington, the Americans never take Indonesia for granted. They do take Australia for granted – and we are more the fool for allowing them to do so.
Moreover, Indonesia has shown that by keeping its distance from America and other big powers (including Russia) it can still maintain a mutually respectful working relationship with them. By contrast (in case we’ve all forgotten), when the Howard government took the lead in defending East Timor against the TNI, Washington sat on its hands despite Howard’s ineffectual pleading for it to become involved.
It needs to be clearly understood that the US alliance never has been the security guarantee that most Australians naively believe it to be. This country has contributed far more per capita to the alliance than the Americans ever have. Trump’s tariffs and his contempt for all alliances and allies while he panders to evil leaders like Putin and Netanyahu should make it obvious that the alliance is a one-sided affair, entirely in the US’ interests, not Australia’s. Nor is this likely to change after Trump departs the White House.
Australia should seek Indonesia’s advice about forging a non-aligned foreign and security policy. This doesn’t mean going it alone. Working closely with other states with similar non-aligned ambitions, Australia could free itself from the manacles of ANZUS, dispense with AUKUS, and find new allies with similar interests in combatting the bullying of big powers.
Australia could become a formal member of NAM and help revive its appeal to states that seek a better world than the one that the current crop of big power leaders want for themselves. Their legacy will be junked by emerging generations of better educated, morally astute young leaders who understand that problems like climate change, gobal inequality and war can only be solved by global cooperation. The present generation of aging, narcissistic leaders – Putin, Trump, Netanyahu, Erdoğan, Xi, Kim, Orbán, and now Takaichi – is incapable of imagining a better, peaceful world. There’s not a statesman or woman among them.
Australia can learn from Indonesia about the benefits of becoming a successfully non-aligned state, regionally and globally, while contributing to reviving the principles of an expanded and influential Non-Aligned Movement. Hopefully a new generation of young leaders will soon emerge to replace the present second rate lot (think Albanese, Ley, Marles, Taylor …) who are mismanaging this country so woefully.
The views expressed in this article may or may not reflect those of Pearls and Irritations.
Allan Patience
Dr Allan Patience is an honorary fellow in political science in the University of Melbourne.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.