Keep military assistance from Indonesia
The United States government is seeking to reestablish military ties with Indonesia under the banner of “fighting terrorism.” It is doing this in spite of the Indonesian military’s links to terrorist groups with ties to Al Qaeda.
You may think Indonesia is too far away to be relevant to your life, but your government doesn’t. We’ve had a close relationship since 1965, when a military coup led by General Suharto massacred half a million Indonesians. The Suharto regime was highly praised in the West for its anti-communism, favorable climate for foreign investment and social stability enforced by a strong military. When Indonesia invaded its neighbor East Timor in 1975, killing 200,000 East Timorese, or one-fourth of the population, it did so with our government’s blessing and 90 percent United States-supplied armaments. We acted diplomatically to prevent United Nations intervention or sanctions against Indonesia for its aggression.
The East Timorese finally did succeed in freeing themselves by voting overwhelmingly for independence in a 1999 referendum. The Indonesian military retaliated by killing more than 5,000 Timorese and destroying most of the country as it pulled out in late 1999.
In response to the brutality visited on East Timor, human rights activists in the United States got Congress to cut off military training and weapons transfers to Indonesia. The U.S. military has been trying to overturn the ban ever since. Sept. 11 boosted their efforts enormously. They now are asking Indonesia to submit a “wish list” of heavy weapons they would like to use to “fight terrorism.”
Who, then, are these terrorists? The Indonesian military has its favorites. One of them is the Free Aceh Movement. Aceh is located at the northern end of the island of Sumatra and is rich in natural gas reserves. Much of the profit from this resource goes to the central Indonesian government or the ExxonMobil corporation, not the local people. The military has responded to the Acehnese people’s call for greater autonomy and control over their resources with a “search and destroy” approach. This approach has kept Exxon’s assets relatively safe by flooding Aceh with Indonesian soldiers and violence.
At the other end of Indonesia, in West Papua, the western half of New Guinea, Freeport McMoRan, based in New Orleans, operates the world’s largest copper and gold mine. Local people charge that the mine has poisoned the rivers. As in Aceh, locals see few of the benefits of economic development and face violence at the hands of the military if they demand a greater voice in deciding how their resources and territory are used. Some of them want an independent West Papua and are facing a military crackdown.
There are real terrorist groups in Indonesia that Americans should be worried about. One is called Laskar Jihad. They killed thousands of Indonesian Christians on islands in the southeast of Indonesia in 1999. They are reported to have connections to Osama bin Laden and Al Qaeda. According to the November 2001 World Today magazine, a respected British journal of international affairs (available at Middleton periodicals at D 410 W63), Laskar Jihad was trained by the same Indonesian military forces the United States trained and now wants to reestablish contacts with. They were armed by the same people the United States wants to start selling weapons to again.
Why is our government acting in this way? According to the World Today, “In the war on terrorism, as during the Cold War, America seems less concerned about how its allies behave at home, as long as they remain loyal on the global stage. When Indonesia says that it will support the war against terrorism, it is not looking at its own Islamic extremists, but at organizations that are advocating separatism.”
It is a convenient symbiosis. The United States gets a loyal coalition partner in the international arena, expands its influence over the Indonesian military and American companies keep making big profits. The Indonesian government gets new American aid, free reign to use any means to clamp down on independence movements and domestic political cover by not fighting Islamic militants but rather using them to attack disloyal constituencies.
I want to say very clearly that the U.S. policy of arming brutal regimes, even ones who harbor terrorist groups, did not start with the “war on terrorism” or with the current president. The roots of that go deeper than partisan differences. They simply can be more easily be pushed through Congress now in light of fear of being accused of being “soft on terrorism,” analogous to being “soft on communism” during the Cold War or “soft on crime” domestically. In light of that, it is more important than ever for Americans to be vigilant about what is being done by our government. Part of that vigilance should be keeping U.S. military assistance from Indonesia.
Brian Marks