A Peaceful Dialogue between Papua and Jakarta, Indonesia: A Critical Review
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
The political conflict in Papua has persisted since 1969 and has taken a toll in lives and property. Meanwhile, the military approach by the Indonesian government and the sporadic resistance of the Free Papuan Movement have not achieved Papua Tanah Damai (PTD) [Papua, the Land of Peace] for the Papuan people. This academic paper uses a library research method focusing on a literature review that discusses the object of study. With regard to analysis, this study employs qualitative research, consisting of data reduction, data presentation, and conclusion. In addition, this paper is based on the author's long period of observation to produce a broader perspective on the Papua settlement. Indeed, since the 1998 reformation era, there has been an attempt to resolve Papua through dialogue, which became the policy of each Indonesian President, but with different implementation. However, peaceful dialogue is hard to achieve. This study explains the challenges to carrying out the dialogue through four issues: revisiting the declaration of Papua's Land of Peace; examining the policies of Indonesian Presidents towards Papua and the path of peaceful dialogue after the reform era; exploring a meaning of 'independence' that can contribute to the realization of peaceful dialogue; and explicating the political challenges that become obstacles to the Papua-Jakarta peace dialogue. To conclude, this paper argues that a complete settlement for Papua can only be reached through peaceful dialogue between Papua and Jakarta, Indonesia.
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
The views, opinions, and pictures expressed in this journal are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the opinions and viewpoints of the editor and the editorial board. All rights are reserved by the authors and the Institute of Human Rights and Peace Studies of Mahidol University. No part of this journal may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means without the prior permission in writing from the journal’s editor, or as expressly permitted by law, or under terms agreed with the appropriate reprographics rights organization. Non-commercial use of information in this journal must be properly referenced.
References
Abu-Nimer, M. (2003). Nonviolence and peacebuilding in Islam: Theory and practice. University Press of Florida.
Al-Makassary, R. (2015). Damai Papua Damai Indonesia [Peace in Papua peace in Indonesia]. Kementerian Agama Papua.
Al-Makassary, R. (2017). Insiden Tolikara dan Ja’far Umar Thalib: Kontroversi mushalla yang “dibakar” dan drama jihad di tanah Papua [Tolikara and Ja’far Umar Thalib Incidents: The Controversy of mushalla’s“burning” and jihad drama in Papua]. Jayapura: Kementerian Agama Papua.
Alua, A. A. (2000). Kongres Papua 2000, 29 Mei-4 Juni: Marilah kita meluruskan sejarah Papua Barat [Papua congress 2000, May 29-June 4: Let us straighten out the history of West Papua]. Sekretariat Presidium Dewan Papua dan Biro Penelitian STFT Fajar Timur.
Appleby, R. S. (2000). The ambivalence of the sacred. Rowman and Littlefield.
Ariawinangun, D., & Broek, T. P. A. van den (Eds.). (2000). Memoria passionis di Papua: Kondisi sosial politik dan hak asasi manusia gambaran 2000 [Memoria passionis in Papua: Socio-political and human rights conditions in 2000]. Sekretariat Keadilan dan Perdamaian (SKP).
Aspinall, E., & Fealy, G. (2003). Local power and politics in Indonesia: Decentralisation and democratisation. ISEAS.
BPS Papua. (2020). Provinsi Papua dalam angka 2020 [Papua in figures 2020]. CV Karya Kelabat.
Broek, T. P. A. van den (Ed.). (2003). Memoria passionis di Papua: Kondisi sosial politik dan hak asasi manusia 2001 [Memoria passionis in Papua: Socio-political and human rights conditions pictured 2001]. Sekretariat Keadilan dan Perdamaian (SKP).
Chauvel, R. (2019). Papua under the Joko Widodo presidency. In L. Max (Ed.) Continuity and change after Indonesia’s reforms (pp. 213–237). ISEAS-Yusof Ishak Institute.
CNN. (2020, October 30). Investigasi tim kemanusiaan: Pendeta Yeremia ditembak [Humanitarian team investigation: Reverend Jeremiah shot]. https://www.cnnindonesia.com/nasional/20201029125036-20-563926/investigasi-tim-kemanusiaan-pendeta-yeremia-ditembak-tni
Giay, B. (2004). West Papua peace zone: The role of the church in West Papua and local initiatives: The struggle for human rights. In G. T. Haar & J. B. James (Eds.), Religion, violence and visions for peace (pp. 203-224). Brill.
Hasan, N. (2006). Laskar Jihad: Islam, militancy, and the quest of identity in post-new order Indonesia. Cornell Southeast Asia Program Publications.
Hernawan, B. J. (2013). From the theatre of torture to the theatre of peace: The politics of torture and re-imagining peacebuilding in Papua, Indonesia [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. The Australian National University.
International Crisis Group. (2002, September 13). Indonesia: Resources and conflict in Papua (Asia report No. 39). https://www.crisisgroup.org/asia/south-east-asia/indonesia/indonesia-resources-and-conflict-papua
International Crisis Group. (2012, August 9). Indonesia: Dynamics of violence in Papua (Asia Report No. 232). https://www.crisisgroup.org/asia/south-east-asia/indonesia/indonesia-dynamics-violence-papua
King, P. (2004). West Papua & Indonesia since Suharto's independence, autonomy or chaos? UNSW Press.
Kirksey, E. (2012). Freedom in entangled worlds: West Papua and the architecture of global power. Duke University.
Lederach, J. P. (2007). The moral imagination: The art and soul of building peace (Association of Conflict Resolution Sacramento, September 30, 2004). European Judaism, 40(2), 9-21. https://doi.org/10.3167/ej.2007.400203
MacLeod, J. (2007). Self-Determination and autonomy: The meanings of freedom in West Papua. In M. A. Brown. (Ed.), Security and development in the Pacific Islands social: Resilience in emerging states (pp. 139-168). Lynne Rienner Publisher.
Maniagasi, F. (2001). Masa depan Papua: Merdeka, otonomi khusus, & dialogue (The future of Papua: Independence, special autonomy, & dialogue). Millenium Publishers.
Purwoko, B. (2015). Bureaucracy and the politics of identity: A study on the influence of ethnicity on the bureaucratic restructuring process in Sorong Selatan regency, West Papua, Indonesia [Unpublished master’s thesis]. University of Western Australia.
Raweyai, Y. T. (2002). Mengapa Papua ingin merdeka [Why Papua wants independence]. Presidium Dewan Papua.
Report of the Republic of Indonesia. (2004). Questioning the unquestionable: An overview of the restoration of Papua into the Republic of Indonesia. Permanent Mission of the Republic of Indonesia to the United Nations.
Sebastian, L. C., Syailendra. E. A., & Marzuki. K. I. (2018). Civil-military relations in Indonesia after the reform period. Asia Policy, 13(3), 49–78. https://www.nbr.org/publication/civil-military-relations-in-indonesia-after-the-reform-period/
Solihah, R., Witianti. S., & Ummah, M. (2019). The political perspective of Indonesian civil-military relations in the reform era. Central European Journal of International & Security Studies, 13(4), 34-50. https://cejiss.org/political-perspective-of-indonesian-civil-military-relation-in-the-reform-era
Sumule, A. (2003). Mencari jalan tengah otonomi khusus provinsi Papua [Seeking a middle ground for special autonomy of Papua province]. Gramedia.
Tebay, N. (2007). “Papua, the land of peace”: The interfaith vision and commitment for West Papua. Exchange, 36(4), 337–358. https://doi.org/10.1163/157254307X225025
Triharyanto, B. (Ed.). (2019). Memoria passionis di Papua no. 38: Tuntut martabat orang Papua dihukum: Potret politik rasialisme di tanah Papua 2019 [Memoria passionis in Papua no. 38: Demand the dignity of Papuans be punished: Political portrait of racism in the land of Papua 2019]. Sekretariat Keadilan dan Perdamaian (SKP).
Warburton, E. (2016). Jokowi and the new developmentalism. Bulletin of Indonesian Economic Studies, 52(3), 297–320. https://doi.org/10.1080/00074918.2016.1249262