웨스트 파푸아의 침략과정을 잘 분석했습니다.
번역을 해서 올려야 하는데, 형편이 여의치 않아 일단 원문 그대로 올립니다..
(웨스트 파푸아와 관련하여 자료를 번역하고 같이 고민할 분들의 연락을 기다립니다.
아....친구가 너무 진부한 표현이라고 뭐라 하네요^^.
사실 이런 문제에 대하여 재정 지원을 부탁하는 것은 그리 어렵지 않을거 같은데...시간을 부탁하기란 상당히 어려운 일이네요...
웨스트 파푸아에서 만난 한 목사님이 그러시더군요..
solidarity keeps us alive..
오늘도 많은 사람들이 죽어가고 있습니다. 웨스트 파푸아를 상징하는 모닝스타를 게양했다는 이유로 15년형을 선고받아야 하고, freeport라는 다국적 광산 기업을 먹여 살리기 위해 인도네시아 군부는 채광 지역 일대의 주민들을 강제로 내쫓고 환경과 문화를 파괴하고 있습니다. 그곳의 분위기는 숨쉬는 것 조차 자유롭지 않았습니다. 폭력이 일상화된 상황에서, 그들은 하나님조차 그들을 외면했다고 생각하고 있습니다.
하지만, 사람이란 정말 위대한 존재인거 같습니다. 인도네시아가 그들을 억압할 수록 독립에 대한 열망은 더 살아나고 있으며, 끊임없이 저항하고 있습니다.
몇 달 전 집회 현장에서 경찰에게 연행되었다가, 경찰서에서 정체불명의 주사를 맞은 여학생에게 물었습니다. 왜 운동을 하느냐고....'나는 웨스트 파푸아 사람들이고, 그들과 함께 있으며, 그들을 위해 목소리를 내야 한다고 생각한다'고 하더군요.
웨스트 파푸아에 함께 하실 분들은 저희에게 연락을 주시기 바랍니다.
hkshlee72@naver.com으로 연락 주시거나, 이 블로그에 연락을 남겨주셔요.
저희는, 유해정, 이상희입니다.
--------------------
*The need for understanding Papua's history, grievances*
*Carmel Budiardjo*, London
It has been asserted in your columns this week (/Local Elections and
Papuan Politics/, July 11, 2005) that because the majority of West
Papuans participated in general elections in 2004, they were therefore
participating in an internal referendum. The writer also claims that
they participated in an external referendum, known as Pepera (the
so-called Act of Free Choice) which took place in 1969.
He did not dispute the fact that only one thousand Papuans participated
in Pepera but alleged that because the result was endorsed by the
United
Nations, the Indonesian government was justified in "relying on the
results of Pepera" for its claim that West Papua is a legitimate part
of
the Indonesian Republic.
In the first place, to liken general elections to a referendum shows
the
shallowness of this analysis. Elections are about choosing
representatives of different political parties which in today's
Indonesia consist of nearly fifty parties. Whereas a referendum is the
occasion for the electorate to choose between two or more options, and
opinions often cross party lines.
Whether or not people participate in elections relates not only to
making choices about party programs but may also be generated by fear
or
anxiety that by not participating, they could face accusations of
separatism or sedition.
Recent events in West Papua, such as the military operations underway
in
the Central Highlands district of Punjak Jaya, which forced thousands
of
villagers to take refuge in the forest, abandoning their homes and
gardens, suggest that fear of the authorities still plays a role in
people's decision about participating in political events.
Now that Indonesia has entered an important new political era in which
democratic rights are recognized as one of the basic rights of the
population, it is strange that someone who presumes to have the
expertise to hold forth about political affairs fails to recognize that
the Act of Free Choice conducted by the Indonesian authorities in the
Soeharto era was anything but democratic.
At the time of the Act, the population of Papua was estimated as being
a
little over 800,000, yet no one disputes the fact that only one
thousand
persons (to be precise, 1,022), not even one per cent of the
population,
participated in that Act.
The Act was conducted following the New York Agreement of 1962 which
was
concluded as the result of intervention from Washington which feared
that Indonesia, then under President Sukarno, was getting too close to
the Soviet bloc. The agreement was concluded between Indonesia and The
Netherlands, without Papuan participation or consultation.
As a result of Dutch insistence, it included a clause providing for an
Act within six years that should be held in accordance with
"international practice" This can surely only mean one thing, namely
the
principle of "one man, one vote".
The issue of West Papua was discussed in the House of Lords last
December. On that occasion, the Bishop of Oxford asked the British
government for its views about the Act of Free Choice which he had
described as being an occasion when a thousand representatives "were
coerced into declaring for inclusion in Indonesia".
Replying for the government, Baroness Symons said: "He is right to say
that there were 1,000 handpicked representatives and they were largely
coerced into declaring for inclusion in Indonesia". One can hardly
disregard the views of the British Government, stated in the country's
highest political forum.
As we know here in the UK, the British government is closely following
events in West Papua, not least because a major British company, BP,
has
decided to invest massively in the exploitation of West Papua's vast
reserves of natural gas. While seeking to promote this investment, the
government has not refrained from acknowledging that the way in which
the territory was incorporated into the Indonesian Republic was
seriously flawed.
West Papua has now been officially part of Indonesia for more than
thirty years, or even longer if you include the six years following the
Dutch withdrawal in 1963, yet the sense of grievance still runs deep.
When President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono made a visit to West Papua last
December, shortly after his inauguration and after saying that the
resolution of the conflict in West Papua was "one of his top
priorities", the leaders of all the churches there decided to boycott
the visit. As far as we know, not even during the worst days of the
Soeharto era did such a thing ever happen.
No one should make the mistake of disregarding the views of the
churches
in West Papua which have always played a prominent role and have always
acted in the best interests of the largely Christian population.
There are many serious problems in West Papua, not least the confusion
created by the government's decision first to establish Special
Autonomy, and then to split the territory into three or perhaps even
into five provinces. Allegations are being made that money intended for
running the special autonomy administration is being used to cover the
cost of ongoing military operations.
There is also concern that the continuing influx of migrants from other
parts of Indonesia is turning the Papuans into a minority in their own
homeland. In some of the major cities such as Jayapura, this is already
true.
It may be true that events in West Papua are too infrequently reported
in Indonesia's national media which perhaps accounts for a great deal
of
misunderstanding about conditions there. We can only hope that this
will
be speedily remedied.
In particular, commentators should play closer attention to the events
in the 1960s which lie at the root of the grievances of the people of
West Papua.
/The writer is the founder of the Indonesia Human Rights Campaign, set
up in 1973./
--
Jan Lozano
Databank Staff
Information and Communication Unit
최근 댓글 목록