Indonesia successfully prevents ULMWP to be full member

Indonesia successfully prevents ULMWP to be full member at MSG

On its 20th summit, held in Honiara, Solomon Islands on 24-26 June, Melanesian Spearhead Group (MSG) finally made a tough but a historic decision by granting United Liberation Movement for West Papua (ULMWP) observer status. Although the summit has finished, the discussion about the decision and its future impact on Papuans is still not over.

The decision surprises some Papuans but many show their joy welcoming the decision as they perceive as a success story. Some even call it a miracle bestowed upon Papuans who have consistently fought for such a recognition in an international forum for decades.

And finally, West Papua representative, ULMWP, has a definitive status at MSG. The status, as they claim, is a beginining of a political step towards full member in MSG and later move to a full political independence.

My colleague who is a political analyst at Cenderawasih University in a conversation with me several days ago commented that the Papua-granted status as observer consitute a highest achievement of hard work and continuous lobbies by Papuans and this status should be accepted wholeheartedly. At least frequent rallies across Papua in support of West Papua to the member of MSG has partially been answered by MGS by granting West Papua observer status.

Certainly, I am not on the side of those who think the observer status as a blessing. I think it is a failure for West Papuans and a success for Indonesia. Logically, if Papuans want full member and MSG grants observer status, either MSG fails to understand Papuan’s grievance or Papuans fails to convince MSG the importance of having a full member status as a noticeable sign of moral support and political recognition.

As I am aware that MSG understands Papua’s problems very well as shown by strong language in numerous statements by MSG member state leaders, it must therefore a failure on Papua’s side. That said, in politics, if your final goal or target is not achieved, it simply means a failure. One might understand this failure as a delayed success or a real failure, it is a matter of taste.

But, at this moment, it is reasonable to declare that Papua’s intense lobbies to convince MSG members states to accept Papua as full member has been unsuccessful. Using the issue of human rights abuses, economic underdevelopment under Indonesia’s rule and adopting cultural bond Melanesia brothers and sistes approach have not affected MSG members states to grant West Papua full member.

At this stage, shared values and identity as Mellanesian fail to affect MSG’s decision. it is clear that these cultural values are proven inadequate. Human Rights abuses and poor economic progress might be an effective tool for raising cultural solidarity but not a decisive force for a change in political landscape.

If identity, human rights issues and economic underdevelopment is not a decisive factor to influence MSG to accomodate West Papua’s aspiration, then what makes MSG heroically upgrade Indonesia status from observer held since 2011 to associate member status? and what makes MSG reluctantly admits West Papua to similar status as Indonesia or even grant Papua a permanent member?

The answer to the question lies at how Indonesia perceives West Papua. As Papua is considered strategic politically and economically, Indonesia will take a comprehensive approach to make sure that Papua remains part of Indonesia; and being a full member of MSG is considered as a threat to Indonesia integrity and automatically affect Indonesia economic and political gains. Therefore, the MSG’s decision pleases Indonesia. Indonesia’s diplomacy should be considered a success but constitute a failure on Papua’s side.

Further, the pressure of Indonesia towards MSG member states have been not only effective but also decisive. As cultural identity inadequately explains the MSG’s behavior, one needs to look other factors. Two things worth mentioning.

First, dominant actor always affects states behavior within a system. Take an example, the decision of United Nations is mostly driven by political and economic interest of the United States and western powers. As United States the UN biggest funding contributor, one can easily predict how a decision is made. US and western democracy influence UN security council to undertake military action against Libya in 2011.

The US also plays significant role in shaping NATO, a group of western country, to launch humanitarian interventions in Kosovo 1999. What’s more, US successfully prevents Palestine to claim a political independence within UN Security Council system despite majority support of UN member states. The failure of Palestine to gain an international recognition as an independent state is driven by the interest of Israel supported by US power

Having said that in my opinion, both Indonesia and PNG are the dominant actors in the MSG. Indonesia affects MSG from outside, as Israel influences US from outside Security Council; and PNG affects from inside as US uses its veto rights from inside the system. Granting Indonesia an associate member in MSG while Papua observer status indicates this relation.

Moreover, Indonesia is very active in influencing MSG policy towards a pro Indonesia driven Policy. As Israel through American Israel Public Committee (AIPAC) has a strong lobby to advance Isreal interests, Indonesia does the same. As a result, both PNG and Fiji in several occasions have maintained that West Papua is an integral part of Indonesia despite their serious concern over human rights abouses in West Papua.

Interestingly, both PNG and Fiji also play decisive role in helping Indonesia to gain observer status in 2011 through their respective prime ministers, Sir Michael Somare, then prime minitester of PNG and Frank Bainimarama, Fiji Prime Minister. Therefore, both PNG and Fiji policies will stay the same.

PNG is an inside dominant’s role as it controls the system of the MSG. As US controls the system of International order, PNG controls the system of MSG. To stabilize and control MSG, one needs a stabilizer and controller that PNG perfectly plays the role.

As the biggest country in pacific island and the founder of MSG, PNG pushes MSG’s policy towards a friendly policy with Indonesia. This is to maintain its long held good relations with Indonesia established since 1986 under the Treaty of Mutual Respect, Friendship, and Cooperation. This treaty guarantees territorial integrity of both parties as it reads under article (2) that “Each Contracting Party shall display and promote respect for the other country ' s national independence, sovereign equality , and territorial integrity.” Such affirmation still applies today and will not change in short period of time unless no defining moment.

Another thing that should be mentioned here is that interests affect state behavior and decisions. Political and economic interests strongly influence states behavior; and state will prioritize its national interest over others.

If one looks at how political and economic interests affect MSG decision, one can look at how Indonesia and PNG have economic interests. PNG and Indonesia have signed MoU both under Indonesia past president, Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono and current president Joko Widodo in which the cooperation covers wide ranges of areas.

Indonesia and PNG share strong commitment to boost economic development by agreeing to work on gas, oil and mining explorations in the border between these two countries and cooperation to combat cross border crimes. As this cooperation gets stronger, it is less likely that both countries will pursue a policy that threatens the economic and political interests. Both Indonesia and PNG prioritize national interests, respect territorial integrity; and they do not want to sacrifice the share benefits arises from cooperation.

In short, Indonesia and its two key partners in MSG will take any measures to prevent the road to Papua membership because Indonesia relations with these two key MSG member states are stronger than Papua’s bid to gain a full member. Strategically, political and economic interests are still the main driving force in the policy of PNG and Fiji at MSG and not a cultural ties of Melanesia. So, MSG granting observer status to Papua and upgrading Indonesia’s status from observer to associate member indicate a victory for Indonesia diplomacy and lobbies.

ENDS

© Scoop Media