Final Note
Final Note
Political violence against Papua people has been going on in a quite long time. Some military operations were made through a pragmatic political policy. The militarism chosen by the government as the spearhead to bring about the policy, in turn created a long list of human right violation. The security approach in Papua that is too excessive actually is not intended for political interest only. The stipulation of DOM in Papua is also closely related to economic interest and the military interest itself. In this context, the presence of PT. Freeport constitutes a significant example where those various interests intertwine; interlock, pulling
53 Interview with Yohanis G. Bonay, Jayapura, 25 May 2002.
each other in a symbiosis mutuality channel among them reciprocally.
The emergence of Papua people’s resistance against the military as representative of state hegemony in the beginning was not based on an elegant resistance ideology. That is why various resistances carried out by Papua people often ended in stigma stab that made them powerless. In this context, the phenomenon of Mama Yosepha teaches a very valuable lesson; that the “success” of Papua people’s struggle completely will not
be determined by muscle and gun. The peaceful struggle exactly is the thing that can force the military to withdraw (in orderly manner).
The petition of Free Papua that continuously resonates turns out to be like a knife with double blades. On the one hand, it can be viewed as the most contextual and realistic movement, because it has a clear historical root and ideological base. But on the other hand, the orientation of struggle which is too political will as if lull the real struggle of human rights. The emergence of internal factionalism does not only deviate the struggle, but –without realizing it—will also change the orientation. The society vertical conflict against the state will turn into fatal horizontal conflict. Such condition exactly will re-invite military repression and repeat the human right violation and damages the values of humanity.
ELSHAM experimentation that proposes a vision of demilitarization perhaps can become another important lesson for human rights movement in Papua. This vision of demilitarization in this context is not a confrontational ELSHAM experimentation that proposes a vision of demilitarization perhaps can become another important lesson for human rights movement in Papua. This vision of demilitarization in this context is not a confrontational
In Frans Maniagasi’s view, such political awareness is important to develop, because in rational-objective thinking, the violence suffered by Papua people is not merely caused by the repressive military, but also because of Papua people’s weak “collective power” that opens the opportunity for such repression to occur. Even the most authoritarian regime will think a thousand times (first) to oppress the people who have been politically
aware and united. 54 Therefore, in his evaluation, the main key of Papua
future is how Papua people collectively are able to protect and fight for their interest. (They must be) defending
politically, and ideologically more powerful groups, including maintaining the way of life in the form of cultural expression and its values. Solidarity of Papua needs to be developed in
against
economically,
a new structure and framework through transformation of social-traditional structure into a new paradigm beyond ethnicity borders into more universal-collective identity and interest.
The effort should become a collective agenda for the existing social workers in Papua, namely NGO, church circles and adat community that have promoted since a long time ago humanity agendas in Papua land. Storm and blow of historical wave that is full of violence, repression and injustice will surely be left behind if –
54 Maniagasi, Frans, 2002. “Papua, Not Special Autonomy or Free” in Republika,
13 June 2002.
and only if—Papua people are willing to fight it together.