Minggu, 12 September 2010

Declaration On Peaceful Dialogue: West Papua National Coalition For Liberation

0 komentar
Thursday, 28 January 2010 13:32

West Papua National Coalition for Liberation (WPNCL)

In recent days, the Papuan people have been thrown into confusion by an erroneous understanding of the meaning of peaceful dialogue and then deceived about the meaning of a referendum by a small group of people who have a very limited understanding of diplomacy.

These narrow-minded individuals and groups quite evidently reject Peaceful Negotiations (dialogue) but demand a Referendum. They are like small children unable to walk without the help of their parents. In other words, how is it possible to have a referendum without peaceful negotiations?

We would like on this occasion to clarify to the general public the meaning and processes involved in diplomacy within the framework of peaceful negotiations.

Friends should understand that in the world of diplomacy, efforts to resolve a conflict always involve a certain process. The process is very simple:*dialogue first, then referendum, not the other way round. *A referendum can only take place as the result of an agreement reached by means of peaceful negotiations between the two conflicting parties.

During the peaceful negotiations, agreement is reached on an agenda accepted by the two sides. The objective of the peaceful negotiations is to find a middle way to resolve a long-standing problem. Winning or losing is not the way to measure the results of peaceful negotiations. The whole problem is discussed on the basis of respecting the rights of the two sides involved. Achieving an agreement is only possible when there is a thorough understanding between the two sides on the need to maintain peace and security in the political arena.

It is quite natural for there to be agreements and disagreements between the two negotiating parties. This does not mean that we should break off talks; the talks must continue as deemed possible within the existing political climate. For instance, during the course of the first discussions on political matters, there will be talks during which the question of a referendum is also discussed. If the other side does not agree with this proposal, it does not mean that this is the end of the matter. In the next stage of the talks, the matter can be raised and discussed again until agreement is reached between the two sides.

The problems in West Papua need to be seen within the context of the above way of thinking. The problem of West Papua *can only* be resolved within the framework of peaceful negotiations. There is no other way.

There can never be a referendum which these people talk about endlessly unless peaceful negotiations are held.

It could be that we are dragged to the negotiating table by force of arms, it could be that we enter negotiations as a result of external pressure from the UN, it could be that we are dragged into negotiations because of the call from our ancestors, coming from on high or from down below; whatever way it happens, we will be dragged to the negotiation table. There is no other way.

It is at the negotiating table that the two disputing parties, West Papua and Indonesia, will reach agreement on whether or not to hold a referendum. There cannot possibly be a referendum without negotiations.

We must first understand the diplomatic process before using words that fail to lead to a proper understanding.

A clear example is PEPERA (the Act of Free Choice) in 1969. Pepera took place as the result of peaceful talks between Indonesia and The Netherlands held under the auspices of the UN acting as the third party.

Even though the UN failed to perform its obligations in the way it should have, diplomacy was pursued at the time in accordance with the etiquette of diplomacy, not the other way round. Pepera did not take place before negotiations were held. That would have been incredible.

If this is what is meant, those calling for a referendum without first holding peaceful talks must answer the following question: On what basis can a referendum be held? If these people know the answer, they should come forward and explain themselves. Should the UN be asked to hold a referendum? What would be the basis for the UN to agree to this? Should the UN urge Indonesia to hold another referendum in West Papua after reviewing the history of Pepera? In order to do this, it would be necessary to hold peaceful talks between Papua and Indonesia under the auspices of the UN or a third country. As a sovereign country, Indonesia would not simply surrender to the UN. Indonesia would stand by its own dignity and its territorial integrity.

As a member of the leadership of the WPNCL which is calling for peaceful negotiations, we call for an end to all these provocations that are being promoted by irresponsible elements who are ignorant about diplomatic processes.

The best thing would be for these provocateurs to go back to school and learn about diplomatic processes because their ignorance cannot possibly help pave the way to peaceful talks but can only damage our aspiration for peaceful talks. Many will ask: ‘How is it that they know nothing about diplomacy yet they want independence?’ This is quite shameful. We do not want people to think in such a way about the Papuan people as a whole because the fact is that not all Papuans think along these erroneous lines. The Papuan people are a people with great dignity and know very well how to handle these matters.

As far as West Papua is concerned, peaceful negotiations have attained an excellent position recently because this approach has received the full backing of the West Papuan people, including the radical OPM and its military wing, the TPN. Another fortunate thing is that it now has the backing of peace-loving people in Indonesia. Without the use of weapons but thanks to pressure from peace-loving people in West Papua, Indonesia and the international community, all our efforts for peaceful negotiations are supported worldwide. The US Congress, the UN, the European Union, the Pacific Islands Forum and the Melanesian Spearhead Group all support peaceful negotiations because they regard this as the best way forward, in compliance with diplomacy. So no one should for a minute think that these bodies will support a referendum without there having first been peaceful negotiations.

Having explained all this, we hope that everyone will fully understand the process for peaceful talks. We would like to use this opportunity to appeal to the people of West Papua and peace-loving people the world over to give their full support to the initiative for peaceful negotiations which is now being pursued by the leadership of the West Papua National Coalition for Liberation, along with peace-loving people in West Papua, in Indonesia and throughout the world.

May peace be achieved in the Land of Papua!

Peace greetings!

Dr Otto Ondawame,
Deputy Chairman of the WPNCL

Souce: http://indigenouspeoplesissues.com

0 komentar:

Posting Komentar