Rabu, 30 Januari 2008
I learn that Suharto, former genocidal dictator of Indonesia
In real international news, I learn that Suharto, former genocidal dictator of Indonesia, has finally kicked the bucket. Suharto originally came to power with the backing of the US government, who trusted him to “deal with” the Communist Party of Indonesia, at that time the largest outside the Stalinist bloc. He did this by indiscriminately slaughtering more than 600,000 people, many of them in no way connected to the Communist Party (as if that made a difference). Hundreds of thousands more murders followed in West Papua, East Timor and Aceh. Although he was overthrown in 1998, neither he nor his grotesquely corrupt (and consequently extremely rich) family have been brought to justice. This impunity, again, involves the collusion of the Western powers.
Letters: SMH 29 January 2008
SMH 29/1/08
I hope Kevin Rudd will not be going or sending a representative to Soeharto’s funeral. He was responsible for the deaths of half a million Indonesians in 1965, 200,000 in East Timor during Indonesia’s illegal occupation, and up to a 100,000 in West Papua since Indonesian took control of that territory in 1963. To offer condolences or attend his funeral is an insult to the families of the victims of his brutal regime.
Joe Collins
Australia West Papua Association, Mosman
The Australian 29/1/08
I KNOW we are not supposed to speak ill of the dead but let�s get real. Suharto was responsible for the deaths of at least 500,000 Indonesians in 1965, 200,000 in East Timor during Indonesia�s illegal occupation of it, and up to a 100,000 in West Papua since Indonesia took control of that territory in 1963. To offer condolences or attend his funeral would be an insult to the families of the victims of his brutal regime.
Joe Collins
Mosman, NSW
The Australian 29/1/08
THE tributes to Suharto have begged the question, could Indonesia�s development have been achieved without militarism and repression?
Foreign governments curried favour with Suharto and his rapacious armed forces to allow primarily mining and logging companies to extract the country�s resource wealth. This support gave the green light to a ruthless process of territorial expansion and occupation. The result is that the country we know today as Indonesia was built through military force.
The murder of countless thousands of opponents to Suharto�s brutal system was accepted as a cost of doing business with Indonesia. Commentators could turn to a survivor and ask them what Suharto�s legacy was. In the villages and towns of Papua, which are still living with military abuse and surveillance, the legacy remains an entrenched system of fear.
In giving the Javanese peasantry their much-needed hand-up, Suharto enriched his cronies and oversaw massive environmental destruction through resource exploitation across the archipelago. Yet had he for one second during those 32 years suggested a change to the way business was done and jeopardised the profits of multinationals, Suharto may have become the international community�s public enemy number one.
John Wing
Research Fellow,
Centre for Peace and Conflict Studies,
University of Sydney
I hope Kevin Rudd will not be going or sending a representative to Soeharto’s funeral. He was responsible for the deaths of half a million Indonesians in 1965, 200,000 in East Timor during Indonesia’s illegal occupation, and up to a 100,000 in West Papua since Indonesian took control of that territory in 1963. To offer condolences or attend his funeral is an insult to the families of the victims of his brutal regime.
Joe Collins
Australia West Papua Association, Mosman
The Australian 29/1/08
I KNOW we are not supposed to speak ill of the dead but let�s get real. Suharto was responsible for the deaths of at least 500,000 Indonesians in 1965, 200,000 in East Timor during Indonesia�s illegal occupation of it, and up to a 100,000 in West Papua since Indonesia took control of that territory in 1963. To offer condolences or attend his funeral would be an insult to the families of the victims of his brutal regime.
Joe Collins
Mosman, NSW
The Australian 29/1/08
THE tributes to Suharto have begged the question, could Indonesia�s development have been achieved without militarism and repression?
Foreign governments curried favour with Suharto and his rapacious armed forces to allow primarily mining and logging companies to extract the country�s resource wealth. This support gave the green light to a ruthless process of territorial expansion and occupation. The result is that the country we know today as Indonesia was built through military force.
The murder of countless thousands of opponents to Suharto�s brutal system was accepted as a cost of doing business with Indonesia. Commentators could turn to a survivor and ask them what Suharto�s legacy was. In the villages and towns of Papua, which are still living with military abuse and surveillance, the legacy remains an entrenched system of fear.
In giving the Javanese peasantry their much-needed hand-up, Suharto enriched his cronies and oversaw massive environmental destruction through resource exploitation across the archipelago. Yet had he for one second during those 32 years suggested a change to the way business was done and jeopardised the profits of multinationals, Suharto may have become the international community�s public enemy number one.
John Wing
Research Fellow,
Centre for Peace and Conflict Studies,
University of Sydney
The Oz on Suharto: at least the regime ran on time
rom crikey.com.au
Jeff Sparrow writes:
Ever wonder how official history would have assessed Saddam Hussein, had he not rashly interpreted US ambassador April Glaspie’s comments (”we have no opinion on the Arab-Arab conflicts, like your border disagreement with Kuwait”) as a green light to invade that country?
Check The Australian�s obituary for General Suharto and wonder no more. If Saddam had survived throughout the nineties as a loyal counterweight to Iran, he too could have been as a “strong, successful leader who got things done in a way that had rarely happened previously.”
“Saddam Hussein was certainly authoritarian,” opines the Oz, “and relied on the armed forces for support, but he was also pragmatic, secular and opposed to Islamic extremism.”
Oops! The passage above actually refers to Suharto. But you can see how the thing is done.
How would have our hypothetical obituarist handled the ticklish subject of the 150,000 people Saddam murdered? The Australian again:
There is, of course, much to be said against Suharto. Over three decades of his New Order regime, he utilised the military to impose a central government over an unlikely nation. Millions of people were killed in brutal crackdowns on communists and Chinese Indonesians.
�There were widespread human rights abuses, especially but not only in East Timor, Aceh and West Papua, and pervasive corruption� For all his failings, Suharto had many significant achievements.
Ah, that wonderful passive voice, so beloved by apologists. Millions (let�s say that again: millions!) of people were killed � but not, apparently, by anyone in particular. The deaths just happened, probably of their own accord: who can say?
Besides, it�s swings and roundabouts, snakes and ladders: on the one hand, mass murder on an almost genocidal scale; on the other, economic development and stability in the region.
As Tim Colebatch says in The Age, “I [do not] understand those who focus entirely on the massacres, the human rights violations and the corruption without conceding that Soeharto then used his power intelligently to guide Indonesia on a path of rapid economic growth�”
In that case, RIP Saddam Hussein! Wiki explains, “Saddam’s organizational prowess was credited with Iraq’s rapid pace of development in the 1970s; development went forward at such a fevered pitch that two million persons from other Arab countries and Yugoslavia worked in Iraq to meet the growing demand for labor.”
As for stability, why, Iraq under Saddam was rock-solid, what with the secret police and torture rooms and all.
Which is why a Hussein who remained a state department pet might even have posthumously enjoyed some of the verbal fel-atio that Greg Sheridan dispenses whenever a tyrant�s in the offing:
Indonesia�s Suharto was an authentic giant of Asia, a nation-builder, a dictator, a changer of history. He was also, for Australia, the most important and beneficial Asian leader in the entire period after World War II. This was once a widely held view among senior Australian policy-makers�Suharto wasa prime mover of history and his rule was of immeasurable benefit to Australia.
Of course, Sheridan knows he can only write that kind of stuff about mass murderers who specialised in exterminating the lesser races. Imagine the jowl-flapping fury of the Oz�s pundits were someone to stress the positive side of killing a million or so Americans!
But when little Freddie gags at discovering the origins of the tasty pork he enjoys, his kind mother replies: “Don�t worry, son � the pigs are used to it.”
Presumably, it�s the same with Indonesians and Timorese. They�re used to it � and if massacring a million. Untermenschen was of “immeasurable benefit to Autralia”, well, everyone likes crispy bacon for breakfast, don�t they?
Poor old Saddam. If he hadn�t got too cocky, his crimes would have been just as casually absolved. After all, the indifference to the toll from the Iraq occupation suggests that, unless we�re drumming up support for new wars, dead Arabs count even less than Indonesians.
Send your letters to boss@crikey.com.au
Jeff Sparrow writes:
Ever wonder how official history would have assessed Saddam Hussein, had he not rashly interpreted US ambassador April Glaspie’s comments (”we have no opinion on the Arab-Arab conflicts, like your border disagreement with Kuwait”) as a green light to invade that country?
Check The Australian�s obituary for General Suharto and wonder no more. If Saddam had survived throughout the nineties as a loyal counterweight to Iran, he too could have been as a “strong, successful leader who got things done in a way that had rarely happened previously.”
“Saddam Hussein was certainly authoritarian,” opines the Oz, “and relied on the armed forces for support, but he was also pragmatic, secular and opposed to Islamic extremism.”
Oops! The passage above actually refers to Suharto. But you can see how the thing is done.
How would have our hypothetical obituarist handled the ticklish subject of the 150,000 people Saddam murdered? The Australian again:
There is, of course, much to be said against Suharto. Over three decades of his New Order regime, he utilised the military to impose a central government over an unlikely nation. Millions of people were killed in brutal crackdowns on communists and Chinese Indonesians.
�There were widespread human rights abuses, especially but not only in East Timor, Aceh and West Papua, and pervasive corruption� For all his failings, Suharto had many significant achievements.
Ah, that wonderful passive voice, so beloved by apologists. Millions (let�s say that again: millions!) of people were killed � but not, apparently, by anyone in particular. The deaths just happened, probably of their own accord: who can say?
Besides, it�s swings and roundabouts, snakes and ladders: on the one hand, mass murder on an almost genocidal scale; on the other, economic development and stability in the region.
As Tim Colebatch says in The Age, “I [do not] understand those who focus entirely on the massacres, the human rights violations and the corruption without conceding that Soeharto then used his power intelligently to guide Indonesia on a path of rapid economic growth�”
In that case, RIP Saddam Hussein! Wiki explains, “Saddam’s organizational prowess was credited with Iraq’s rapid pace of development in the 1970s; development went forward at such a fevered pitch that two million persons from other Arab countries and Yugoslavia worked in Iraq to meet the growing demand for labor.”
As for stability, why, Iraq under Saddam was rock-solid, what with the secret police and torture rooms and all.
Which is why a Hussein who remained a state department pet might even have posthumously enjoyed some of the verbal fel-atio that Greg Sheridan dispenses whenever a tyrant�s in the offing:
Indonesia�s Suharto was an authentic giant of Asia, a nation-builder, a dictator, a changer of history. He was also, for Australia, the most important and beneficial Asian leader in the entire period after World War II. This was once a widely held view among senior Australian policy-makers�Suharto wasa prime mover of history and his rule was of immeasurable benefit to Australia.
Of course, Sheridan knows he can only write that kind of stuff about mass murderers who specialised in exterminating the lesser races. Imagine the jowl-flapping fury of the Oz�s pundits were someone to stress the positive side of killing a million or so Americans!
But when little Freddie gags at discovering the origins of the tasty pork he enjoys, his kind mother replies: “Don�t worry, son � the pigs are used to it.”
Presumably, it�s the same with Indonesians and Timorese. They�re used to it � and if massacring a million. Untermenschen was of “immeasurable benefit to Autralia”, well, everyone likes crispy bacon for breakfast, don�t they?
Poor old Saddam. If he hadn�t got too cocky, his crimes would have been just as casually absolved. After all, the indifference to the toll from the Iraq occupation suggests that, unless we�re drumming up support for new wars, dead Arabs count even less than Indonesians.
Send your letters to boss@crikey.com.au
The Telegraph was right to highlight the millions killed under Suharto’s regime
Dear Sir,
The Telegraph was right to highlight the millions killed under Suharto’s regime (Suharto’s death revives memories of the millions killed under his rule, 28 January 2008).
His regime was responsible for a large number of human rights violations, including the deaths of over half a million political opponents, the effective censorship of the media and the banning of political dissent.
However, Amnesty International is deeply concerned that very few people have been brought to justice for their part in these atrocities. All the victims should also receive due compensation and reparations as a matter of priority.
In addition, the general situation in the country remains a concern for Amnesty International. Peaceful demonstrators have been killed by the security forces, discrimination remains widespread, and individuals continue to be persecuted for expressing their desire for independence in the Indonesian regions of Moluku and Papua.
Amnesty International hopes that Indonesia can now deliver justice for the millions that suffered under Suharto, while breaking with the past and improving human rights for present and future generations.
Yours faithfully,
Kate Allen
Director of Amnesty International UK
——————————————————————————————————
Dear Sir,
I read with interest your article on the death of General Suharto, the former president of Indonesia (Daughter calls for forgiveness as ex-dictator Suharto dies, 28 January 2008).
Forgiveness is one thing, but we should not forget the large number of human rights violations conducted in his name.
Suharto’s regime was responsible for deaths of over half a million political opponents, the effective censorship of the media and the banning of political dissent.
It remains a deep regret to Amnesty International that very few people have ever been tried for their part in these crimes.
All those responsible should be brought to justice, and victims should receive due compensation and reparations as a matter of priority.
The general situation in Indonesia remains a concern for Amnesty International. Peaceful demonstrators have been killed by the security forces, discrimination remains widespread and individuals continue to be persecuted for expressing their desire for independence in the Indonesian regions of Moluku and Papua.
Amnesty International hopes that Indonesia can now deliver justice for the millions that suffered under Suharto, while breaking with the past and improving human rights for present and future generations.
Yours faithfully,
Kate Allen
Director of Amnesty International UK
The Telegraph was right to highlight the millions killed under Suharto’s regime (Suharto’s death revives memories of the millions killed under his rule, 28 January 2008).
His regime was responsible for a large number of human rights violations, including the deaths of over half a million political opponents, the effective censorship of the media and the banning of political dissent.
However, Amnesty International is deeply concerned that very few people have been brought to justice for their part in these atrocities. All the victims should also receive due compensation and reparations as a matter of priority.
In addition, the general situation in the country remains a concern for Amnesty International. Peaceful demonstrators have been killed by the security forces, discrimination remains widespread, and individuals continue to be persecuted for expressing their desire for independence in the Indonesian regions of Moluku and Papua.
Amnesty International hopes that Indonesia can now deliver justice for the millions that suffered under Suharto, while breaking with the past and improving human rights for present and future generations.
Yours faithfully,
Kate Allen
Director of Amnesty International UK
——————————————————————————————————
Dear Sir,
I read with interest your article on the death of General Suharto, the former president of Indonesia (Daughter calls for forgiveness as ex-dictator Suharto dies, 28 January 2008).
Forgiveness is one thing, but we should not forget the large number of human rights violations conducted in his name.
Suharto’s regime was responsible for deaths of over half a million political opponents, the effective censorship of the media and the banning of political dissent.
It remains a deep regret to Amnesty International that very few people have ever been tried for their part in these crimes.
All those responsible should be brought to justice, and victims should receive due compensation and reparations as a matter of priority.
The general situation in Indonesia remains a concern for Amnesty International. Peaceful demonstrators have been killed by the security forces, discrimination remains widespread and individuals continue to be persecuted for expressing their desire for independence in the Indonesian regions of Moluku and Papua.
Amnesty International hopes that Indonesia can now deliver justice for the millions that suffered under Suharto, while breaking with the past and improving human rights for present and future generations.
Yours faithfully,
Kate Allen
Director of Amnesty International UK
INDONESIA: Let the death of Soeharto be the moment of truth
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASEAHRC-STM-029-2008January 29, 2007
A Statement by the Asian Human Rights Commission
Soeharto breathed his last in the quiet confines of Pertamina Hospital in South Jakarta in stark contrast to the hundreds of thousands that were compelled to breathe their last in agony in prisons, caves, rivers or places of detention during his rule. There were cases of victims being shot or the heads chopped off at the mouths of caves � no one knowing how or under what circumstances they died in those caves. Only a recent excavation at Wonosobo revealed the signs of misery that these victims may have suffered prior to their ignominious deaths in the cave. A similar fate had awaited those who were imprisoned on Buru Island which is still known as “Soeharto’s Gulag”. The famous Indonesian author Pramoedya Ananta Toer, who for many years was not allowed to publish his writings, was imprisoned on the island for 14 years. Until recently there were several cemeteries on the island to marking the graves of those who died of starvation, torture and disease.
While Soeharto’s era might be over, many of his political allies are still continuing policies of political discrimination from within the current governing league in Indonesia. Their attempts to cover up the atrocities committed by Soeharto and themselves continue to distort the historical picture of the nation. Indonesia is trying to establish an identity based on values of democracy and human dignity, but what Soeharto and his supporters did and are doing is blocking an honest appraisal of his time in office. Many of the victims are still alive unable to find redress which is amalgamated by a lack of acknowledgement of their sufferings through a distortion of history.
The persecution commenced in 1965 by Soeharto continued for decades with various forms of humiliation, deprivation, discrimination and isolation used under his watch. The victims were punished for generations. It was made difficult even for the children of these ‘ex-tapol’ prisoners to gain access to a good school, employment or social benefits. The worst of it all was the destruction of a system by which justice could have been obtained by the victims.
While there is a plethora of praises for the so called “father of development”, the greatest disrespect that he brought to the nation, has not been said. He not only introduced autocratic patriarchy under a system of ‘Pancasila’, which in a subtle manner undermined not only the system of democratic governance, but also the all important system of prosecution. The rural Pancasila served as the suppressing ideology. Under this guise bodies were created even in the most remote villages to monitor and conduct surveillance in order to stifle any form of freedom of expression and association. The same ideology provided the justification of all power both political and economic concentrated in the hands of Soeharto which eventually lead to staggering corruption and nepotism. Transparency International once declared Soeharto as Asia’s most corrupt leader.
To his dubious credentials must be added the forceful annexation of the eastern part of Timor. The harsh repression of the democracy movement in East Timor is estimated to have resulted in the deaths of over 180,000 persons. The same callous treatment was applied to the situations in West Papua and Aceh.
“General Suharto has died in bed and not in jail, escaping justice for his numerous crimes in East Timor and throughout the Indonesian archipelago,” was the remark made by the group East Timor Action Network, as was quoted by the Bangkok Post. The real success of Soeharto was his elimination of any form of justice being meted out to the victims, and thus allowing impunity to reign. All attempts by civil society organizations and more recently by the attorney general to stand trial were thwarted by the persistent claim by his lawyers and the doctors that he is unfit to stand trial. A large section of the people see the death of Soeharto as a missed opportunity for sentence to be passed on the justice system itself crippled and plagued with its own culture of mpunity. This harsh reality was revealed in the trial of the Indonesians accused of war crimes and human rights violations in East Timor at the Ad-Hoc Human Rights Tribunal. Ironically all Indonesians, except for an Eat Timorese, were found not guilty.
The Asian Human Rights Commission fervently hopes that the death of Soeharto be the beginning of a new hope for the reign of justice � a reform of the police, the attorney general and the judiciary, thus heralding a rebirth of the entire prosecution system that was ruined by the legacy of Soeharto.
# # #
About AHRC: The Asian Human Rights Commission is a regional non-governmental organisation monitoring and lobbying human rights issues in Asia. The Hong Kong-based group was founded in 1984.
A Statement by the Asian Human Rights Commission
Soeharto breathed his last in the quiet confines of Pertamina Hospital in South Jakarta in stark contrast to the hundreds of thousands that were compelled to breathe their last in agony in prisons, caves, rivers or places of detention during his rule. There were cases of victims being shot or the heads chopped off at the mouths of caves � no one knowing how or under what circumstances they died in those caves. Only a recent excavation at Wonosobo revealed the signs of misery that these victims may have suffered prior to their ignominious deaths in the cave. A similar fate had awaited those who were imprisoned on Buru Island which is still known as “Soeharto’s Gulag”. The famous Indonesian author Pramoedya Ananta Toer, who for many years was not allowed to publish his writings, was imprisoned on the island for 14 years. Until recently there were several cemeteries on the island to marking the graves of those who died of starvation, torture and disease.
While Soeharto’s era might be over, many of his political allies are still continuing policies of political discrimination from within the current governing league in Indonesia. Their attempts to cover up the atrocities committed by Soeharto and themselves continue to distort the historical picture of the nation. Indonesia is trying to establish an identity based on values of democracy and human dignity, but what Soeharto and his supporters did and are doing is blocking an honest appraisal of his time in office. Many of the victims are still alive unable to find redress which is amalgamated by a lack of acknowledgement of their sufferings through a distortion of history.
The persecution commenced in 1965 by Soeharto continued for decades with various forms of humiliation, deprivation, discrimination and isolation used under his watch. The victims were punished for generations. It was made difficult even for the children of these ‘ex-tapol’ prisoners to gain access to a good school, employment or social benefits. The worst of it all was the destruction of a system by which justice could have been obtained by the victims.
While there is a plethora of praises for the so called “father of development”, the greatest disrespect that he brought to the nation, has not been said. He not only introduced autocratic patriarchy under a system of ‘Pancasila’, which in a subtle manner undermined not only the system of democratic governance, but also the all important system of prosecution. The rural Pancasila served as the suppressing ideology. Under this guise bodies were created even in the most remote villages to monitor and conduct surveillance in order to stifle any form of freedom of expression and association. The same ideology provided the justification of all power both political and economic concentrated in the hands of Soeharto which eventually lead to staggering corruption and nepotism. Transparency International once declared Soeharto as Asia’s most corrupt leader.
To his dubious credentials must be added the forceful annexation of the eastern part of Timor. The harsh repression of the democracy movement in East Timor is estimated to have resulted in the deaths of over 180,000 persons. The same callous treatment was applied to the situations in West Papua and Aceh.
“General Suharto has died in bed and not in jail, escaping justice for his numerous crimes in East Timor and throughout the Indonesian archipelago,” was the remark made by the group East Timor Action Network, as was quoted by the Bangkok Post. The real success of Soeharto was his elimination of any form of justice being meted out to the victims, and thus allowing impunity to reign. All attempts by civil society organizations and more recently by the attorney general to stand trial were thwarted by the persistent claim by his lawyers and the doctors that he is unfit to stand trial. A large section of the people see the death of Soeharto as a missed opportunity for sentence to be passed on the justice system itself crippled and plagued with its own culture of mpunity. This harsh reality was revealed in the trial of the Indonesians accused of war crimes and human rights violations in East Timor at the Ad-Hoc Human Rights Tribunal. Ironically all Indonesians, except for an Eat Timorese, were found not guilty.
The Asian Human Rights Commission fervently hopes that the death of Soeharto be the beginning of a new hope for the reign of justice � a reform of the police, the attorney general and the judiciary, thus heralding a rebirth of the entire prosecution system that was ruined by the legacy of Soeharto.
# # #
About AHRC: The Asian Human Rights Commission is a regional non-governmental organisation monitoring and lobbying human rights issues in Asia. The Hong Kong-based group was founded in 1984.
Amnesty International USA statement: Suharto leaves violent legacy
http://www.amnestyusa.org/document.php?lang=e&id=ENGUSA20080128001
NATIONAL USA
PRESS RELEASE
January 28, 2008
Ex-General Suharto of Indonesia died quietly in bed at age 86, unlike up to a million Indonesians his loyalists had killed after taking power in a coup, and at least a hundred thousand killed in East Timor. Suharto was a brutal dictator, and his death does not end his violent legacy.
After Suharto resigned in disgrace in 1998, attempts to charge him for his crimes proved futile and charges were dropped. The Indonesian military continues to dominate politics and business.
Amnesty International USA is particularly concerned by United States support of Indonesia’s military (TNI). In November 2006, Congress defined restrictions on Foreign Military Financing (FMF) and export of “lethal” military equipment to Indonesia until there was accountability by TNI, especially their militias for killings and violence following East Timor’s 1999 vote for independence. Two days after the bill became law, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, citing the “war on terror,” issued a waiver removing these restrictions.
Perpetrators of human rights violations continue to enjoy impunity for violations which occurred in East Timor and in Aceh before the tsunami, and continue in Papua, Indonesia. Despite promises to improve human rights, such abuses continue in Papua, where government forces torture, kill and imprison opposition figures and threaten church and community leaders who sometimes “disappear.” Two Papuans, whom Amnesty International believes are prisoners of conscience, were given long prison sentences for non-violent expression of their beliefs.
Contact:
etanetanetanetanetanetanetanetanetanetanetanetanETAN welcomes your financial support. For more info:http://etan.org/etan/donate.htm
NATIONAL USA
PRESS RELEASE
January 28, 2008
Ex-General Suharto of Indonesia died quietly in bed at age 86, unlike up to a million Indonesians his loyalists had killed after taking power in a coup, and at least a hundred thousand killed in East Timor. Suharto was a brutal dictator, and his death does not end his violent legacy.
After Suharto resigned in disgrace in 1998, attempts to charge him for his crimes proved futile and charges were dropped. The Indonesian military continues to dominate politics and business.
Amnesty International USA is particularly concerned by United States support of Indonesia’s military (TNI). In November 2006, Congress defined restrictions on Foreign Military Financing (FMF) and export of “lethal” military equipment to Indonesia until there was accountability by TNI, especially their militias for killings and violence following East Timor’s 1999 vote for independence. Two days after the bill became law, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, citing the “war on terror,” issued a waiver removing these restrictions.
Perpetrators of human rights violations continue to enjoy impunity for violations which occurred in East Timor and in Aceh before the tsunami, and continue in Papua, Indonesia. Despite promises to improve human rights, such abuses continue in Papua, where government forces torture, kill and imprison opposition figures and threaten church and community leaders who sometimes “disappear.” Two Papuans, whom Amnesty International believes are prisoners of conscience, were given long prison sentences for non-violent expression of their beliefs.
Contact:
etanetanetanetanetanetanetanetanetanetanetanetanETAN welcomes your financial support. For more info:http://etan.org/etan/donate.htm
The Courier Mail (Australia) : Yudhoyono backs brutal Papua role
January 29, 2008 Tuesday
Marianne Kearney IN JAKARTA
INDONESIAN President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono yesterday gave extraordinary praise for former dictator Suharto’s role in the brutal military operation in Papua which killed thousands of tribesman.
Leading yesterday’s state funeral for Suharto in Solo, Mr Yudhoyono called on all Indonesians to remember the achievements of his 32-year rule, which was punctuated by massive human rights abuses.
The President commended Suharto for leading Operation Mandala, the early 1960s military operation aimed at intimidating the local population and pressuring then colonial ruler, The Netherlands, into handing the territory to Indonesia.
“In 1962, he led the forces which bravely struggled for West Irian (Papua),” said Mr Yudhoyono.
The operation paved the way for Indonesia to formally take control of the territory in 1969.
Human rights groups say up to 100,000 Papuans have died as a result of actions by the Indonesian military and security forces.
Before Operation Mandala, the Dutch had been preparing West Irian for independence.
But the US — fearing Indonesia might move further to the left — pressured The Netherlands into allowing West Irian to be put under United Nations control.
The UN ceded the territory to Indonesia and held a much criticised Act of Free Choice in 1969, in which a handful of tribal chiefs were intimidated into voting to join Indonesia.
Mr Yudhoyono’s comment is a signal to both Papuans and Australia that the current administration will not tolerate dissent in the province, where the Free Papua Movement has waged a low-level guerilla war since 1969.
A diplomatic tussle between Canberra and Jakarta flared in 2006 when Australia granted political asylum to a boatload of Papuans who said they were fleeing military persecution because of their peaceful support for independence.
Indonesia suspected Australia was covertly supporting independence activists, despite repeated official statements on Canberra’s support for Indonesian territorial integrity.
Papua’s guerilla movement has kept a low profile over the past few years.
But church groups, activists and students have continued to campaign peacefully for independence or demanded the expulsion of the Indonesian military from the jungle-clad province. Analysts say Jakarta now fears that these activists, especially the overseas campaigners, could garner international sympathy for their cause, just as exiled East Timorese successfully campaigned for independence.
East Timorese Prime Minister Xanana Gusmao flew from Dili to Solo yesterday to attend the Suharto funeral.
Mr Gusmao, who led a guerilla struggle against Indonesia’s 1975-99 occupation of East Timor, said Timorese should pay tribute to the man who helped develop their country.
“Thank God, Pak Harto did many things to develop this country over the 24 years, although he also did a lot of terrible things. But we must forgive his sins,” he said.
Marianne Kearney IN JAKARTA
INDONESIAN President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono yesterday gave extraordinary praise for former dictator Suharto’s role in the brutal military operation in Papua which killed thousands of tribesman.
Leading yesterday’s state funeral for Suharto in Solo, Mr Yudhoyono called on all Indonesians to remember the achievements of his 32-year rule, which was punctuated by massive human rights abuses.
The President commended Suharto for leading Operation Mandala, the early 1960s military operation aimed at intimidating the local population and pressuring then colonial ruler, The Netherlands, into handing the territory to Indonesia.
“In 1962, he led the forces which bravely struggled for West Irian (Papua),” said Mr Yudhoyono.
The operation paved the way for Indonesia to formally take control of the territory in 1969.
Human rights groups say up to 100,000 Papuans have died as a result of actions by the Indonesian military and security forces.
Before Operation Mandala, the Dutch had been preparing West Irian for independence.
But the US — fearing Indonesia might move further to the left — pressured The Netherlands into allowing West Irian to be put under United Nations control.
The UN ceded the territory to Indonesia and held a much criticised Act of Free Choice in 1969, in which a handful of tribal chiefs were intimidated into voting to join Indonesia.
Mr Yudhoyono’s comment is a signal to both Papuans and Australia that the current administration will not tolerate dissent in the province, where the Free Papua Movement has waged a low-level guerilla war since 1969.
A diplomatic tussle between Canberra and Jakarta flared in 2006 when Australia granted political asylum to a boatload of Papuans who said they were fleeing military persecution because of their peaceful support for independence.
Indonesia suspected Australia was covertly supporting independence activists, despite repeated official statements on Canberra’s support for Indonesian territorial integrity.
Papua’s guerilla movement has kept a low profile over the past few years.
But church groups, activists and students have continued to campaign peacefully for independence or demanded the expulsion of the Indonesian military from the jungle-clad province. Analysts say Jakarta now fears that these activists, especially the overseas campaigners, could garner international sympathy for their cause, just as exiled East Timorese successfully campaigned for independence.
East Timorese Prime Minister Xanana Gusmao flew from Dili to Solo yesterday to attend the Suharto funeral.
Mr Gusmao, who led a guerilla struggle against Indonesia’s 1975-99 occupation of East Timor, said Timorese should pay tribute to the man who helped develop their country.
“Thank God, Pak Harto did many things to develop this country over the 24 years, although he also did a lot of terrible things. But we must forgive his sins,” he said.
Selasa, 29 Januari 2008
Suharto was Indonesia’s Pol Pot: Sukarno widow
Posted on Januari 29, 2008.
The Japanese widow of Indonesia’s founding president Sukarno says she will never forgive his successor Suharto for his repression, and has likened him to Pol Pot. Suharto seized power from Sukarno in 1965-66 and ruled with an iron fist for another three decades.
“I don’t want to lash out at a dead man but I cannot forgive Suharto,” Ratna Sari Dewi Sukarno, Sukarno’s third wife said.
“He was Indonesia’s Pol Pot,” she said, referring to the late leader of Cambodia’s genocidal Khmer Rouge. Dewi, a former bar hostess born as Naoko Nemoto, married Sukarno at age 19 in 1962 after he was charmed by her on a state visit to Tokyo.
After Sukarno died under house arrest in 1970, she returned to Japan where she has become a television personality and runs a jewellery and cosmetics business.
Despite Indonesia’s economic progress under Suharto, his tenure was marked by repression, from the killingsof at least 500,000 communists and their sympathisers from 1966, to invading East Timor and quelling separatist movements in Aceh and Papua.
Dewi blamed Suharto both for the death of her husband, “the man who declared independence and became Indonesia’s first president,” and for the mass killings around the country.
“Although he had a soft face, he could be cruel and heartless at the same time,” she said.
“You could not tell what he was like on the inside.
“What he said and what he did were two different things.”
She scolded Suharto for not making court appearances late in his life to answer corruption charges, citing illness.
“Even today, many Indonesians suffer from that legacy and the income gap continues to widen,” Dewi said.
“He ended his life living among friends,” she said.
“I think he was a very lucky man.”
Suharto was buried today in a state funeral in central Java after a long illness.
- AFP
The Japanese widow of Indonesia’s founding president Sukarno says she will never forgive his successor Suharto for his repression, and has likened him to Pol Pot. Suharto seized power from Sukarno in 1965-66 and ruled with an iron fist for another three decades.
“I don’t want to lash out at a dead man but I cannot forgive Suharto,” Ratna Sari Dewi Sukarno, Sukarno’s third wife said.
“He was Indonesia’s Pol Pot,” she said, referring to the late leader of Cambodia’s genocidal Khmer Rouge. Dewi, a former bar hostess born as Naoko Nemoto, married Sukarno at age 19 in 1962 after he was charmed by her on a state visit to Tokyo.
After Sukarno died under house arrest in 1970, she returned to Japan where she has become a television personality and runs a jewellery and cosmetics business.
Despite Indonesia’s economic progress under Suharto, his tenure was marked by repression, from the killingsof at least 500,000 communists and their sympathisers from 1966, to invading East Timor and quelling separatist movements in Aceh and Papua.
Dewi blamed Suharto both for the death of her husband, “the man who declared independence and became Indonesia’s first president,” and for the mass killings around the country.
“Although he had a soft face, he could be cruel and heartless at the same time,” she said.
“You could not tell what he was like on the inside.
“What he said and what he did were two different things.”
She scolded Suharto for not making court appearances late in his life to answer corruption charges, citing illness.
“Even today, many Indonesians suffer from that legacy and the income gap continues to widen,” Dewi said.
“He ended his life living among friends,” she said.
“I think he was a very lucky man.”
Suharto was buried today in a state funeral in central Java after a long illness.
- AFP
Our model dictator: The death of Suharto is a reminder of the west’s ignoble role in propping up a murderous regime
http://www.guardian.co.uk/indonesia/Story/0,,2248009,00.html
John Pilger
Monday January 28, 2008
The Guardian
In my film Death of a Nation, there is a sequence filmed on board an Australian aircraft flying over the island of Timor. A party is in progress, and two men in suits are toasting each other in champagne. “This is an historically unique moment,” says one of them, “that is truly uniquely historical.”
This was Gareth Evans, Australia’s then foreign minister. The other man was Ali Alatas, the principal mouthpiece of the Indonesian dictator General Suharto, who died yesterday. The year was 1989, and the two were making a grotesquely symbolic flight to celebrate the signing of a treaty that would allow Australia and the international oil and gas companies to exploit the seabed off East Timor, then illegally and viciously occupied by Suharto. The prize, according to Evans, was “zillions of dollars”.
Beneath them lay a land of crosses: great black crosses etched against the sky, crosses on peaks, crosses in tiers on the hillsides. Filming clandestinely in East Timor, I would walk into the scrub, and there were the crosses. They littered the earth and crowded the eye. In 1993, the foreign affairs committee of Australia’s parliament reported that “at least 200,000″ had died under Indonesia’s occupation: almost a third of the population. Yet East Timor’s horror, foretold and nurtured by the US, Britain and Australia, was a sequel. “No single American action in the period after 1945,” wrote the historian Gabriel Kolko, “was as bloodthirsty as its role in Indonesia, for it tried to initiate the massacre.” He was referring to Suharto’s seizure of power in 1965-6, which caused the violent deaths of up to a million people.
To understand the significance of Suharto is to look beneath the surface of the current world order: the so-called global economy and the ruthless cynicism of those who run it. Suharto was our model mass murderer - “our” is used here advisedly. “One of our very best and most valuable friends,” Thatcher called him. For three decades the south-east Asian department of the Foreign Office worked tirelessly to minimise the crimes of Suharto’s gestapo, known as Kopassus, who gunned down people with British-supplied Heckler & Koch machine guns from British-supplied Tactica “riot control” vehicles.
A Foreign Office speciality was smearing witnesses to the bombing of East Timorese villages by British-supplied Hawk aircraft - until Robin Cook was forced to admit it was true. Almost a billion pounds in export credit guarantees financed the sale of the Hawks, paid for by the British taxpayer while the arms industry reaped the profit.
Only the Australians were more obsequious. “We know your people love you,” the prime minister Bob Hawke told the dictator to his face. His successor, Paul Keating, regarded the tyrant as a father figure. Paul Kelly, a prominent Murdoch retainer, led a group of major newspaper editors to Jakarta, to fawn before the mass murderer even though they all knew his grisly record.
Here lies a clue as to why Suharto, unlike Saddam Hussein, died not on the gallows but surrounded by the finest medical team his secret billions could buy. Ralph McGehee, a senior CIA operations officer in the 1960s, describes the terror of Suharto’s takeover in 1965-6 as “the model operation” for the US-backed coup that got rid of Salvador Allende in Chile seven years later. “The CIA forged a document purporting to reveal a leftist plot to murder Chilean military leaders,” he wrote, “[just like] what happened in Indonesia in 1965.” The US embassy in Jakarta supplied Suharto with a “zap list” of Indonesian Communist party members and crossed off the names when they were killed or captured. Roland Challis, BBC south-east Asia correspondent at the time, told me how the British government was secretly involved in this slaughter. “British warships escorted a ship full of Indonesian troops down the Malacca Straits so they could take part in the terrible holocaust,” he said. “I and other correspondents were unaware of this at the time … There was a deal, you see.”
The deal was that Indonesia under Suharto would offer up what Richard Nixon had called “the richest hoard of natural resources, the greatest prize in south-east Asia”. In November 1967 the greatest prize was handed out at a remarkable three-day conference sponsored by the Time-Life Corporation in Geneva. Led by David Rockefeller, all the corporate giants were represented: the major oil companies and banks, General Motors, Imperial Chemical Industries, British American Tobacco, Siemens, US Steel and many others. Across the table sat Suharto’s US-trained economists who agreed to the corporate takeover of their country, sector by sector. The Freeport company got a mountain of copper in West Papua. A US/European consortium got the nickel. The giant Alcoa company got the biggest slice of Indonesia’s bauxite. America, Japanese and French companies got the tropical forests of Sumatra. When the plunder was complete, President Lyndon Johnson sent his congratulations on “a magnificent story of opportunity seen and promise awakened”. Thirty years later, with the genocide in East Timor also complete, the World Bank described the Suharto dictatorship as a “model pupil”.
Shortly before the death of Alan Clark, who under Thatcher was the minister responsible for supplying Suharto with most of his weapons, I interviewed him, and asked: “Did it bother you personally that you were causing such mayhem and human suffering?”
“No, not in the slightest,” he replied. “It never entered my head.”
“I ask the question because I read you are a vegetarian and are seriously concerned with the way animals are killed.”
“Yeah?”
“Doesn’t that concern extend to humans?”
“Curiously not.”
johnpilger.com
John Pilger
Monday January 28, 2008
The Guardian
In my film Death of a Nation, there is a sequence filmed on board an Australian aircraft flying over the island of Timor. A party is in progress, and two men in suits are toasting each other in champagne. “This is an historically unique moment,” says one of them, “that is truly uniquely historical.”
This was Gareth Evans, Australia’s then foreign minister. The other man was Ali Alatas, the principal mouthpiece of the Indonesian dictator General Suharto, who died yesterday. The year was 1989, and the two were making a grotesquely symbolic flight to celebrate the signing of a treaty that would allow Australia and the international oil and gas companies to exploit the seabed off East Timor, then illegally and viciously occupied by Suharto. The prize, according to Evans, was “zillions of dollars”.
Beneath them lay a land of crosses: great black crosses etched against the sky, crosses on peaks, crosses in tiers on the hillsides. Filming clandestinely in East Timor, I would walk into the scrub, and there were the crosses. They littered the earth and crowded the eye. In 1993, the foreign affairs committee of Australia’s parliament reported that “at least 200,000″ had died under Indonesia’s occupation: almost a third of the population. Yet East Timor’s horror, foretold and nurtured by the US, Britain and Australia, was a sequel. “No single American action in the period after 1945,” wrote the historian Gabriel Kolko, “was as bloodthirsty as its role in Indonesia, for it tried to initiate the massacre.” He was referring to Suharto’s seizure of power in 1965-6, which caused the violent deaths of up to a million people.
To understand the significance of Suharto is to look beneath the surface of the current world order: the so-called global economy and the ruthless cynicism of those who run it. Suharto was our model mass murderer - “our” is used here advisedly. “One of our very best and most valuable friends,” Thatcher called him. For three decades the south-east Asian department of the Foreign Office worked tirelessly to minimise the crimes of Suharto’s gestapo, known as Kopassus, who gunned down people with British-supplied Heckler & Koch machine guns from British-supplied Tactica “riot control” vehicles.
A Foreign Office speciality was smearing witnesses to the bombing of East Timorese villages by British-supplied Hawk aircraft - until Robin Cook was forced to admit it was true. Almost a billion pounds in export credit guarantees financed the sale of the Hawks, paid for by the British taxpayer while the arms industry reaped the profit.
Only the Australians were more obsequious. “We know your people love you,” the prime minister Bob Hawke told the dictator to his face. His successor, Paul Keating, regarded the tyrant as a father figure. Paul Kelly, a prominent Murdoch retainer, led a group of major newspaper editors to Jakarta, to fawn before the mass murderer even though they all knew his grisly record.
Here lies a clue as to why Suharto, unlike Saddam Hussein, died not on the gallows but surrounded by the finest medical team his secret billions could buy. Ralph McGehee, a senior CIA operations officer in the 1960s, describes the terror of Suharto’s takeover in 1965-6 as “the model operation” for the US-backed coup that got rid of Salvador Allende in Chile seven years later. “The CIA forged a document purporting to reveal a leftist plot to murder Chilean military leaders,” he wrote, “[just like] what happened in Indonesia in 1965.” The US embassy in Jakarta supplied Suharto with a “zap list” of Indonesian Communist party members and crossed off the names when they were killed or captured. Roland Challis, BBC south-east Asia correspondent at the time, told me how the British government was secretly involved in this slaughter. “British warships escorted a ship full of Indonesian troops down the Malacca Straits so they could take part in the terrible holocaust,” he said. “I and other correspondents were unaware of this at the time … There was a deal, you see.”
The deal was that Indonesia under Suharto would offer up what Richard Nixon had called “the richest hoard of natural resources, the greatest prize in south-east Asia”. In November 1967 the greatest prize was handed out at a remarkable three-day conference sponsored by the Time-Life Corporation in Geneva. Led by David Rockefeller, all the corporate giants were represented: the major oil companies and banks, General Motors, Imperial Chemical Industries, British American Tobacco, Siemens, US Steel and many others. Across the table sat Suharto’s US-trained economists who agreed to the corporate takeover of their country, sector by sector. The Freeport company got a mountain of copper in West Papua. A US/European consortium got the nickel. The giant Alcoa company got the biggest slice of Indonesia’s bauxite. America, Japanese and French companies got the tropical forests of Sumatra. When the plunder was complete, President Lyndon Johnson sent his congratulations on “a magnificent story of opportunity seen and promise awakened”. Thirty years later, with the genocide in East Timor also complete, the World Bank described the Suharto dictatorship as a “model pupil”.
Shortly before the death of Alan Clark, who under Thatcher was the minister responsible for supplying Suharto with most of his weapons, I interviewed him, and asked: “Did it bother you personally that you were causing such mayhem and human suffering?”
“No, not in the slightest,” he replied. “It never entered my head.”
“I ask the question because I read you are a vegetarian and are seriously concerned with the way animals are killed.”
“Yeah?”
“Doesn’t that concern extend to humans?”
“Curiously not.”
johnpilger.com
Teman-Teman Mari Terlibat
Teman-teman,
Kami sedang mengoperasikan sebuah blog: http://www.papindo.wordpress.com sebagai wahana untuk bertukar pikiran dan pendapat tentang isu-isu hubungan Papua Barat - NKRI, tidak ada kaitan dengan aspirasi Papua Barat Merdeka atau tidak, tetapi lebih bersifat ke dasar kita sebagai manusia, sebagai tetangga secara geografis dan sosio-budaya dan etnis dan sebagai sesama makhluk, sebagai makhluk bernalar, berperasaan dan berjiwa, kita mau mengupayakan Dialog Versi Maya, karena dialogue muka ke muka rupaya sudah tidak mungkin. Barangkali perkembangan Webasite yang konon dijuluki paling demokratis itu bisa membuktikan diri dalam dialogue Papua Barat - NKRI, Papindo.
Artikel pertama kami muat tentang pandangan orang Papua terhadap dan tetang Soeharto.
Selamat bergabung.
Wassalam
Kami sedang mengoperasikan sebuah blog: http://www.papindo.wordpress.com sebagai wahana untuk bertukar pikiran dan pendapat tentang isu-isu hubungan Papua Barat - NKRI, tidak ada kaitan dengan aspirasi Papua Barat Merdeka atau tidak, tetapi lebih bersifat ke dasar kita sebagai manusia, sebagai tetangga secara geografis dan sosio-budaya dan etnis dan sebagai sesama makhluk, sebagai makhluk bernalar, berperasaan dan berjiwa, kita mau mengupayakan Dialog Versi Maya, karena dialogue muka ke muka rupaya sudah tidak mungkin. Barangkali perkembangan Webasite yang konon dijuluki paling demokratis itu bisa membuktikan diri dalam dialogue Papua Barat - NKRI, Papindo.
Artikel pertama kami muat tentang pandangan orang Papua terhadap dan tetang Soeharto.
Selamat bergabung.
Wassalam
MANUFER SANG JENDRAL BESAR: Episode Jurus One-way ticket
The Legend and The Factory Soeharto: (Contra Soeharto series 19)
Kehebatan sang Jendral Besar Soeharto:· pandai memanfaatkan kekuatan· pandai memanfaatkan kelemahan· ahli strategi perang gerilya dan anti-gerilya· ahli perang terbuka· ahli perang tertutup Indonesia saat ini direpotkan dengan manuver sang Jendral besar. Dari sejarahnya kita semua tahu sang Jendral ahli strategi perang. Dari mulai ahli perang gerilya, ahli perang anti-gerilya, perang terbuka dan perang tertutup. Sang Jendral Besar lah Maestronya, dan sudah terbukti secara nyata di lapangan, selama 42 tahun (masa berkuasa:32 tahun + orde reformasi sekarang 10 tahun).
Menurut Sejarah, Sang Jendral Memimpin serangan fenomenal pada jamannya, serangan 6 jam dijogja, code name: Janur Kuning, dengan taktik: Capit Udang, desa mengepung kota. Manuver serangan ini memaksa dunia internasional terbelalak mengetahui kenyataan bahwa propaganda Belanda yang menyatakan bahwa secara de facto: Pemerintahan Indonesia sudah tidak ada, terbukti tidak benar. Dan akhirnya memaksa Belanda ke meja Perundingan.
Menurut sejarah pula, strategi anti gerilya berhasil pula diterapkan sang jendral besar dalam meredam konflik-konflik di dalam negeri pasca kemerdekaan seperti RMS, Andi Aziz, Kahar Muzakar, OPM Papua, DOM Aceh, dan masih banyak lagi.
Strategi perang terbuka berhasil dalam merebut Irian Barat dan memasuki Timor Timur.
Strategi perang tertutup berhasil dalam meredam konflik-konflik pasca G30S/PKI, seperti peristiwa MALARI, kasus Waduk Kedung Ombo Jawa Tengah, Badega Jawa Barat, sengketa Sengkon-Karta, Kasus Lampung, Petrus, kasus Amir Biki, meredam gejolak kaum intelektual seperti tragedi penolakan Mendagri Rudini Masuk kampus ITB tahun 1989, meredam gerakan Komando Jihad Era Abu Bakar Basyir & Abdulah Sungkar sampai keduanya lari tunggang langgang ketakutan, terbirit-birit ke Malaysia.
Pada jaman Soeharto berkuasa mungkin Ustad Abu Bakar Ba’syir dan Ustadz Abdulah Sungkar bermimpi pun tidak untuk pulang kampung, makanya di negeri pelariannya Malaysia sempat mendirikan Pesantren yang menimbulkan kontroversi karena para lulusannya banyak yang dicap terlibat dalam aksi terorisme. Kenapa ini terjadi? Kalau mau jujur, sebenarnya aksi-aksi ini pada awalnya adalah bentuk apresiasi dan respon terhadap Soeharto, seperti halnya bentuk respon presiden kita SBY terhadap kesehatan Sang Jendral Besar.
Pada masa keemasan kekuasaannya Sang Jendral Besar Soeharto pandai memanfaatkan kekuatannya dengan meraih danmengumpulkan pundi-pundi kekayaan yang fenomenal juga, ada yang terdeteksi dan ada yang tidak terdeteksi umum entah dimana di sembunyikan.
Pada masa kejatuhannya yang katanya orde reformasi, sang jendral tetep dapat menjalankan kekuasaanya, tetep berhasil mempertahankan dan mengumpulkan pundi-pundi kekayaannya, tetep berhasil menyembunyikannya pula. Kalau mau jujur, coba lihat siapa yang punya jalan tol, siapa yang punya televisi swasta (siapa yan memiliki saham di MetroTV, RCTI, Global TV, TPI, Indosiar, dll?). siapa yang mengendalikan partai politik, Golkar sudah pasti. PAN? Belakangan aktifitas partai ini melibatkan keluarga cendana, minimal ada Dede Yusuf disana. Belum lagi partai-partai yang lain.
Pasti jawaban kita akan sama:Soeharto. Hanya ada yang malu-malu, takut-takut dalam menjawabnya. Jadi jangan heran kalau sekarang pemberitaan media tendensius hanya menyoroti jasa-jasa sang Jendral Besar saja, sebab Cendana di Indonesia seperti Rupet Murdoch yang orang Yahudi itu yang menguasai hampir dua per tiga (2/3) informasi Dunia. Jadi bisa menggiring opini publik, untuk suatu kebijakan yang diambil dan menguntungkan kelompoknya.
Bisa jadi sang jendral sedang bermanufer juga sekarang ini. Apa buktinya?
Melihat realitas saat ini, kasus korupsi sang Jendral Besar sudah go internasional terbukti dengan dimasukannya kasus beliau di PBB sebagai Presiden terkorup. Dari semua pemerintahan era setelah beliau lengser keprabon, tidak ada satu Presiden pun yang berhasil mengadilinya. Sang Reformator, Amin Rais jauh-jauh hari sudah membuka opini untuk memaafkan beliau. Sosok ini hampir mewakili kalangan Muhamadiyah.
DPR/MPR saat ini mayoritas kursinya dikuasai oleh Golkar dan kaukusnya. Penentang rezim pada masa kekuasaanya yaitu munir telah tumbang, artinya walaupun ada penerusnya tapi relatif aman. Media relatif aman, karena hampir semua stasiun tv yang ada saat ini cendana investornya atau setidaknya kroninya. Kalangan pesantren relatif tenang karena cendana selama ini, setelah era reformasi telah berhasil dalam bergerilya di lingkungan ini, dengan menyumbang berbagai fasilitas, dll. Ini mewakili kalangan Nahdiyin. Dan masih banyak lagi yang lain.
Artinya menurut pertimbangan Sang Jendral besar, momentnya sudah hampir tepat, untuk menerapkan manufer. Tinggal kali ini: manufer apa yang tepat! Kalau melihat efek media yang ditimbulkan, sang jendral dan kroninya menerapkan manufer: one-way ticket, kick and run, sapit udang dengan desa mengepung kota-nya yang terkenal itu.
Jadi Sang Jendral sedang bernostalgia untuk menerapkan kembali taktik andalannya code name: Janur Kuning, dengan taktik: Capit Udang, desa mengepung kota. Manuver serangan ini akan memaksa dunia internasional terbelalak mengetahui kenyataan bahwa propaganda tuduhan Korupsi yang dituduhkan terhadapnya secara de facto: tidak mempan, terbukti tidak benar, buktinya banyak yang mendoakan kesembuhannya, menurutnya hampir seluruh Indonesia. Dan akhirnya memaksa Dunia dan pemerintah Indonesia ke meja Perundingan diluar pengadilan dengan win–win solution versi Cendana dengan moto: “maafkan Soeharto dan Lupakan” sebagai anti tesis dan counter atack dari “maafkaan tapi tidak melupakan” yang diwacanakan para politisi kita.
Coba anda bayangkan. Ditengah ditolaknya opini: “dimaafkan tapi tidak dilupakan” di sebagian kota-kota di Indonesia.
Kehebatan sang Jendral Besar Soeharto:· pandai memanfaatkan kekuatan· pandai memanfaatkan kelemahan· ahli strategi perang gerilya dan anti-gerilya· ahli perang terbuka· ahli perang tertutup Indonesia saat ini direpotkan dengan manuver sang Jendral besar. Dari sejarahnya kita semua tahu sang Jendral ahli strategi perang. Dari mulai ahli perang gerilya, ahli perang anti-gerilya, perang terbuka dan perang tertutup. Sang Jendral Besar lah Maestronya, dan sudah terbukti secara nyata di lapangan, selama 42 tahun (masa berkuasa:32 tahun + orde reformasi sekarang 10 tahun).
Menurut Sejarah, Sang Jendral Memimpin serangan fenomenal pada jamannya, serangan 6 jam dijogja, code name: Janur Kuning, dengan taktik: Capit Udang, desa mengepung kota. Manuver serangan ini memaksa dunia internasional terbelalak mengetahui kenyataan bahwa propaganda Belanda yang menyatakan bahwa secara de facto: Pemerintahan Indonesia sudah tidak ada, terbukti tidak benar. Dan akhirnya memaksa Belanda ke meja Perundingan.
Menurut sejarah pula, strategi anti gerilya berhasil pula diterapkan sang jendral besar dalam meredam konflik-konflik di dalam negeri pasca kemerdekaan seperti RMS, Andi Aziz, Kahar Muzakar, OPM Papua, DOM Aceh, dan masih banyak lagi.
Strategi perang terbuka berhasil dalam merebut Irian Barat dan memasuki Timor Timur.
Strategi perang tertutup berhasil dalam meredam konflik-konflik pasca G30S/PKI, seperti peristiwa MALARI, kasus Waduk Kedung Ombo Jawa Tengah, Badega Jawa Barat, sengketa Sengkon-Karta, Kasus Lampung, Petrus, kasus Amir Biki, meredam gejolak kaum intelektual seperti tragedi penolakan Mendagri Rudini Masuk kampus ITB tahun 1989, meredam gerakan Komando Jihad Era Abu Bakar Basyir & Abdulah Sungkar sampai keduanya lari tunggang langgang ketakutan, terbirit-birit ke Malaysia.
Pada jaman Soeharto berkuasa mungkin Ustad Abu Bakar Ba’syir dan Ustadz Abdulah Sungkar bermimpi pun tidak untuk pulang kampung, makanya di negeri pelariannya Malaysia sempat mendirikan Pesantren yang menimbulkan kontroversi karena para lulusannya banyak yang dicap terlibat dalam aksi terorisme. Kenapa ini terjadi? Kalau mau jujur, sebenarnya aksi-aksi ini pada awalnya adalah bentuk apresiasi dan respon terhadap Soeharto, seperti halnya bentuk respon presiden kita SBY terhadap kesehatan Sang Jendral Besar.
Pada masa keemasan kekuasaannya Sang Jendral Besar Soeharto pandai memanfaatkan kekuatannya dengan meraih danmengumpulkan pundi-pundi kekayaan yang fenomenal juga, ada yang terdeteksi dan ada yang tidak terdeteksi umum entah dimana di sembunyikan.
Pada masa kejatuhannya yang katanya orde reformasi, sang jendral tetep dapat menjalankan kekuasaanya, tetep berhasil mempertahankan dan mengumpulkan pundi-pundi kekayaannya, tetep berhasil menyembunyikannya pula. Kalau mau jujur, coba lihat siapa yang punya jalan tol, siapa yang punya televisi swasta (siapa yan memiliki saham di MetroTV, RCTI, Global TV, TPI, Indosiar, dll?). siapa yang mengendalikan partai politik, Golkar sudah pasti. PAN? Belakangan aktifitas partai ini melibatkan keluarga cendana, minimal ada Dede Yusuf disana. Belum lagi partai-partai yang lain.
Pasti jawaban kita akan sama:Soeharto. Hanya ada yang malu-malu, takut-takut dalam menjawabnya. Jadi jangan heran kalau sekarang pemberitaan media tendensius hanya menyoroti jasa-jasa sang Jendral Besar saja, sebab Cendana di Indonesia seperti Rupet Murdoch yang orang Yahudi itu yang menguasai hampir dua per tiga (2/3) informasi Dunia. Jadi bisa menggiring opini publik, untuk suatu kebijakan yang diambil dan menguntungkan kelompoknya.
Bisa jadi sang jendral sedang bermanufer juga sekarang ini. Apa buktinya?
Melihat realitas saat ini, kasus korupsi sang Jendral Besar sudah go internasional terbukti dengan dimasukannya kasus beliau di PBB sebagai Presiden terkorup. Dari semua pemerintahan era setelah beliau lengser keprabon, tidak ada satu Presiden pun yang berhasil mengadilinya. Sang Reformator, Amin Rais jauh-jauh hari sudah membuka opini untuk memaafkan beliau. Sosok ini hampir mewakili kalangan Muhamadiyah.
DPR/MPR saat ini mayoritas kursinya dikuasai oleh Golkar dan kaukusnya. Penentang rezim pada masa kekuasaanya yaitu munir telah tumbang, artinya walaupun ada penerusnya tapi relatif aman. Media relatif aman, karena hampir semua stasiun tv yang ada saat ini cendana investornya atau setidaknya kroninya. Kalangan pesantren relatif tenang karena cendana selama ini, setelah era reformasi telah berhasil dalam bergerilya di lingkungan ini, dengan menyumbang berbagai fasilitas, dll. Ini mewakili kalangan Nahdiyin. Dan masih banyak lagi yang lain.
Artinya menurut pertimbangan Sang Jendral besar, momentnya sudah hampir tepat, untuk menerapkan manufer. Tinggal kali ini: manufer apa yang tepat! Kalau melihat efek media yang ditimbulkan, sang jendral dan kroninya menerapkan manufer: one-way ticket, kick and run, sapit udang dengan desa mengepung kota-nya yang terkenal itu.
Jadi Sang Jendral sedang bernostalgia untuk menerapkan kembali taktik andalannya code name: Janur Kuning, dengan taktik: Capit Udang, desa mengepung kota. Manuver serangan ini akan memaksa dunia internasional terbelalak mengetahui kenyataan bahwa propaganda tuduhan Korupsi yang dituduhkan terhadapnya secara de facto: tidak mempan, terbukti tidak benar, buktinya banyak yang mendoakan kesembuhannya, menurutnya hampir seluruh Indonesia. Dan akhirnya memaksa Dunia dan pemerintah Indonesia ke meja Perundingan diluar pengadilan dengan win–win solution versi Cendana dengan moto: “maafkan Soeharto dan Lupakan” sebagai anti tesis dan counter atack dari “maafkaan tapi tidak melupakan” yang diwacanakan para politisi kita.
Coba anda bayangkan. Ditengah ditolaknya opini: “dimaafkan tapi tidak dilupakan” di sebagian kota-kota di Indonesia.
Senin, 28 Januari 2008
SUHARTO DIES WITHOUT EVER BEING BROUGHT TO JUSTICE
28 January 2008 - It is hard to exaggerate the damage inflicted on Indonesia by the former dictator Suharto who died today, during the 32 years when he ruled the country with a rod of iron until his downfall in May 1998.
Suharto rose to power on a wave of massacres that killed up to one million people, one of the twentieth century’s worst crimes against humanity for which no one has been brought to justice. Tens of thousands more were incarcerated and held for more than a decade without charge or trial. 13,000 men were banished to the remote island of Buru, out of reach of their families and subject to a harsh physical environment and unremitting hard labour, which caused hundreds of deaths.
Hundreds of women political prisoners were similarly detained in a remote prison camp in Central Java.
TAPOL founder Carmel Budiardjo, herself a political prisoner (tapol) for three years, said: “Millions of Indonesians will regret, as I do, the fact that Suharto was never called to account for the terrible crimes perpetrated during his despotic rule. None of the presidents who have held office since 1998 was willing to recognise that the rule of law can only have meaning if those who flout it are brought to justice. Few present or former heads of state the world over have had so much blood on their hands as Suharto.”
Following the establishment of Suharto’s New Order under which the Indonesian military established a system of pervasive control over the whole population, the initial target of the repression was the Indonesian Communist Party, the PKI, and its associated mass organisations. These organisations with a combined membership of around fifteen million people were banned without any means of redress, while their members and families were subject to discrimination in every sphere of life.
Once the PKI had been destroyed and hundreds of thousands of its members or sympathisers were either dead, behind bars or purged from the stateapparatus, Suharto turned his attention to the other political parties and mass organisations, forcing them to merge and swear allegiance to the stateideology, Pancasila. Under Suharto’s New Order regime, the vibrant political traditions that had characterised the country up until the imposition of Guided Democracy by his predecessor Sukarno in 1959, were destroyed. In furtherance of the repressive purposes of the military regime installed under Suharto’s command, the population was stripped of all its political rights, the rule of law ceased to function and gross human rights violations occurred without end.
After Suharto was forced to resign when mass demonstrations swept Indonesia in 1998 in response to the financial crisis engulfing the country, the political constraints on the population were lifted. But the damaging impact of military impunity and the lack of respect for the rule of law have continued to prevail, while associates of Suharto still exert an influence in many parts of the country’s body-politic. There has been no attempt by post-Suharto governments with the single exception of the 20-month presidency of Abdurrahman Wahid, to remove many of the influences of the Suharto regime. Furthermore, a number of the discriminatory laws and regulations are still on the statute book such as Decree No 25 adopted by the MPRS, the Supreme Legislative Assembly, in 1966, which bans the teaching of Marxism-Leninism and which has made it difficult for parties suspected of harbouring communist teachings to obtain recognition and to operate without being harassed.
It was under Suharto that Indonesia compelled the people of West Papua by force of arms to become a part of the Republic of Indonesia, following the fraudulent Act of Free Choice in 1969. Since then, the West Papuan people have suffered from massive human rights abuses, helpless to halt the unbridled plunder of their natural resources. While the West Papuan people live in abject poverty, the Indonesian state has reaped huge benefits from revenues, royalties and taxes from foreign enterprises such as Freeport which was granted a concession by Suharto to extract copper and gold in 1967, and it will soon start profiting massively from British Petroleum, now renamed Beyond Petroleum, as it starts to exploit West Papua’s natural gas.
It was under Suharto that Indonesia launched an act of aggression against the people of East Timor (now Timor-Leste) in 1975 and occupied the countryfor over 23 years. Up to 200,000, a third of the population, died from killings or from conflict-related causes. During the occupation, the country’s administration and economy were run by the Indonesian military, 100,000 Timorese were displaced from their homes and re-settled in ’strategic villages’ while thousands were incarcerated on Atauro island or in prison camps throughout the territory
It was under Suharto that the province of Aceh was also subject to military operations for nearly thirty years during which time an estimated 15,000 people lost their lives as rampant human rights violations occurred. This situation continued until August 2005 when a peace agreement was signed between the Indonesian government and the resistance movement, GAM.
Although Suharto was forced to resign in 1998, he never faced charges for the many crimes against humanity that were perpetrated under his New Order regime. The billions of dollars that were plundered by Suharto and his family have still not been accounted for and returned to the state while the former dictator and his offspring continue to control many of the businesses and facilities which they acquired by virtue of the privileges they enjoyed during the New Order. A few months before his death, the World Bank and the UN’s Stolen Assets Recovery initiative named Suharto as the worst head-of-state embezzler in the world.
Now that the man who caused so much suffering, bereavement and death in Indonesia and Timor-Leste has died, it is beholden upon all of us to keep alive the memory of his crimes and to support the efforts of people in Indonesia to seek justice and redress for the immense damage he inflicted politically and economically on their country.
TAPOL which was set up in 1973 to campaign for the release of the tens of thousands of political prisoners then being held, will to continue to campaign for human rights, peace and democracy in Indonesia until the legacy of Suharto has been completely erased.
Contact Carmel Budiardjo on +44 208 771 2904END
Suharto rose to power on a wave of massacres that killed up to one million people, one of the twentieth century’s worst crimes against humanity for which no one has been brought to justice. Tens of thousands more were incarcerated and held for more than a decade without charge or trial. 13,000 men were banished to the remote island of Buru, out of reach of their families and subject to a harsh physical environment and unremitting hard labour, which caused hundreds of deaths.
Hundreds of women political prisoners were similarly detained in a remote prison camp in Central Java.
TAPOL founder Carmel Budiardjo, herself a political prisoner (tapol) for three years, said: “Millions of Indonesians will regret, as I do, the fact that Suharto was never called to account for the terrible crimes perpetrated during his despotic rule. None of the presidents who have held office since 1998 was willing to recognise that the rule of law can only have meaning if those who flout it are brought to justice. Few present or former heads of state the world over have had so much blood on their hands as Suharto.”
Following the establishment of Suharto’s New Order under which the Indonesian military established a system of pervasive control over the whole population, the initial target of the repression was the Indonesian Communist Party, the PKI, and its associated mass organisations. These organisations with a combined membership of around fifteen million people were banned without any means of redress, while their members and families were subject to discrimination in every sphere of life.
Once the PKI had been destroyed and hundreds of thousands of its members or sympathisers were either dead, behind bars or purged from the stateapparatus, Suharto turned his attention to the other political parties and mass organisations, forcing them to merge and swear allegiance to the stateideology, Pancasila. Under Suharto’s New Order regime, the vibrant political traditions that had characterised the country up until the imposition of Guided Democracy by his predecessor Sukarno in 1959, were destroyed. In furtherance of the repressive purposes of the military regime installed under Suharto’s command, the population was stripped of all its political rights, the rule of law ceased to function and gross human rights violations occurred without end.
After Suharto was forced to resign when mass demonstrations swept Indonesia in 1998 in response to the financial crisis engulfing the country, the political constraints on the population were lifted. But the damaging impact of military impunity and the lack of respect for the rule of law have continued to prevail, while associates of Suharto still exert an influence in many parts of the country’s body-politic. There has been no attempt by post-Suharto governments with the single exception of the 20-month presidency of Abdurrahman Wahid, to remove many of the influences of the Suharto regime. Furthermore, a number of the discriminatory laws and regulations are still on the statute book such as Decree No 25 adopted by the MPRS, the Supreme Legislative Assembly, in 1966, which bans the teaching of Marxism-Leninism and which has made it difficult for parties suspected of harbouring communist teachings to obtain recognition and to operate without being harassed.
It was under Suharto that Indonesia compelled the people of West Papua by force of arms to become a part of the Republic of Indonesia, following the fraudulent Act of Free Choice in 1969. Since then, the West Papuan people have suffered from massive human rights abuses, helpless to halt the unbridled plunder of their natural resources. While the West Papuan people live in abject poverty, the Indonesian state has reaped huge benefits from revenues, royalties and taxes from foreign enterprises such as Freeport which was granted a concession by Suharto to extract copper and gold in 1967, and it will soon start profiting massively from British Petroleum, now renamed Beyond Petroleum, as it starts to exploit West Papua’s natural gas.
It was under Suharto that Indonesia launched an act of aggression against the people of East Timor (now Timor-Leste) in 1975 and occupied the countryfor over 23 years. Up to 200,000, a third of the population, died from killings or from conflict-related causes. During the occupation, the country’s administration and economy were run by the Indonesian military, 100,000 Timorese were displaced from their homes and re-settled in ’strategic villages’ while thousands were incarcerated on Atauro island or in prison camps throughout the territory
It was under Suharto that the province of Aceh was also subject to military operations for nearly thirty years during which time an estimated 15,000 people lost their lives as rampant human rights violations occurred. This situation continued until August 2005 when a peace agreement was signed between the Indonesian government and the resistance movement, GAM.
Although Suharto was forced to resign in 1998, he never faced charges for the many crimes against humanity that were perpetrated under his New Order regime. The billions of dollars that were plundered by Suharto and his family have still not been accounted for and returned to the state while the former dictator and his offspring continue to control many of the businesses and facilities which they acquired by virtue of the privileges they enjoyed during the New Order. A few months before his death, the World Bank and the UN’s Stolen Assets Recovery initiative named Suharto as the worst head-of-state embezzler in the world.
Now that the man who caused so much suffering, bereavement and death in Indonesia and Timor-Leste has died, it is beholden upon all of us to keep alive the memory of his crimes and to support the efforts of people in Indonesia to seek justice and redress for the immense damage he inflicted politically and economically on their country.
TAPOL which was set up in 1973 to campaign for the release of the tens of thousands of political prisoners then being held, will to continue to campaign for human rights, peace and democracy in Indonesia until the legacy of Suharto has been completely erased.
Contact Carmel Budiardjo on +44 208 771 2904END
Carmel Budiardjo: The Family Firm
During the 32 years of the New Order, the Suharto family made good use of the special privileges they enjoyed to pursue a wide range of business ventures. First to set the pattern was Suharto�s wife, Tien (Siti Hartinah) Suharto who became known as Madame Ten Percent, thanks to her involvement in a wide range of business ventures. Together with the tycoon and Suharto crony, Liem Sioe Liong, for instance, she took control of PT Bogasari Mills which was granted a state monopoly for the import, milling and distribution of flour.
She also became the chief patron and beneficiary of Taman Mini (Indonesia in Miniature) Project, a high-profile project covering a large area of landon the outskirts of Jakarta, where the traditions and artefacts of all the provinces of the country were put on display. Set up in 1971 at a cost of $25 million, officials said at the time that these funds could have been better used to fund no fewer than 52 small businesses or seven large universities.
As the wife of the president, she chaired Dharma Wanita, a compulsory civil servants� wives� association which organised the Family Welfare Movement, a cultural movement whose aim was to promote the ideology of Suharto�s New Order throughout the country, reaching down to the villages.
Tien Suharto died suddenly on 28 April 1996, reportedly from shock, after witnessing a bitter row between two of her sons.
The six children of Suharto and his wife all became involved in a wide variety of business ventures, benefiting from the many privileges which they enjoyed by virtue of being the sons and daughters of the president. According to TIME-Asia (24 May 1999), the six Suharto children owned between them significant equity in at least 564 companies, covering a range of commodities and businesses from oil and cloves (used in the popular kretek cigarettes) to land, toll roads, airlines, hotels, TV stations and real estate. Foremost among these offspring was Tommy (Hutomo Mandala Putra) Suharto, the youngest of the brood and Suharto�s favourite son who, like his five siblings, benefited from the system of patronage set up by Suharto during his 32-year rule. Himself a keen sports-car racer, his many companies included the Lambrighini sports car company and a 75 percent stake in an 18-hole golf course and 22 luxury apartments in Ascot, Britain.
In 2000, Tommy, became the first (and as yet the only) member of the Suharto family to be tried and convicted in a court of law. He was given a 15-year sentence for ordering the murder of a Supreme Court judge who had found him guilty of a land scam and given him an 18-month sentence. But in 2005, in an unprecedented decision, he was released from jail after serving only one third of his sentence. These days, reports about the far-flung riches of Tommy Suharto and the cases against him pending in courts around the world are hardly ever off the front pages of Indonesian newspapers. In the final years of his life, Suharto was obviously troubled by the persistent references to his greed and corruption. Perhaps thinking that he could clear his name by taking on one of the world�s most prestigious news magazines, he decided to sue TIME for an article about his accumulated wealth. He filed a case suing the Asian edition of TIME magazine for defamation for an article it published in May 1999 titled �Suharto Inc� which reported that he and his family had amassed a fortune of $15 billion.
After two lower courts rejected the complaint, Indonesia�s Supreme Court reversed the verdict and ordered the magazine, its editor and five staff members to pay Suharto the sum of $111 million. The Indonesian lawyer who acted for TIME, Todung Mulya Lubis, described the verdict as an affront to the principle of press freedom. He said: �The supporters of Suharto are still within the government, within the parliament, within the judiciary within the business of society. They may not be as strong as in the past but they are still there.� He described the judgment of the Supreme Court as �a blow for democracy, for the freedom of the press�.
While this charade was underway, an agency set up by the World Bank and the UN, the StAR (Stolen Assets Recovery) initiative, put Suharto at the verytop of their list of former heads of state for stealing between $15 billion and $35 billion during his 32-year rule. The figures were based on investigations carried out by Transparency International.
Suharto departed this world without facing justice for his multiple crimes against humanity or for the extremely brutal campaign carried out by his troops in their attempt to crush the resistance movement in East Timor.
Although Suharto stood head and shoulders above other government leaders who ruthlessly repressed their populations, his crimes never gained theworld attention accorded to other brutal leaders such as Pinochet or Pol Pot. Even when the massacres of 1965-66 were in full swing, world media coverage was meagre. Scanning British media coverage of those events, after I returned home to London, I found barely a mention of what was going on, and most of the reports I did find described the killings as the consequence of a �civil war�.
Shortly after returning home in November 1971 following three years of political imprisonment, I happened to be sitting near a group of Amnesty officials who were discussing a report about torture. I asked them whether they would include Indonesia but they appeared to be unaware that torturein Indonesia was a problem. Comparing the press reports I saw about the massacres in Chile when Pinochet took power and reports about the 1965-66 killings, I was shocked by the lack of coverage devoted to Indonesia.
Suharto could count his blessings that, perhaps apart from The Netherlands where Indonesia was a familiar topic, he could, and did, get away with blue murder without much of the world even noticing.
Carmel Budiardjo
She also became the chief patron and beneficiary of Taman Mini (Indonesia in Miniature) Project, a high-profile project covering a large area of landon the outskirts of Jakarta, where the traditions and artefacts of all the provinces of the country were put on display. Set up in 1971 at a cost of $25 million, officials said at the time that these funds could have been better used to fund no fewer than 52 small businesses or seven large universities.
As the wife of the president, she chaired Dharma Wanita, a compulsory civil servants� wives� association which organised the Family Welfare Movement, a cultural movement whose aim was to promote the ideology of Suharto�s New Order throughout the country, reaching down to the villages.
Tien Suharto died suddenly on 28 April 1996, reportedly from shock, after witnessing a bitter row between two of her sons.
The six children of Suharto and his wife all became involved in a wide variety of business ventures, benefiting from the many privileges which they enjoyed by virtue of being the sons and daughters of the president. According to TIME-Asia (24 May 1999), the six Suharto children owned between them significant equity in at least 564 companies, covering a range of commodities and businesses from oil and cloves (used in the popular kretek cigarettes) to land, toll roads, airlines, hotels, TV stations and real estate. Foremost among these offspring was Tommy (Hutomo Mandala Putra) Suharto, the youngest of the brood and Suharto�s favourite son who, like his five siblings, benefited from the system of patronage set up by Suharto during his 32-year rule. Himself a keen sports-car racer, his many companies included the Lambrighini sports car company and a 75 percent stake in an 18-hole golf course and 22 luxury apartments in Ascot, Britain.
In 2000, Tommy, became the first (and as yet the only) member of the Suharto family to be tried and convicted in a court of law. He was given a 15-year sentence for ordering the murder of a Supreme Court judge who had found him guilty of a land scam and given him an 18-month sentence. But in 2005, in an unprecedented decision, he was released from jail after serving only one third of his sentence. These days, reports about the far-flung riches of Tommy Suharto and the cases against him pending in courts around the world are hardly ever off the front pages of Indonesian newspapers. In the final years of his life, Suharto was obviously troubled by the persistent references to his greed and corruption. Perhaps thinking that he could clear his name by taking on one of the world�s most prestigious news magazines, he decided to sue TIME for an article about his accumulated wealth. He filed a case suing the Asian edition of TIME magazine for defamation for an article it published in May 1999 titled �Suharto Inc� which reported that he and his family had amassed a fortune of $15 billion.
After two lower courts rejected the complaint, Indonesia�s Supreme Court reversed the verdict and ordered the magazine, its editor and five staff members to pay Suharto the sum of $111 million. The Indonesian lawyer who acted for TIME, Todung Mulya Lubis, described the verdict as an affront to the principle of press freedom. He said: �The supporters of Suharto are still within the government, within the parliament, within the judiciary within the business of society. They may not be as strong as in the past but they are still there.� He described the judgment of the Supreme Court as �a blow for democracy, for the freedom of the press�.
While this charade was underway, an agency set up by the World Bank and the UN, the StAR (Stolen Assets Recovery) initiative, put Suharto at the verytop of their list of former heads of state for stealing between $15 billion and $35 billion during his 32-year rule. The figures were based on investigations carried out by Transparency International.
Suharto departed this world without facing justice for his multiple crimes against humanity or for the extremely brutal campaign carried out by his troops in their attempt to crush the resistance movement in East Timor.
Although Suharto stood head and shoulders above other government leaders who ruthlessly repressed their populations, his crimes never gained theworld attention accorded to other brutal leaders such as Pinochet or Pol Pot. Even when the massacres of 1965-66 were in full swing, world media coverage was meagre. Scanning British media coverage of those events, after I returned home to London, I found barely a mention of what was going on, and most of the reports I did find described the killings as the consequence of a �civil war�.
Shortly after returning home in November 1971 following three years of political imprisonment, I happened to be sitting near a group of Amnesty officials who were discussing a report about torture. I asked them whether they would include Indonesia but they appeared to be unaware that torturein Indonesia was a problem. Comparing the press reports I saw about the massacres in Chile when Pinochet took power and reports about the 1965-66 killings, I was shocked by the lack of coverage devoted to Indonesia.
Suharto could count his blessings that, perhaps apart from The Netherlands where Indonesia was a familiar topic, he could, and did, get away with blue murder without much of the world even noticing.
Carmel Budiardjo
OBITUARY OF SUHARTO, FORMER PRESIDENT AND DICTATOR OF INDONESIA
As Indonesia�s former dictator lay dying on 8 January, a coterie of the country�s great-and-good gathered at his bedside to pay their last respects to a man responsible for more deaths and suffering than any state leader since World War Two with the exception of Pol Pot of Cambodia.
While President Yudhoyono and former President Abdurrahman Wahid, out of respect for an elder statesman, stood at his bedside praying that efforts to restore him to health would be successful, other Indonesians regretted that with his passing, ten years after his fall from power in May 1998,he would never face justice for the countless crimes against humanity perpetrated during his 32-year reign of terror in Indonesia and the death and destruction inflicted on East Timor during the 23-year occupation of that country.
Since being forced to resign by the financial crisis that engulfed Indonesia in 1998, Suharto lived as a recluse in Cendana, the luxurious family home in the Menteng district of Jakarta, basking in the wealth which he, his late wife and his offspring plundered during the years when the military held a tight grip on the country. He even escaped justice for the unparalleled corruption which resulted in his being named the worst head-of-state embezzler in modern times by the Stolen Assets Recovery Initiative, a joint venture of the World Bank and the United Nations Office of Drugs and Crime.
Born on 8 June 1921 to a family of peasants in the village of Kemusu Argamulya in Central Java and having nothing more than lower secondary school education, Suharto turned at an early age to the military as his vocation. His rise in the ranks of the Indonesian Army occurred at a time when the country was still under civilian rule, following Indonesia�s one and only democratic election held in 1955.
Suharto�s military career began during the Japanese occupation of Indonesia (1942-1945) when he became a battalion commander in Peta, Defenders of the Fatherland, a Japanese-trained militia. After the Japanese surrender in August 1945, he joined the Indonesian army then known as ABRI but now called Tentara Nasional Indonesia (TNI), on the day it was founded on 5 October 1945. In 1957, he became a district commander in the Diponegoro Division (Central Java) with the rank of colonel.
In parallel with his career in the military, he also engaged in financial activities to fund his subordinates and to provide the wherewithal for patronage. In the mid-1950s, he was implicated in a sugar smuggling scandal and other corrupt practices. This earned him a reprimand and removal in disgrace from his Diponegoro post, followed by a course at the Army Staff and Command School in Bandung,. But this did not stand in the way of his subsequent promotion to brigadier-general in January 1960.
After a stint as commander of the unsuccessful Operation Mandala in 1960, aimed at driving the Dutch from West Papua, he was promoted to major-general and appointed commander of the Diponegoro Division. At the height of Indonesia�s confrontation with the newly-formed state of Malaysia in 1963, Suharto was appointed commander of Kostrad, the army�s elite command, which later enabled him to play a strategic role in the physical annihilation of the Indonesian Communist Party, which by the mid-1960s had become the third largest communist party in the world.
The coup attempt on 30 September 1965 mounted by self-proclaimed pro-communist army officers, when six army generals and a lower-ranking officer were kidnapped and murdered, as part of a conflict within the Indonesian army, provided Suharto with the pretext to unleash nationwide reprisals against the Indonesian Communist Party. As the White Terror spread throughout Central and East Java and then to other parts of Indonesia, hundreds of thousands of communists and alleged communists were killed. An estimated 200,000 people were arrested and held for years without charge. By the mid-1970s, some 70,000 were still in detention, of whom 13,000 men had been banished to the remote island of Buru where they were subject to harsh conditions. Hundreds of women prisoners were banished to a prison camp in Central Java called Plantungan. The remoteness of these camps made family visits and food supplies virtually impossible.
No one has ever been held to account for the killings and atrocities that occurred during Suharto�s New Order which enabled Suharto to rule Indonesia without opposition for more than thirty years. It was not until after the dictator�s downfall that surviving victims were able to speak publicly about the ordeals which they and their families had suffered.
As the anti-communist purge got into full swing in late 1965, Suharto�s leading role in the armed forces was formalise with his appointment by President Sukarno as commander of the army on 16 October 1965. Abusing the powers given to him by Sukarno, Suharto issued an order for all PKI members or suspects to be purged from state positions. His grip on the country became further entrenched with the special powers granted to him on 11 March 1966 which was known as Supersemar. The PKI was banned along with associated mass organisations estimated to have a following of some 15 million people.
Meanwhile, the removal of the popular President Sukarno was handled with consummate skill. Suharto showed himself to be the master of Javanese-style slow-but-sure tactics, described by one biographer as a �protracted Wayang play�. It was not until 12 March 1967 that a heavily purged legislative assembly stripped Sukarno of all his powers and installed Suharto as acting president. Although he had already been in control of the country for three years, it was not until a year later, on 21 March 1968, that Suharto was formally elected to his first five-year term as president. He was re-elected unopposed on six subsequent occasions in 1973, 1978, 1983, 1988, 1993 and 1998. However, it was his election in 1998 that triggered his downfall as mass demonstrations swept the country and called for his dismissal, making his position untenable.
New Order Violence
Under Suharto�s New Order, violence became a regular feature, while the fear of being accused as communists de-politicised all activists as well as the population as a whole, in the interests of security and order. Organisations were set up for each section of the population which were obliged to declare their allegiance to the government and its Pancasila ideology. There were many clampdowns such as the Tanjung Priok affair in West Java in September 1984 when dozens of Muslims outside a mosque were shot dead by the security forces and incidents in Lampung, South Sumatra in 1987 and later on against plantation workers in North Sumatra.
On 28 November 1975, Indonesia invaded East Timor in the wake of Portugal�s withdrawal from the territory. During the 23 years of occupation, military operations against a well-organised resistance movement resulted in tens of thousand of deaths. According to the East Timorese church, an estimated
60,000 Timorese were killed during the first two months of the invasion. A special commission set up by the UN in 2002, the Commission for Reception, Truth and Reconciliation in East Timor, concluded that 18,600 Timorese were murdered or disappeared during the Indonesian occupation and between 84,000 and 183,000 more died as a direct result of Indonesia�s policies.
From 1976, the people of Aceh, the western-most province of Indonesia, experienced the brutality of unrestrained killings when the region was designated a �military operations region� (Daerah Operasi Militer) after the establishment of GAM (Gerakan Aceh Merdeka) in 1976 which sought to create a separate state. While some of the victims were killed during military conflicts, the vast majority of those who were struck down were unarmed civilians.
In 1965, after Indonesia had taken control of West Papua from the Dutch in 1963, crack troops of the military were sent to the region to crush an independence movement known as the OPM (Organisasi Papua Merdeka, Free Papua Organisation). This resulted in the deaths of tens of thousands ofpeople in the following decades, especially after the so-called Act of Free Choice in August 1969 when just over one thousand Papuans took part in thefraudulent Act, sealing the territory�s fate as a province of Indonesia. Here too, the territory was designated as a special military area or DOM,
giving the military free rein to capture, kill or maim people deemed to be in favour of independence.
In 1983, death squads took to the streets in a so-called anti-crime operation. For six months, death squads went on the rampage, killing alleged criminals or bandits. This resulted in the deaths of an estimated three thousand people. The killings occurred in a number of cities and came to be known as petrus or �mysterious killings�. The precise number of victims was never established because the Indonesian media was prohibited from reporting the killings. In September 1983, the Far Eastern Economic Review reported that the killings were �set to continue until the authorities have reached their countrywide target reliably put at 4,000 extra-judicial killings�.
Suharto took personal responsibility for these killings in his autobiography, Suharto: Pikiran, Ucapan dan Tindakan Saya (Suharto: My Thoughts, Sayings and Deeds) in which he wrote: �The newspapers were full of articles about the mysterious deaths of a number of people�. There was nothing mysterious about it at all. Was it right to do nothing? It had to be treated by violence. But this did not mean just going out and shooting people, bang, bang. No. But those who tried to resist, like it or not, had to be shot. Because they resisted, they were shot.�
These killings were a reminder to the population that the authorities continued to have the power and the physical ability to deal with anyone daring to challenge the government.
While President Yudhoyono and former President Abdurrahman Wahid, out of respect for an elder statesman, stood at his bedside praying that efforts to restore him to health would be successful, other Indonesians regretted that with his passing, ten years after his fall from power in May 1998,he would never face justice for the countless crimes against humanity perpetrated during his 32-year reign of terror in Indonesia and the death and destruction inflicted on East Timor during the 23-year occupation of that country.
Since being forced to resign by the financial crisis that engulfed Indonesia in 1998, Suharto lived as a recluse in Cendana, the luxurious family home in the Menteng district of Jakarta, basking in the wealth which he, his late wife and his offspring plundered during the years when the military held a tight grip on the country. He even escaped justice for the unparalleled corruption which resulted in his being named the worst head-of-state embezzler in modern times by the Stolen Assets Recovery Initiative, a joint venture of the World Bank and the United Nations Office of Drugs and Crime.
Born on 8 June 1921 to a family of peasants in the village of Kemusu Argamulya in Central Java and having nothing more than lower secondary school education, Suharto turned at an early age to the military as his vocation. His rise in the ranks of the Indonesian Army occurred at a time when the country was still under civilian rule, following Indonesia�s one and only democratic election held in 1955.
Suharto�s military career began during the Japanese occupation of Indonesia (1942-1945) when he became a battalion commander in Peta, Defenders of the Fatherland, a Japanese-trained militia. After the Japanese surrender in August 1945, he joined the Indonesian army then known as ABRI but now called Tentara Nasional Indonesia (TNI), on the day it was founded on 5 October 1945. In 1957, he became a district commander in the Diponegoro Division (Central Java) with the rank of colonel.
In parallel with his career in the military, he also engaged in financial activities to fund his subordinates and to provide the wherewithal for patronage. In the mid-1950s, he was implicated in a sugar smuggling scandal and other corrupt practices. This earned him a reprimand and removal in disgrace from his Diponegoro post, followed by a course at the Army Staff and Command School in Bandung,. But this did not stand in the way of his subsequent promotion to brigadier-general in January 1960.
After a stint as commander of the unsuccessful Operation Mandala in 1960, aimed at driving the Dutch from West Papua, he was promoted to major-general and appointed commander of the Diponegoro Division. At the height of Indonesia�s confrontation with the newly-formed state of Malaysia in 1963, Suharto was appointed commander of Kostrad, the army�s elite command, which later enabled him to play a strategic role in the physical annihilation of the Indonesian Communist Party, which by the mid-1960s had become the third largest communist party in the world.
The coup attempt on 30 September 1965 mounted by self-proclaimed pro-communist army officers, when six army generals and a lower-ranking officer were kidnapped and murdered, as part of a conflict within the Indonesian army, provided Suharto with the pretext to unleash nationwide reprisals against the Indonesian Communist Party. As the White Terror spread throughout Central and East Java and then to other parts of Indonesia, hundreds of thousands of communists and alleged communists were killed. An estimated 200,000 people were arrested and held for years without charge. By the mid-1970s, some 70,000 were still in detention, of whom 13,000 men had been banished to the remote island of Buru where they were subject to harsh conditions. Hundreds of women prisoners were banished to a prison camp in Central Java called Plantungan. The remoteness of these camps made family visits and food supplies virtually impossible.
No one has ever been held to account for the killings and atrocities that occurred during Suharto�s New Order which enabled Suharto to rule Indonesia without opposition for more than thirty years. It was not until after the dictator�s downfall that surviving victims were able to speak publicly about the ordeals which they and their families had suffered.
As the anti-communist purge got into full swing in late 1965, Suharto�s leading role in the armed forces was formalise with his appointment by President Sukarno as commander of the army on 16 October 1965. Abusing the powers given to him by Sukarno, Suharto issued an order for all PKI members or suspects to be purged from state positions. His grip on the country became further entrenched with the special powers granted to him on 11 March 1966 which was known as Supersemar. The PKI was banned along with associated mass organisations estimated to have a following of some 15 million people.
Meanwhile, the removal of the popular President Sukarno was handled with consummate skill. Suharto showed himself to be the master of Javanese-style slow-but-sure tactics, described by one biographer as a �protracted Wayang play�. It was not until 12 March 1967 that a heavily purged legislative assembly stripped Sukarno of all his powers and installed Suharto as acting president. Although he had already been in control of the country for three years, it was not until a year later, on 21 March 1968, that Suharto was formally elected to his first five-year term as president. He was re-elected unopposed on six subsequent occasions in 1973, 1978, 1983, 1988, 1993 and 1998. However, it was his election in 1998 that triggered his downfall as mass demonstrations swept the country and called for his dismissal, making his position untenable.
New Order Violence
Under Suharto�s New Order, violence became a regular feature, while the fear of being accused as communists de-politicised all activists as well as the population as a whole, in the interests of security and order. Organisations were set up for each section of the population which were obliged to declare their allegiance to the government and its Pancasila ideology. There were many clampdowns such as the Tanjung Priok affair in West Java in September 1984 when dozens of Muslims outside a mosque were shot dead by the security forces and incidents in Lampung, South Sumatra in 1987 and later on against plantation workers in North Sumatra.
On 28 November 1975, Indonesia invaded East Timor in the wake of Portugal�s withdrawal from the territory. During the 23 years of occupation, military operations against a well-organised resistance movement resulted in tens of thousand of deaths. According to the East Timorese church, an estimated
60,000 Timorese were killed during the first two months of the invasion. A special commission set up by the UN in 2002, the Commission for Reception, Truth and Reconciliation in East Timor, concluded that 18,600 Timorese were murdered or disappeared during the Indonesian occupation and between 84,000 and 183,000 more died as a direct result of Indonesia�s policies.
From 1976, the people of Aceh, the western-most province of Indonesia, experienced the brutality of unrestrained killings when the region was designated a �military operations region� (Daerah Operasi Militer) after the establishment of GAM (Gerakan Aceh Merdeka) in 1976 which sought to create a separate state. While some of the victims were killed during military conflicts, the vast majority of those who were struck down were unarmed civilians.
In 1965, after Indonesia had taken control of West Papua from the Dutch in 1963, crack troops of the military were sent to the region to crush an independence movement known as the OPM (Organisasi Papua Merdeka, Free Papua Organisation). This resulted in the deaths of tens of thousands ofpeople in the following decades, especially after the so-called Act of Free Choice in August 1969 when just over one thousand Papuans took part in thefraudulent Act, sealing the territory�s fate as a province of Indonesia. Here too, the territory was designated as a special military area or DOM,
giving the military free rein to capture, kill or maim people deemed to be in favour of independence.
In 1983, death squads took to the streets in a so-called anti-crime operation. For six months, death squads went on the rampage, killing alleged criminals or bandits. This resulted in the deaths of an estimated three thousand people. The killings occurred in a number of cities and came to be known as petrus or �mysterious killings�. The precise number of victims was never established because the Indonesian media was prohibited from reporting the killings. In September 1983, the Far Eastern Economic Review reported that the killings were �set to continue until the authorities have reached their countrywide target reliably put at 4,000 extra-judicial killings�.
Suharto took personal responsibility for these killings in his autobiography, Suharto: Pikiran, Ucapan dan Tindakan Saya (Suharto: My Thoughts, Sayings and Deeds) in which he wrote: �The newspapers were full of articles about the mysterious deaths of a number of people�. There was nothing mysterious about it at all. Was it right to do nothing? It had to be treated by violence. But this did not mean just going out and shooting people, bang, bang. No. But those who tried to resist, like it or not, had to be shot. Because they resisted, they were shot.�
These killings were a reminder to the population that the authorities continued to have the power and the physical ability to deal with anyone daring to challenge the government.
Accountability for Suharto’s Crimes Must Not Die With Him
East Timor and Indonesia Action Network (ETAN) on the Death of Suharto
Contact: John M. Miller +1/718-596-7668
Accountability for Suharto’s Crimes Must Not Die With Him
Indonesia’s former dictator General Suharto has died in bed and not in jail, escaping justice for his numerous crimes in East Timor and throughout the Indonesian archipelago. One of the worst mass murderers of the 20th century, his death tolls still shock:
* 500,000 to one million Indonesians in the aftermath of his 1965 seizure of power;
* 100,000 in West Papua;
* 100,000 to 200,000 in East Timor, which his troops illegally invaded in 1975;
* tens of thousands more in Aceh and elsewhere.
Suharto also accumulated an appalling legacy of corruption - 15 to 35 billion dollars stolen by him and his family.
Suharto has avoided personal accountability for the genocide, destruction and corruption he inflicted upon those he presumed to rule. However, the generals, cronies and family members who carried out his orders via massacre, torture and theft must not get off so easily. Those who murdered and pillaged on behalf of Suharto and his “New Order” regime must be brought to justice.
We cannot forget that the United States government consistently supported Suharto and his regime. As the corpses piled up after his coup and darkness descended on Indonesia, his cheerleaders in the U.S. welcomed the “gleam of light in Asia.” In the pursuit of realpolitik, U.S. administration after administration, fully aware of his many crimes, provided military assistance and hardware, training and equipping Suharto’s killers. The Indonesian dictator sought and received U.S. approval before he launched his invasion of East Timor; ninety percent of the weapons used in this illegal attack came from the U.S.
In the face of broad domestic opposition as his “economic miracle” had collapsed in 1998, he finally stepped down. But only after U.S. Secretary of State Albright hinted he should do so, even as the White House insisted she was not calling on the U.S.-backed dictator to “step down now.”
Persistent advocacy by concerned activists from East Timor, Indonesia, the U.S. and within Congress finally succeeded in curtailing U.S. military assistance to the Suharto regime in the 1990s. After Suharto was ousted, East Timor broke free and the Indonesian military lost some perks. Since then, military reform efforts have stalled or been reversed. Suharto’s favored military still maintains substantial power. Its higher-ranking officers, and powerful retired military, like President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono, built their careers during his reign. The military continues to violate human rights with impunity and in West Papua and some areas operates by Suharto-era rules, restricting outside access and employing terror in service of its commercial interests.
Limited investigations dealing with Suharto-era crimes have added some information to the public record, but the few trials that have occurred have largely failed, as defendants have lied, intimidated or bribed their way to acquittals, crushing the hopes of the victims and their families for justice or even an apology.
To overcome Suharto’s legacy and to uphold basic international human rights and legal principles, those who executed, aided and abetted, and benefited from his criminal orders must be held accountable. The U.S. must undergo a complete accounting for its role in backing the dictator. As a start, the U.S. government must support for an international tribunal to prosecute human rights and war crimes committed in East Timor from 1975 to 1999, and Washington should condition military assistance to Indonesia “on progress towards full democratisation, the subordination of the military to the rule of law and civilian government, and strict adherence with international human rights” as recommended by East Timor’s Commission for Reception, Truth and Reconciliation.
A brief ETAN backgrounder on Suharto’s life is at http://www.etan.org/news/2008/01suhartobio.htm.
This statement is also available in Tetum and Bahasa Indonesia. See http://www.etan.org/
etanetanetanetanetanetanetanetanetanetanetanetan
ETAN welcomes your financial support. For more info: http://etan.org/etan/donate.htm
John M. Miller Internet: fbp@igc.org
National Coordinator
East Timor & Indonesia Action Network (ETAN)
PO Box 21873, Brooklyn, NY 11202-1873 USA
Phone: (718)596-7668 Fax: (718)222-4097
Mobile phone: (917)690-4391 Skype: john.m.miller
Web site: http://www.etan.org
Contact: John M. Miller +1/718-596-7668
Accountability for Suharto’s Crimes Must Not Die With Him
Indonesia’s former dictator General Suharto has died in bed and not in jail, escaping justice for his numerous crimes in East Timor and throughout the Indonesian archipelago. One of the worst mass murderers of the 20th century, his death tolls still shock:
* 500,000 to one million Indonesians in the aftermath of his 1965 seizure of power;
* 100,000 in West Papua;
* 100,000 to 200,000 in East Timor, which his troops illegally invaded in 1975;
* tens of thousands more in Aceh and elsewhere.
Suharto also accumulated an appalling legacy of corruption - 15 to 35 billion dollars stolen by him and his family.
Suharto has avoided personal accountability for the genocide, destruction and corruption he inflicted upon those he presumed to rule. However, the generals, cronies and family members who carried out his orders via massacre, torture and theft must not get off so easily. Those who murdered and pillaged on behalf of Suharto and his “New Order” regime must be brought to justice.
We cannot forget that the United States government consistently supported Suharto and his regime. As the corpses piled up after his coup and darkness descended on Indonesia, his cheerleaders in the U.S. welcomed the “gleam of light in Asia.” In the pursuit of realpolitik, U.S. administration after administration, fully aware of his many crimes, provided military assistance and hardware, training and equipping Suharto’s killers. The Indonesian dictator sought and received U.S. approval before he launched his invasion of East Timor; ninety percent of the weapons used in this illegal attack came from the U.S.
In the face of broad domestic opposition as his “economic miracle” had collapsed in 1998, he finally stepped down. But only after U.S. Secretary of State Albright hinted he should do so, even as the White House insisted she was not calling on the U.S.-backed dictator to “step down now.”
Persistent advocacy by concerned activists from East Timor, Indonesia, the U.S. and within Congress finally succeeded in curtailing U.S. military assistance to the Suharto regime in the 1990s. After Suharto was ousted, East Timor broke free and the Indonesian military lost some perks. Since then, military reform efforts have stalled or been reversed. Suharto’s favored military still maintains substantial power. Its higher-ranking officers, and powerful retired military, like President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono, built their careers during his reign. The military continues to violate human rights with impunity and in West Papua and some areas operates by Suharto-era rules, restricting outside access and employing terror in service of its commercial interests.
Limited investigations dealing with Suharto-era crimes have added some information to the public record, but the few trials that have occurred have largely failed, as defendants have lied, intimidated or bribed their way to acquittals, crushing the hopes of the victims and their families for justice or even an apology.
To overcome Suharto’s legacy and to uphold basic international human rights and legal principles, those who executed, aided and abetted, and benefited from his criminal orders must be held accountable. The U.S. must undergo a complete accounting for its role in backing the dictator. As a start, the U.S. government must support for an international tribunal to prosecute human rights and war crimes committed in East Timor from 1975 to 1999, and Washington should condition military assistance to Indonesia “on progress towards full democratisation, the subordination of the military to the rule of law and civilian government, and strict adherence with international human rights” as recommended by East Timor’s Commission for Reception, Truth and Reconciliation.
A brief ETAN backgrounder on Suharto’s life is at http://www.etan.org/news/2008/01suhartobio.htm.
This statement is also available in Tetum and Bahasa Indonesia. See http://www.etan.org/
etanetanetanetanetanetanetanetanetanetanetanetan
ETAN welcomes your financial support. For more info: http://etan.org/etan/donate.htm
John M. Miller Internet: fbp@igc.org
National Coordinator
East Timor & Indonesia Action Network (ETAN)
PO Box 21873, Brooklyn, NY 11202-1873 USA
Phone: (718)596-7668 Fax: (718)222-4097
Mobile phone: (917)690-4391 Skype: john.m.miller
Web site: http://www.etan.org
Minggu, 27 Januari 2008
Tanggapan terhadap Kematian Pempimpin Orde Baru: Soeharto
Hari ini saya tanyakan kepada seorang Papua, yang sedang menonton televisi, mendengarkan dan menonton prosesi pemberangkatan mayat mantan pemimpin orde baru dari RSPP Pertamina menuju Jalan Cendana No. 08, Jakarta Pusat. Saya bertanya kepadanya, “Bagaimana perasaan Anda saat mendengar, dan menonton peristiwa yang membawa duka bagi seluruh bangsa Indonesia ini?”
Ia serta-merta menjawab, “Saya bersyukur, bahwa sang Panglima Komando Mandala, yang memimpin perebutan dan pendudukan NKRI di Papua Barat itu telah pergi.”
Saya lanjutkan, “Tetapi sesuai ajaran agama Anda, seperti dimintakan oleh Presiden SBY dan Wapres Kalla, apakah Anda merasa patut memaafkan dia?”
Jawabannya, “Ya, sebagai sesama manusia, kita tidak bisa tidak mau memaafkan, itu keharusan, tidak ada satupun manusia bisa menolak memaafkan manusia lain yang telah tiada. Tetapi itu bukan berarti kita lalu sama sekalli melupakan kesalahan dan dosanya terhadap sebuah bangsa, sebuah tanah-air. Dalam hal ini bangsa Indonesia dan bangsa Papua, NKRI dan Negara Papua Barat belum mati, maka apa saja yang diperbuatnya atas nama kedua bangsa dan kedua negara ini tidak bisa dilupakan begitu saja.”
Lalu, saya mengandai-andai, kalau seandainya Anda menjadi seorang yang berpengaruh atau penting di kawasan Pasifik atau Asia Tenggara, “Bisakan Anda menyerukan agar bangsa-bangsa di dunia mengampuni dia, sebagai seorang manusia?”
Jawaban, “Beliau sebagai seseorang memang dimaafkan, tetapi tidak bisa dikaitkan dengan bangsa dan negara. Ia melakukan itu sebagai seorang pemimpin dari negara yang bernama Indonesia. Jadi kesalahan Soeharto sebagai Kepala dari Negara Indonesia tidak bisa lantas dihapus pergi bersamanya. Negara Indonesia tetap harus dituntut, itu baru negara hukum, negara demokratis dan peradaban yang manusiawi. Kita tidak bisa menghapus kesalahan atas nama publik dengan kematian seorang individu.”
Bagaimana pendapat Anda?
Atau apa tanggapan Anda terhadap wawancara singkat ini?
Silahkan berkomentar.
Ia serta-merta menjawab, “Saya bersyukur, bahwa sang Panglima Komando Mandala, yang memimpin perebutan dan pendudukan NKRI di Papua Barat itu telah pergi.”
Saya lanjutkan, “Tetapi sesuai ajaran agama Anda, seperti dimintakan oleh Presiden SBY dan Wapres Kalla, apakah Anda merasa patut memaafkan dia?”
Jawabannya, “Ya, sebagai sesama manusia, kita tidak bisa tidak mau memaafkan, itu keharusan, tidak ada satupun manusia bisa menolak memaafkan manusia lain yang telah tiada. Tetapi itu bukan berarti kita lalu sama sekalli melupakan kesalahan dan dosanya terhadap sebuah bangsa, sebuah tanah-air. Dalam hal ini bangsa Indonesia dan bangsa Papua, NKRI dan Negara Papua Barat belum mati, maka apa saja yang diperbuatnya atas nama kedua bangsa dan kedua negara ini tidak bisa dilupakan begitu saja.”
Lalu, saya mengandai-andai, kalau seandainya Anda menjadi seorang yang berpengaruh atau penting di kawasan Pasifik atau Asia Tenggara, “Bisakan Anda menyerukan agar bangsa-bangsa di dunia mengampuni dia, sebagai seorang manusia?”
Jawaban, “Beliau sebagai seseorang memang dimaafkan, tetapi tidak bisa dikaitkan dengan bangsa dan negara. Ia melakukan itu sebagai seorang pemimpin dari negara yang bernama Indonesia. Jadi kesalahan Soeharto sebagai Kepala dari Negara Indonesia tidak bisa lantas dihapus pergi bersamanya. Negara Indonesia tetap harus dituntut, itu baru negara hukum, negara demokratis dan peradaban yang manusiawi. Kita tidak bisa menghapus kesalahan atas nama publik dengan kematian seorang individu.”
Bagaimana pendapat Anda?
Atau apa tanggapan Anda terhadap wawancara singkat ini?
Silahkan berkomentar.
Soeharto di Mata orang Papua
Mendahului berbagai artikel yang akan ditulis tentang Alm. Jenderal Besar Haji Muhammad Soeharto, yang telah wafat pada Hari Minggu, 27 Januari 2007, tepat pukul 13:10 WIB di RSPP Jakarta Selatan, maka kami merasa perlu menyampaikan beberapa topik pandangan orang Papua terhadap beliau.
Kalau seandainya seorang Jawa atau Indonesia bertanya kepada seorang Papua, “Menurut Anda, siapa atau apa Soeharto itu?”, maka orang Papua akan memberikan jawab antara lain:
Dia petinggi militer yang kejam, tak berperi-kemanusiaan;
Soeharto seorang yang sudah tidak punya hatinraninya, manusia yang sudah dibutakan oleh ketamakan atas tanah dan bangsa lain demi kepentingan Pulau dan orang Jawa;
Soeharto adalah pembunuh ayah, ibu, adik, kaka, paman, kerabat, bangsa saya;
Beliau seorang yang sukses meredam aspirasi menyuarakan kebenaran;
Dia Raja orang Jawa;
Dia secara pribadi manusia bertanggungjawab atas kematian Papua sebagai sebuah bangsa dan perusakan alam di Bumi Cenderawasih.
Pertanyaan untuk diskusi adalah:
Bagaimana pendapat masing-masing suku-bangsa di Indonesia?
Apa tanggapan Anda terhadap tanggapan seorang Papua di atas?
Berikanlah tanggapan Anda di bilik Komentar.
Koteka Webmaster
Kalau seandainya seorang Jawa atau Indonesia bertanya kepada seorang Papua, “Menurut Anda, siapa atau apa Soeharto itu?”, maka orang Papua akan memberikan jawab antara lain:
Dia petinggi militer yang kejam, tak berperi-kemanusiaan;
Soeharto seorang yang sudah tidak punya hatinraninya, manusia yang sudah dibutakan oleh ketamakan atas tanah dan bangsa lain demi kepentingan Pulau dan orang Jawa;
Soeharto adalah pembunuh ayah, ibu, adik, kaka, paman, kerabat, bangsa saya;
Beliau seorang yang sukses meredam aspirasi menyuarakan kebenaran;
Dia Raja orang Jawa;
Dia secara pribadi manusia bertanggungjawab atas kematian Papua sebagai sebuah bangsa dan perusakan alam di Bumi Cenderawasih.
Pertanyaan untuk diskusi adalah:
Bagaimana pendapat masing-masing suku-bangsa di Indonesia?
Apa tanggapan Anda terhadap tanggapan seorang Papua di atas?
Berikanlah tanggapan Anda di bilik Komentar.
Koteka Webmaster
Sabtu, 26 Januari 2008
Salam Jumpa
Wassalam!
Blog ini kami peruntukkan bagi pertukaran pikiran, pandangan dan kritik dari Papua Barat terhadap Indonesia; dan dari Indonesia terhadap Papua Barat dalam konteks berbagai pelanggaran Hak Asasi Manusia, penderitaan (karena pelanggaran HAM, pemiskinan, penggusuran, intimidasi, teror, dsb.) dan isu perjuangan Papua Merdeka.
Blog ini pada akhirnya diupayakan menjawab atau melakukan pencerahan terhadap sejumlah pertanyaan seperti:
Apakah orang Indonesia mendukung Papua Merdeka? Mengapa?
Mengapa orang Papua mau Merdeka?
Apakah orang Papua minta merdeka karena kecemburuan sosial, kebencian etnis, perbedaan agama, pelanggaran HAM?
Apakah orang Indonesia mempertahankan Papua Barat di dalam NKRI karena…?
dst.
Kami harapkan kita lakukan percakapan maya ini secara jujur, terbuka, blak-blakan dan bertanggungjawab.
Terimakasih
Koteka Webmaster
Blog ini kami peruntukkan bagi pertukaran pikiran, pandangan dan kritik dari Papua Barat terhadap Indonesia; dan dari Indonesia terhadap Papua Barat dalam konteks berbagai pelanggaran Hak Asasi Manusia, penderitaan (karena pelanggaran HAM, pemiskinan, penggusuran, intimidasi, teror, dsb.) dan isu perjuangan Papua Merdeka.
Blog ini pada akhirnya diupayakan menjawab atau melakukan pencerahan terhadap sejumlah pertanyaan seperti:
Apakah orang Indonesia mendukung Papua Merdeka? Mengapa?
Mengapa orang Papua mau Merdeka?
Apakah orang Papua minta merdeka karena kecemburuan sosial, kebencian etnis, perbedaan agama, pelanggaran HAM?
Apakah orang Indonesia mempertahankan Papua Barat di dalam NKRI karena…?
dst.
Kami harapkan kita lakukan percakapan maya ini secara jujur, terbuka, blak-blakan dan bertanggungjawab.
Terimakasih
Koteka Webmaster
Langganan:
Postingan (Atom)