The Time has Come Now for Our Civilised & Democratic

World to Review the So-Called

“UN Supervised Act of Free Choice 1969”
in West Irian

A Briefing Paper
Presented by
Sem Karoba, BSW
The West Papuan Peoples’ Representative Office
Port Vila, the Republic of Vanuatu
July 2004
Executive Summary
This paper briefs background reasons for handing over West Papua to
Indonesia, i.e., a cold war whitewash as well as the interests on the rich
mineral resources in the territory and claims that the Indonesia’s argument of
Dutch East Indies as the “New Indonesia” is baseless.

In our war on Terrorism and in promoting democracy, security and stability

across the Pacific Islands countries, the independence of West Papua is the
key factor that determines the future of the Pacific Islands. To do otherwise
is not more than just serving the interests of the nations that are foreign to
Pacific Island countries and peoples, i.e., business interests in West Papua.

It has now become reality that the Act of Free Choice 1969 in West Papua
was a sham, and therefore, the West Papuan Peoples’ Representative Office
(WPPRO) Port Vila, the Republic of Vanuatu proposes:
• There is a need to request the UN Secretary-General to Review the
UN Conduct of the so-called Act of Free Choice (AFC) 1969 in West
Papua;
• There is a need to request an internal review within the UNO
organisation of the AFC 1969 in West Papua.
• There is a need to consider and pursue both political and legal avenues
to challenge the credibility of the AFC 1969 in West Papua.
• There is a need for a united voice of the Pacific Islands countries on
the issue of West Papua history, and
• There is a need for Pacific Islands’ leaders to put pressures on
Indonesia to open dialogue table.

This Briefing Paper is also available at:

http://www.westpapua.net/docs/papers/paper10/briefing04.doc
To contact Us:
Emails: morningstar@vanuatu.com.vu, amole@wp.minihub.org,
To Know More About Our Independence Campaigns:
Websites: http://www.papuapost.com, http://www.westpapuaenws.com,
http://www.westpapua.net, http://www.melanesianews.org

WPPRO Briefing Paper 2004 -2-

Table of Contents
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ......................................................................................................... 2
TABLE OF CONTENTS ........................................................................................................... 3
A. BACKGROUND ................................................................................................................. 4
1. West Papua in Colonial Map ...................................................................................... 4
2. The Cold War and West Papua................................................................................... 4
3. Interests on the West Papua’s Rich Natural Resources .............................................. 5
B. CURRENT REVELATIONS.................................................................................................. 7
1. Credibility of the AFC 1969 Questioned .................................................................... 7
3. Indonesia’s Responses: It Still Sings the Old Songs .................................................. 9
C. LOOKING AHEAD: THE FUTURE OF WEST PAPUA?........................................................... 9
1. War on Terror ............................................................................................................. 9
2. Islamisation and Ethnic Cleansing Policies .............................................................. 10
3. Special Autonomy for West Papua ........................................................................... 10
4. Political Avenue........................................................................................................ 11
5. Legal Avenue ............................................................................................................ 11
D. FINAL REMARKS ........................................................................................................... 11
E. ATTACHMENTS .............................................................................................................. 13
Attachment A: The 88 US Senators Letter to the UN Secretary-General .................... 13
Attachment B1: FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE : MAJORITY OF TDS CHALLENGE
SHAM VOTE IN WEST PAPUA ................................................................................ 15
Attachment B2: List of Supporting Parliamentarians................................................... 16
Attachment C: STATEMENT BY ARCHBISHOP DESMOND TUTU, SOUTH
AFRICA........................................................................................................................ 18
Attachment D: Mood of optimism heralds Pacific Forum meeting.............................. 19
F. ENDNOTES: .................................................................................................................... 20

WPPRO Briefing Paper 2004 -3-

A. Background
1. West Papua in Colonial Map
West Papua (or West Irian, Nederlandsche Nieuw Guinea, Irian Jaya, and Papua) was part of the Dutch
colony since 1828. It had a peculiar status within the Dutch colonial administrative territory called the
Dutch East Indies. The Nederlandsche Nieuw Guinea was under direct administrative link with the
colonial power when Indonesia declared its independence (17 August 1945) as a historical incident after the
defeat of Japanese troops by the (Western) Allied Forces on 14 August 1945 (during the WWII) i . When the
Dutch recognised Indonesian sovereignty in 1949, the status of West Irian was yet to be resolved due to its
peculiar and separate status within the colonial map. 1

The Dutch administration then made preparations towards decolonisation of West Papua as a separate state,
first of all by excluding the territory in its acknowledgement of Indonesian state; followed by the
acknowledgement of West Papua State, her National Anthem and National Flag as well as and the Nation
on December 1st, 1961. 2 The Dutch promised West Papua Independence within ten years. A programme
called “Papuan-isation” began ever since. Papuans were sent abroad to further their studies. All of them
never come back to their home when Indonesia annexed the territory in 1961-1969.

Thus, it is obvious that West Papua’s annexation by Indonesia was a failure of the colonial power in
ensuring the future of one of its colonial territories according to UN Resolution 1514 (XV) 1960. 3

2. The Cold War and West Papua

Besides the issue of the colonial political map and the colonial powers occupying Indonesia and West
Papua, the war on Communism (Cold War) and in particular the humiliating defeat of the well-armed
United States troops by the poorly armed and Communist Vietnamese contributed significant and yet
disastrous fate to West Papua. The US was trying to appease South East Asian States to fight communism.
Soekarno, as revolutionary leader of Indonesia, who has the knowledge and experience in realpolitik,
designed a close military co-operation with the USSR, undermining the US war on communism in the
region. ii

Various discussions were held between Jakarta and Washington, but Washington could not appease Jakarta.
Soekarno declared war against the Netherlands on 19 December 1961 (18 days after the Dutch
acknowledged its decolonisation plan for West Papua). This declaration called the Triple Command of

1 The Papua Conflict: Jakarta’s Perceptions and Policies, Richard Chauvel and Ikrar Nusa Bhakti, East-West
Center, Washington, 2004, pp.11-2. [http://www.westpapua.net/docs/papers/paper9/ps005.pdf]
2 West Papua: from COLONISATION to RECOLONISATION, X 1414, GF990/402, by J. O. Rumaseuw, The West

Papuan Community, 1999 [http://www.westpapua.net/docs/books/book1/part03.htm]

3 DECLARATION ON THE GRANTING OF INDEPENDENCE TO THE COLONIAL COUNTRIES AND PEOPLES.

A/RES/1514 (XV) 14 DECEMBER 1960 [http://www.westpapua.net/docs/un/UNGA-1514.doc]

WPPRO Briefing Paper 2004 -4-

People: (1) Dismiss the Dutch-made Papua State; iii (2) Raise the Indonesian Red-and-White Flag all over
Irian Jaya, and (3) Be prepared for a mass mobilisation. The USA saw the declaration as a war by the
Communist Ally called Indonesia against its own ally called the Netherlands. The simplest way, according
to the political map of Pentagon during the Cold War Era was to get rid of West Papua at the cost of saving
Indonesia from communist influence, through whatever way and as soon as possible. John Saltford rightly
describes the political atmosphere:
In 1961 this campaign had become a matter of some concern to the newly elected President J. F. Kennedy.
…, he was more prepared than his predecessor to seek a resolution to the dispute. Policy makers in
Washington were concerned about Jakarta's massive Soviet backed increase in military expenditure. 4

As Rumaseuw (1999) cites, the world politicians were, in their pursuit of getting Indonesia out of the
communist grip, not interested in the wish of West Papua or her peoples iv . Expressions below explain their
views on West Papua during 1960-1969:
When Kennedy met the Dutch, he bluntly said that 'WEST NEW GUINEA WAS NOT A PART OF THE
WORLD WHERE GREAT POWERS SHOULD BE 'RATIONALLY ENGAGED'"
In expressing his views to Dr. van Roijen, then Dutch Ambassador to the U.S., Kennedy said, "...THOSE
PAPUANS OF YOURS ARE SOME 700,000 AND LIVING IN THE STONE AGE."
R. Komer, a former CIA agent who was assigned as White House Senior Staff, in his November 1961 memo
to Australia stated, "THE PROPOSITION THAT A PRO-BLOC, IF NOT COMMUNIST INDONESIA, IS AN
INFINITELY GREATER THREAT TO THEM AND TO US, THAN TO INDO POSSESSION OF A FEW
THOUSANDS MILES OF CANNIBAL LAND."
The Australian Minister of Foreign Affairs, Sir G. Barwick, to his counterpart Joseph Luns of the Netherlands,
in response to ALP views stated: " I DON'T THINK LABOUR PEOPLE HAD MUCH DISAGREEMENT...
THEY WERE DECOLONISING 'BUGGS' WITHOUT CONSIDERING THE CONSEQUENCES." 5

Besides the humiliating expressions, President John F. Kennedy sent letters to the Dutch Foreign Minister,
forcing him to co-operate with the US policies in allowing West Papua to be taken over by Indonesia. 6 It is,
thus, not difficult to conclude that the Cold War contributed significant impact on the decisions made by
the USA, UN, the Netherlands and Australia to allow the handover of West Papua to Indonesia as soon as
possible, through whatever way as possible and not the democratic expression of the peoples of West
Papuan. West Papua re-colonisation by Indonesia was not more than just a cold war sell out.

3. Interests on the West Papua’s Rich Natural Resources

The rich natural resources in West Papua also played a significant role in attracting foreign interventions
into West Papua’s political future during 1960s. Today and even tomorrow, the question on who is allowed
to extract the natural resources of the territory becomes the major factor that determines the fate of West
Papua. The US interest on exploiting West Papua’s resources became the main objective besides getting rid

4 UNITED NATIONS INVOLVEMENT WITH THE ACT OF SELF DETERMINATION IN WEST IRIAN (INDONESIAN
WEST NEW GUINEA) 1968 TO 1969, By John SaItford
[http://www.westpapua.net/docs/books/book/book0/un_wp.doc]
5 West Papua: from COLONISATION to RECOLONISATION, X 1414, GF990/402, by J. O. Rumaseuw, The West

Papuan Community, 1999 [http://www.westpapua.net/docs/books/book1/part03.htm]

6 Letter from President Kennedy to Joseph Lunz, [http://www.westpapua.net/docs/books/book2/part04a.htm].

WPPRO Briefing Paper 2004 -5-

of communism from Indonesia. Rumaseuw quotes revelation of this reality as stated by the Indonesian
Prime Minister/Minister of Information in 1963:
....You all know, that our president in his recent vacation in Japan,…, also spared his time to settle Oil
Business with the Americans.. It could be proven that when in Japan, President Kennedy has sent him a
delegation to settle the oil business. So, what was said by dr. Satrio, was true, that the Indonesian nation is
now really lurked by the foreign nations
....colonialism is originate by capitalism. What is capitalism? Is it trade capitalism? This type of capitalism is
cruel. Is it industrial capitalism, it won't be so cruel. IS IT FINANCE-CAPITALISM, NAMELY CAPITAL
INVESTMENT IS MORE CRUEL BECAUSE THE POLICY FOR EXPLOITATION WILL NOT BE
CONSIDERED BASED ON THE WILL OF THE RESOURCES OWNERS, BUT WILL BE DECIDED BASED
ON EVERY OBJECTIVE FACTOR AVAILABLE WITHIN EACH INVESTING COUTRY RESPECTIVELY. 7

The state-owned US giant Freeport MacMoRan Copper & Gold, Inc. signed an agreement on 10 January
1967, 8 followed by the signing of the First Contract of Work (CoW I) on 7 April 1967, i.e., two years
ahead of the AFC 1969. v The CoW I is connected directly to the back-door lobbies by the US political
engineer, Mr. Elsworth Bunker, who proposed the draft of the New York Agreement 1962 9 and the Rome
Joint Statement (1963, 1969) vi , in which the US was given full rights to extract West Papua’s natural
resources without any limit in terms of time or amount of the resources to be extracted.

Rumaseuw’s paper interestingly and in detail presents the map of connections between the USA business
interests: the Kennedy brothers’ business circles, the Allan Pope incident, (1957)the Rockefeller’s incident
(1961) , UN Secretary-General, HommarksjÖld assassination (1961), the Dutch Zilstra’s assassination
(1962), and up to the assassination of a people and state called West Papua (1969). 10

Similar to the 1960’s foreign interests that sacrificed West Papua’s fate, Special Autonomy that began in
2002 was also imposed under pressure from the foreign powers, based on the same business interests. The
European countries are taking their turn to play with West Papua’s political future by pressurising
Indonesia to impose the Special Autonomy and encouraging Papuans to accept the package, undermining
the aspiration of Papuan peoples to democratically and peacefully review the previous conspiracy that
brought about the unlawful handover of West Papua to Indonesia. Similar to the Freeport – Indonesia
conspiracy, the British Government in particular has assisted Indonesia in setting up scenarios to impose
and implement the Special Autonomy Law with a compensation of the British Petroleum / British Gas

7 Rumaseuw, 1999. op.cit.: [http://www.westpapua.net/docs/books/book1/part04.htm] A detailed information on the

connection between business interest and the violation of Papuans’ national rights presented in WestPaC-AMP Paper:
West Papua: The Case We Knew, by Rumaseuw, WestPaC-AMP, 2001,
[http://www.westpapua.net/docs/books/book3/part03.htm]
8 West Papua: From Colonisation to Re-Colonisation, by Rumaseuw, WestPaC-AMP, 1999.

[http://www.westpapua.net/docs/books/.book1./part04.htm]
9 The New York Agreement was the Legal Basis for the exercise of the Act of Free Choice, can be found at:

[http://www.westpapua.net/.docs/nya.htm]
10 West Papua: The Case We Knew, op.cit.. [http://www.westpapua.net/docs/books/book3/part03.htm]

WPPRO Briefing Paper 2004 -6-

extracting the Liquefied Natural Gas from Bintuni Bay, West Papua. 11 They also persuaded West Papuan
leaders to comply with the Autonomy Bill. The meeting in London….,. Organised by the Foreign Office of
the British Government, Papuan leaders were persuaded to accept the Special Autonomy and promised to
assist if there is any initiative inside Indonesia towards a peaceful solution of the conflict. 12

These events justify what Ali Murtopo, the man in charge of handling Papuan nationalists during AFC
1969, once said,
Brigadier General Ali Murtopo harangued the Papuan Nationalists in Jayapura for two hours and told them
that: "JAKARTA WAS NOT INTERESTED IN THEM AS PAPUANS, BUT IN WEST IRIAN AS A
TERRITORY. IF THEY WANTED TO BE INDEPENDENT THEY HAD BETTER ASKED GOD TO FIND
THEM AN ISLAND IN THE PACIFIC WHERE THEY COULD EMIGRATE, OR MAY THEY WRITE TO THE
AMERICANS AND ASK IF THEY WOULD BE GOOD ENOUGH TO FIND THEM A PLACE ON THE
MOON. 13

B. Current Revelations
1. Credibility of the AFC 1969 Questioned14
West Papuan peoples declared independence on 1 July 1971 in Port Numbay as a response to the unlawful
handover of West Papua to Indonesia and undemocratic exercise of the AFC 1969 and have been waging
resistance campaigns, costing at least 100,000 lives of Papuans. The peoples’ protests and resistance have
been seen as “the noise from the bush”, from the “cannibals”, the “stone-age peoples” to whom the great
world leaders should not be rationally engaged. However, the first academic work to shed light upon the
legitimacy of the AFC was written by an English scholar, Dr. John Saltford. His doctoral study on the UN
Role in the AFC concludes:
I would contend that the first part of this does not require an in-depth study of the subject to arrive at an
accurate conclusion. A brief examination of the official November 1969 report is all that is needed to
conclude that the Agreement was not fulfilled. Under its terms, the Netherlands, Indonesia and the UN had
an obligation to protect the political rights and freedoms of the Papuans, and to ensure that an act of self-
determination took place, in accordance with international practice. On both these points, the three parties
failed, and they did so deliberately since genuine Papuan self-determination was never seen as an option by
any of them once the Agreement was signed.

On the UN's part in the Agreement's implementation, it is clear that the Secretariat's priority throughout was
to ensure that West New Guinea became a recognized part of Indonesia with the minimum of controversy
and disruption. This was the role assigned to the organization by the Americans in 1962, and U Thant saw no
reason not to comply. It was Cold War politics, and the rights of the Papuans counted for nothing. Indeed it
would have been extraordinary if things had turned out otherwise.

11 SPECIAL AUTONOMY FOR INDONESIA’S WEST PAPUA: Its Threats to Pluralism and Development according to
Papuans’ Perspectives, by Sem Karoba, AMP-Demmak, 2004. [http://www.westpapua.net./docs/demmak-paper.doc]
This paper presents a broader view on what is happening with the Special Autonomy for West Papua within Indonesia.
12 WPPRO Report on Meeting with British Foreign Office and West Papuan Representatives, Dr. John Otto

Ondawame, 2004. [http://www.westpapua.net/docs/paper11/wppro04.doc]

13 WEST PAPUA: From Colonisation to Recolonisation, by Glen O. Rumaseuw, WestPaC-AMP, 1999.

[http://www.westpapua.net/docs/books/book1/part05.htm]
14 http://www.westpapua.net/cases/legal/afc-1969.htm

WPPRO Briefing Paper 2004 -7-

Similar to Dr. Saltford’s conclusion, Powes Parkop argues in his paper that the AFC failed to comply with
the UN Declaration on Decolonisation that upheld “the need to pay regard to the freely expressed will of
the peoples" …Principle ix of Resolution 1514 (xv) part (a) and concludes:
These principles were profoundly breached by what happened in West Papua from the moment Indonesia
took over the country's administration. The adequate preparation of the people and their institutions and the
manner in which the so-called AFC was conducted should render the exercise and its subsequent outcome
void in international law as it clearly violates the principle of the United Nations. In any event the exercise that
was forced upon the West Papuans without their consent and participation. 15

Moreover, Dr. Fernando Ortiz-Sanz (UN Secretary-General Representative to West Papua during the AFC
1969 in West Papua) explained his views that in fact he was not satisfied with the process and outcome of
the AFC 1969. Recently, before he died, he commented that the AFC was conducted in favour of
Indonesia, and therefore, if there is a demand from the Papuans for a referendum, then it does make sense.
This confirms his report to the UN in 1969:
The tour has confirmed my initial impressions ... that the implementation of the provisions of the New York
Agreement relating to self-determination "in accordance with international practice" is, indeed, impossible. 16

In other words, he agrees with both Parkop and Saltford’s conclusions that the AFC 1969 was not carried
out in accordance with the international practice. This goes in line with Narasimhan's [U Thant's Indian
17
chef de cabinet] acknowledgement that the AFC 1969 in West Papua was a sham.

These facts and arguments were enough to come to a conclusion that a “Review on the UN Conduct” of the
vii
AFC 1969 in West Papua is indeed legally and democratically justifiable and necessary. Such a demand
is not unfamiliar for the United Nations Organisation. Following the UN-Secretary General decision to
review the UN Conduct on a similar sham in Rwanda, a worldwide campaign for the Review was launched
in 2001 in New York.

In March 2004, majority members of the Irish Parliament urged Kofi Annan 18 to review the United
Nations' role in the 1969 AFC, joining South African Archbishop and Nobel Peace Prize Laurite Desmond
19 20
Tutu and scores of non-governmental organizations and European Parliamentarians. European MPs
21
also signed the campaign for the UN conduct in 1969. On June 28, 2004, nineteen U.S. Senators sent a

15 REINSCRIPTION OF WEST PAPUA AS A COLONISED STATE AND PEOPLE, by Powes Parkop, (Master of Law)
[http://www.westpapua.net/ docs/books/book5/book5.htm]
16 Dr. John Saltford, op.cit.: 7.
17 See Clipping of SMH News, 21 November 2001.
18 Attachment B1: Report and List of Irish MPs as well as European MPs Supporting the UN AFC 1969 Review
19 Attachment C: STATEMENT BY ARCHBISHOP DESMOND TUTU, SOUTH AFRICA
20 Members of Parliament Supporting the UN Review of the Conduct 1969 in West Papua. (Attachment C)
21 Attachment B2: List of Parliamentarians Supporting the Review on the UN Conduct in AFC 1969

WPPRO Briefing Paper 2004 -8-

letter to United Nations Secretary General Kofi Annan urging the appointment of a Special Representative
22
to Indonesia to monitor the human rights situation in West Papua and Aceh.

And finally, U.S. declassified secret files revealed early July 2004 show US support for Indonesia. It says,
23
“Indonesia's 1969 Takeover of West Papua Not by "Free Choice”. The files indicate the truth that the
claim of the Papuans and comments and findings of politicians and academics that the ACF 1969 in West
Papua was not more than a “sham” is in fact highly justifiable.

3. Indonesia’s Responses: It Still Sings the Old Songs

Indonesia still sings the old songs: “it claims that the AFC 1969 was recognised by the international
community, and therefore, the revelation of the US declassified document on the AFC 1969 in West Papua
has nothing to do with the integrity of Indonesia over the territory.” The same song was aired when the
world criticised over its occupation on East Timor.

The world has seen Indonesia’s claim has always been relying on the “international recognition” that West
Papua is part of Indonesia viii , and that the AFC 1969 was carried out according to the international
practice 24 , which is clearly on the contrary to the current revelations of the conduct of the AFC. Indonesia
also says: “We should avoid the temptation to apply today's standards to situations from the past. This most
recent disclosure does not change our sovereignty over Papua." 25

“What are the democratic standards today that differ from those in the past?” is an open question to be
answered by the world civilised and democratic leaders and countries.

C. Looking Ahead: the Future of West Papua?

1. War on Terror
The war against communism has sacrificed West Papua. And today, the war against terrorism should not
repeat the same mistake. There is, thus, an urgent need for the international community to bring to an end
the acts of terror by the Indonesian armed forces, the police as well as various Islamic militia groups in

22 Attachment A: Letter from the US Congress to Kofi Annan, 2004

23 Articles on the Declassified Document: U.S. Sacrificed Papua to Court Suharto, By Jim Lobe, Asia Times,
Tuesday, July 13, 2004; Indonesia says annexation of Papua fair and final after US release declassified
documents, Radio New Zealand International, Posted at 08:19 on 13 July, 2004 UTC; Interview/Imron Cotan -
Indonesia's Ambassador to Australia -on the release of secret documents on the annexation of West Papua,
Reporter Mark Davis, SBS Dateline, July 14, 2004; US 'concern' over West Papua, The Australian, July 14, 2004
[http://www.westpapua.net/cases/legal/afc-1969.htm]
24 The History of the Return of Irian Jaya (West Papua) to Indonesia, Directorate of International Organizations,

Department for Foreign Affairs [http://www.westpapua.net/docs/history-indo.htm]

25 RI repeats same old song on Papua, Kurniawan Hari, Jakarta, The Jakarta Post, Tuesday, July 13, 2004

[http://www.westpapua.net/cases/legal/afc-1969.htm#7]

WPPRO Briefing Paper 2004 -9-

West Papua. The East Timor-style militia build-up across the border between West Papua and Papua New
Guinea as well as Wamena, the Bird’s head region and Timika under various names such as the Red-and-
White militia, Pemuda Pancasila and Laskar Jihad clearly threatens the peace and stability across
Melanesian archipelago, if not across Pacific Island countries. 26

Some countries in the Pacific region argue that the independence of West Papua can destabilise the region.
However, in the war against terrorism, the message is clear: allowing Indonesia to occupy one of the
Pacific Islands countries actually means allowing terrorist networks and activities to spread over the Pacific
region. There is a clear message that the map of the Indonesian founder Sukarno to include all Malay
speaking countries and Melanesia under the name of Pan Indonesia or Great Indonesia.

2. Islamisation and Ethnic Cleansing Policies

Besides the activities of the terrorists network, there is also a crusade of this most populous Moslem
country in the world to maintain its position as the largest Moslem country.

West Papua has become the great threat to the Indonesia’s image in the Islam world. Transmigration
programme has brought about significant increase of Moslem population in this Melanesian soil. They are
also already coming into the Pacific countries under the names of refugees, displaced peoples,
transmigration and such. Their great mission is to unify all Melanesian countries under the Islamic
Kingdom of Indonesia. The claim by certain Pacific Islands countries that the independence of West Papua
will destabilise the Pacific is merely based on business interests in this richest mineral resources country in
the world today. Allowing Indonesia to occupy the territory is just the same as allowing the Islamic crusade
to sweep across the Pacific archipelago to fulfil the mission of the Indonesian founding fathers’ map and at
the same time the imperialists to extract mineral resources from this Melanesian soil.

Besides, Indonesia’s infamous transmigration programme funded by the World Bank, based on the Rome
Joint Statement that began in 1967 has proven to be a policy to wipe out Melanesian peoples from their
own land, and to take over their lands. Formal, informal, and so-called professional transmigrants are still
pouring into West Papua. The total population of immigrants is about to outnumber the Papuans. This
reality seriously threatens the very existence of Papuans as Melanesian peoples. And the threat is already
spreading across the Pacific Islands.

3. Special Autonomy for West Papua

Special Autonomy (Otsus) was begun on January 1, 2002 (three years ago), 27 but so far, it has added more
problems to the existing problems rather than solving the problems. It was followed by a serious of policies

http://www.westpapua.net/cases/
26

UNDANG-UNDANG REPUBLIK INDONESIA NOMOR 21 TAHUN 2001 TENTANG OTONOMI KHUSUS BAGI
27

PROVINSI PAPUA [http://www.westpapua.net/cases/autonm/uuotsus.htm]

WPPRO Briefing Paper 2004 -10-

that seriously threatens the security and stability of the Pacific Regions:
1. Militia organisations under the names of Pemuda Pancasila, Laskar Jihad, and the Red-and-White
Militia have waged various activities (training, equipping, and steering up conflicts) across West
Papua, and more across the border between West Papua and PNG.
2. On July 17, police chief Inspector-General Made Mangku Pastika issued a statement announcing
operation "Adil Matoa 2002" 28 which has brought about various human rights violations,
including Ambushes and acts of terror in recent years. 29
3. The partition of the province proclaimed in 2003 has caused horizontal conflicts among the tribal
peoples of West Papua. 30
4. The murder of PDP Leader Theys Eluay as the path towards implementing Otsus has never been
properly investigated and the perpetrators were never been brought to justice. Even the killers of
the chief were regarded as the “heroes” of Indonesia’s nationalism. 31

4. Political Avenue
There is an urgent need for the Melanesian countries to demand the UN for a review of the UN conduct
during the AFC 1969. The Government of the Republic of Vanuatu has taken a clear step towards resolving
the potential threat of the terrorist activities across the Pacific Islands. The Melanesian Spearhead Group as
well as the Pacific Island Forum should also voice the humanitarian catastrophe occurring in one of the
Melanesian soils, West Papua. Likewise, the Pacific Islands Countries should also cooperate in liberating
West Papua as the door of the terrorist networks from entering into the Pacific Islands.

5. Legal Avenue
The peoples of West Papua and supporters of West Papua independence around the world have launched a
campaign to review the UN conduct on the AF 1969 in West Papua. The West Papuan Peoples’
Representative Office hereby requests the Melanesian and Pacific Islands countries to take legal action
against Indonesia’s claim over West Papua as one of the Melanesian countries.

D. Final Remarks
Indonesia’s claim over West Papua territory is now questioned, as the AFC 1969 was in fact a sham.
Continuous acts of terror and militia build-up in West Papua, particularly across the border between West
Papua and PNG clearly brings a new threat to the stability and security in the Pacific Islands countries.

28 The Indonesian version of the Matoa Operation 2002 [http://www.westpapua.net/images/02/pic01.htm -

pic07.htm]
29 "SPECIAL AUTONOMY" FOR INDONESIA’S WEST PAPUA: Its Threats to Pluralism and Development (in

Democracy, Human Rights, Law Enforcement and Economic Activities) According to Papuans’ Experience, by
Sem Karoba (Demmak), February 2004 [http://www.westpapua.net/docs/demmak-paper.doc] and
[http://www.westpapu.net/news/updates2002.htm]
30 Presidential Decree No. 1, 2003 Regarding the Partition of the Province

[http://www.westpapua.net/cases/autonm/kepres/index.htm]
31 [http://www.westpapua.net/about/heroes/theys/]

WPPRO Briefing Paper 2004 -11-

According to the international practice and laws, it is obvious that reviewing the conduct AFC 1969 is not a
taboo, but rather a necessity for our civilised and democratic world.

The credibility of West Papua’s annexation by Indonesia through the AFC 1969 has now been proven
legally fraud and democratically unjustifiable. Therefore, a UN Review on its conduct during the AFC
1969 in West Papua is clearly urgent and important. In our global war on terrorism, the issue of West
Papua is no longer an isolated one.

It is the task of us Melanesians and peoples of the Pacific Islanders to act pro-actively in preventing
instability and security problems in our countries. In long term, freeing West Papua is clearly in the
interests of us all in the region as the independence of West Papua, in a long term, actually means peace,
stability and security across the Pacific Islands countries and peoples. Failing to support West Papua’s
independence based on short-term and foreign interests will certainly sacrifice the future of peace and
security across the Pacific Islands.

In line with the Mr Urwin’s statement 32 the WPPRO proposes the Pacific Islands leaders to receive
proposals for West Papua’s inclusion as an observer that the Forum in the mentioned Pacific Plan to be
considered by the forum leaders at the end of this week.

West Papua issue is no longer an isolated one, the time has come now for us to resolve the ongoing social,
political, security and humanitarian crises in territory.

32 See Attachment D: Mood of optimism heralds Pacific Forum meeting,

[http://www.abc.net.au/ra/newstories/RANewsStories_1167931.htm]

WPPRO Briefing Paper 2004 -12-

E. Attachments
Attachment A: The 88 US Senators Letter to the UN Secretary-General
United States Senate
WASHINGTON, DC 20510
June 28, 2004

Honorable Kofi Annan

Secretary General
United Nations
New York, New York 10017

Dear Mr. Secretary General:

We are writing to urge you to appoint a United Nations Special Representative to Indonesia to monitor and report on
the situations in Aceh and Papua. This Special Representative would also make recommendations regarding steps the
UN Security Council and General Assembly might undertake to end the troubling and deadly conflicts that continue to
engulf these regions.

In Aceh, the year-long period of martial law that ended in May with the imposition of a "civil emergency" has had an
extraordinary human cost.

While it is impossible to verify the precise number of extra-judicial incarcerations and killings, accounts suggest that
more than 2000 people have been killed in the past year, the majority of whom have been civilians.

Indonesia's National Commission on Human Rights' (Komnas HAM) ad-hoc team for Aceh recently reported on the
"attacks against unarmed civilians, including victims who were murdered, tortured, sexually abused or raped, or others
who the court had not yet proved were rebels." The report also cited kidnapping, child abuse, arson, and robbery. The
Komnas HAM team alleged that most violations were committed by the Indonesian security forces, including both high
level political and military authorities, though some deaths have been attributed to the rebel Free Aceh Movement. The
conflict has also generated massive refugee flows across international borders, with thousands of others displaced
internally. Although martial law has formally ended, the massive troop presence in Aceh continues, as do most of the
restrictions imposed under martial law.

The Indonesian government and security forces have effectively shut off Aceh from the rest of the world, severely
restricting the activities of Indonesian and international humanitarian and human rights organizations.

Many non-governmental organization workers and activists have been forced into hiding. International media have
been effectively barred from entering the province and the Indonesian press has been intimidated. In an affront to the
United Nations itself, Indonesian authorities forced the UN to curtail its humanitarian activities in Aceh for several
months in 2003. While the UN and the International Committee of the Red Cross are now allowed to operate there,
significant constraints remain imposed on internal travel and contact with the civilian population.

In Papua, the UN Special Rapporteur on Violence Against Women and the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention have
long documented human rights violations. Recently, the Indonesian military's creation of militia has exacerbated
tensions between indigenous Papuans and migrants. A military campaign in the Central Highlands has led to an
inestimable number of civilian deaths and significant population displacement. The fate of those hiding in the Papuan
forests remains unknown, as military authorities have prohibited provision of humanitarian assistance. Human rights
organizations have endured intimidation and threats by government security forces operating with impunity.

Human rights violations in Papua have instigated a refugee flow across international borders. Dialogue between the
Indonesian national government and Papuan local leaders has recently broken down, as demonstrated by Jakarta's

WPPRO Briefing Paper 2004 -13-

ultimately deadly attempt to divide the province into smaller provinces against the will of the people.

The international community has remained too quiet for too long regarding the conflicts in Aceh and Papua. The scale
of human rights violations in these two Indonesian provinces warrants special international attention.

Therefore, we urge you to appoint a Special Representative to Indonesia to monitor and report on the situations in
Aceh and Papua.

We look forward to hearing from you regarding these concerns.

Sincerely,

Senator Frank R. Lautenberg (NJ)

Senator Chris Dodd (CT)
Senator Patrick J. Leahy (VT)
Senator Ron Wyden (OR)
Senator Dianne Feinstein (CA)
Senator Russell D. Feingold (WI)
Senator Deborah Ann Stabenow (MI)
Richard J. Durbin (IL)
Senator Jon S. Corzine (NJ)
Senator Herb Kohl (WI)
Senator Barbara Boxer (CA)
Senator Barbara Mikulski (MD)
Senator Carl Levin (MI)
Senator Byron L. Dorgan (ND)
Senator Patty Murray (WA).
Senator Jeff Bingaman (NM)
Senator Paul S. Sarbanes (MD)
Senator Jack Reed (RI)
Senator Daniel K. Akaka (HI)
Senator Edward M. Kennedy (MA)

cc: James B. Cunningham, Acting U.S. Representative to the United Nations

WPPRO Briefing Paper 2004 -14-

Attachment B1: FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE : MAJORITY OF TDS
CHALLENGE SHAM VOTE IN WEST PAPUA
25 MARCH 2004

A majority of TDs today challenge the sham take-over of West Papua - the first majority to so do in
Europe.

The story of West Papua is one of independence cruelly snatched away at the last hour.

Each of the 88 TDs - from all political parties - have individually signed a letter to the UN Secretary General
calling on him to initiate a review of the UN's actions in the Indonesian take-over of West Papua. This is one
significant step to righting this injustice.

"Irish politicians can be proud that they are taking a lead in Europe on this issue, and we hope this will act
as a catalyst to mobilise support internationally for the neglected cause of the West Papuan people. The
denial of the right to self-determination is the root cause of systematic human rights violations in my
country," said leading West Papuan activist John Rumbiak today.

"We would like to thank our Irish brothers and sisters who are standing with us today. Maybe this is the
beginning of the end of our isolation. I call upon the Government of Ireland to call upon the UN Secretary
General to review the UN's role in the Act of Free Choice, 1969" added Dr. John Ondawame, West Papuan
spokesman.

"Today Ireland has made history, and I am very happy to be here to witness it," proclaimed Viktor Kaisiepo.

West Papua Action Coordinator Mark Doris concluded: "We look forward to close cooperation with the
Government to build on this political breakthrough."

An estimated 100,000 West Papuans have died since the Indonesian military take-over.

Notes for Editors: (1) In 1969, while the world looked away, a grave injustice was committed against the
West Papuan people. West Papua was actually promised independence from the Dutch, the former colonial
power (by 1st December 1970). But this was cruelly snatched away in a Cold War sell-out dressed up as a
democratic plebiscite called the "Act of Free Choice". This spurious Act was contaminated by force and
violence. Just 1,022 West Papuans out of a population of one million were allowed to vote. Not surprisingly,
this handpicked group unanimously "agreed" that West Papua would become the 26th province of
Indonesia. A senior UN official in charge at the time, Chakravarthy Narasimhan, has since called the
process a "whitewash".

WPPRO Briefing Paper 2004 -15-

Attachment B2: List of Supporting Parliamentarians
British Parliament: Ann Clwyd MP - Chair, All-Party Parliamentary Human Rights Group; Jeremy Corbyn MP
- Jnt. Vice-Chair; Lord Avebury - Jnt. Vice- Chair; Robert Walter MP- Jnt. Vice- Chair; Mark Oaten MP -
Treasurer; Julie Morgan MP - Secretary, UK, PicheN@parliament.uk

Irish Parliament (TD = MP): Fianna Fáil (12 TDs): Dan Wallace TD, Noel Davern TD, Cecilia Keaveney TD,
Michael Mulcahy TD, Máire Hoctor TD, Peter Kelly TD, Eoin Ryan TD, Barry Andrews TD, John Moloney
TD, Seán Fleming TD, Dermot Fitzpatrick TD, Charlie O'Connor TD; Progressive Democrats (4 TDs): Noel
Grealish TD, Liz O'Donnell TD, Tim O'Malley TD, Fiona O'Malley TD. Fine Gael (31 TDs): Enda Kenny TD,
Leader, Gay Mitchell TD, Spokesperson on Foreign Affairs, Padraic McCormack TD, Jim O'Keeffe TD,
David Stanton TD, Paul Kehoe TD, John Perry TD, John Deasy TD, Simon Coveney TD, Dinny McGinley
TD, Bernard Durkan TD, Michael Noonan TD, Bernard Allen TD, Billy Timmins TD, Tom Hayes TD,
Seymour Crawford TD, Jimmy Deenihan TD, John Bruton TD, Paul Connaughton TD, Michael Ring TD,
Olivia Mitchell TD, Phil Hogan TD, Damien English TD, Paul McGrath TD, Dan Neville TD, Fergus O'Dowd
TD, Richard Bruton TD, Denis Naughton TD, Pat Breen TD, Gerard Murphy TD, Olwyn Enright TD; Labour
Party (21 TDs): Pat Rabbitte TD, Leader, Labour Party, Michael D. Higgins TD, Spokesperson on Foreign
Affairs, Ruairí Quinn TD, Jack Wall TD, Joe Sherlock TD, Kathleen Lynch TD, Joe Costello TD, Tommy
Broughan TD, Jan O'Sullivan TD, Mary Upton TD, Brian O'Shea TD, Liz McManus TD, Joan Burton TD,
Seán Ryan TD, Emmet Stagg TD, Willie Penrose TD, Brendan Howlin TD, Seamus Pattison TD, Róisín
Shortall TD, Eamon Gilmore TD, Breeda Moynihan Cronin TD; Green Party (6 TDs): Trevor Sargent TD,
Leader, John Gormley TD, Spokesperson on Foreign Affairs, Dan Boyle TD, Paul Gogarty TD, Ciaran Cuffe
TD, Eamon Ryan TD; Sinn Féin (5 TDs): Aengus Ó Snodaigh TD, Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin TD, Martin Ferris
TD, Arthur Morgan TD, Seán Crowe TD; Socialist Party (1 TD): Joe Higgins TD; Independent TDs (8 TDs):
Paddy McHugh TD, Marian Harkin TD, Mildred Fox TD, Seamus Healy TD, Paudge Connolly TD, Tony
Gregory TD, Finian McGrath TD, Liam Twomey TD.

Finland: Ulla Anttila MP, Vice Chairperson of the Human Rights' Group, Kari Uotila MP, Chairperson of the
Human Rights' Group, Anni Sinnemäki MP, Satu Hassi MP.

New Zealand Parliament: Green Party : Jeanette Fitzsimons MP, Rod Donald MP (co-leaders), Mike Ward
MP, Ian Ewen-Street MP, Sue Bradford MP, Metiria Turei MP, Sue Kedgley MP, Nandor Tanczos MP, Keith
Locke MP (Foreign Affairs Spokesperson); United Future: Larry Baldock MP; Progressive Coalition: Matt
Robson MP. Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand - International.Secretary@Greens.org.nz

Australia: Australian Greens Senator Bob Brown - senator.brown@aph.gov.au

Australian Greens - DebF@cyberone.com.au

Canada: Svend Robinson, MP

European Parliament: Proinsias de Rossa, MEP

Mrs Nuala Ahern MEP
Mr Alexandros Alavanos MEP
Mrs Mary Banotti MEP
Mr Margrietus (Max) J. van den Berg MEP
Mr Johannes (Hans) Blokland MEP
Mr Hans Udo Bullmann MEP
Mr Paulo Casaca MEP
Mr Michael Cashman MEP

WPPRO Briefing Paper 2004 -16-

Mr Luigi Cocilovo MEP
Mr Gerard Collins MEP
Mr Richard Corbett MEP
Mr Armando Cossutta MEP
Mr John Cushnahan MEP
Mrs Avril Doyle MEP
Mr Harald Ettl MEP
Mrs Pernille Frahm MEP
Mr Koldo Gorostiaga Atxalandabaso MEP
Mr Liam Hyland MEP
Mr Giorgos Katiforis MEP
Mrs Jean Lambert MEP
Mr Jo Leinen MEP
Mr Alain Lipietz MEP
Mrs Caroline Lucas MEP
Baroness Sarah Ludford MEP
Mr John Joseph McCartin MEP
Professor Sir Neil Mac Cormick MEP
Mrs Patricia McKenna MEP
Mr Erik Meijer MEP
Mr Seán O'Neachtain MEP
Mrs. Francisca Sauquillo Pérez Del Arco MEP
Mrs Catherine Stihler MEP
Mr Charles Tannock MEP
Mrs Anne E.M. Van Lancker MEP
Ulla Sandbaek MEP
Jens Peter Bonde MEP
Brian Crowley MEP
Niall Andrews MEP
Matti Wuori MEP
Nelly MAES MEP

(Total Members of European Parliament: 40; Total national parliamentarians: 111;

Total Parliamentarians: 151)

WPPRO Briefing Paper 2004 -17-

Attachment C: STATEMENT BY ARCHBISHOP DESMOND TUTU,
SOUTH AFRICA
For many years the people of South Africa suffered under the yoke of oppression and apartheid. Many people continue
to suffer brutal oppression, where their fundamental dignity as human beings is denied. One such people is the people
of West Papua.

The people of West Papua have been denied their basic human rights, including their right to self-determination. Their
cry for justice and freedom has fallen largely on deaf ears.

An estimated 100,000 people have died in West Papua since Indonesia took control of the territory in 1963.

It is with deep concern I have learned about the United Nations’ role in the take-over of West Papua by Indonesia, and
in the now-discredited “Act of ‘Free’ Choice” of 1969. Instead of a proper referendum, where every adult male and
female had the opportunity to vote by secret ballot on whether or not they wished to be part of Indonesia, just over
1,000 people were hand-picked and coerced into declaring for Indonesia in public in a climate of fear and repression.

The UN had just 16 observers to this Act for a country the size of Spain. The then Secretary-General’s Representative
reported on the conduct of the Act to the UN General Assembly in 1969, which noted his report on 19 November of that
year.

One of the senior UN officials at the time, Chakravarthy Narasimhan, has since called the process a “whitewash”.

A strong United Nations will be capable of, among other things, acknowledging and correcting its mistakes.

I would like to add my voice to growing international calls for the UN Secretary General to instigate a review of the
UN’s conduct in relation to the now-discredited “Act of ‘Free’ Choice”.

I will keep the people of West Papua in my prayers, and I would like to extend my best wishes and moral support to
them in their hour of need.

WPPRO Briefing Paper 2004 -18-

Attachment D: Mood of optimism heralds Pacific Forum meeting
The Pacific region is experiencing a new spirit of cooperation according to new Pacific Islands Forum Secretary
General Greg Urwin.

Mr Unwin says countries are now far more willing to unite in support of others in the region that might be in trouble.

Mr Urwin was speaking in the Samoa capital, Apia, ahead of this year's forum leaders' meeting.

Our correspondent in Apia, Sean Dorney, says for the first time, non-government organisations in the Pacific will have
their views presented directly to the 16 forum Leaders.

Mr Urwin will meet the NGOs at the end of their three-day meeting to receive their proposals about what should be
included in the Pacific Plan to be considered by the forum leaders at the end of this week.

Addressing the civil society groups at the start of their meeting, Mr Urwin said Pacific leaders had shown recently while
they respected each others sovereignty they were willing to act if a neighbour was in serious trouble.

"I think you will find that the atmosphere has changed to the extent that countries are now much more willing to support
others in extreme situations and to take the view that the problems of one are the problems of all," he said.

The forum leaders' meeting opens Thursday.

03/08/2004 16:21:10 | ABC Radio Australia News

http://www.abc.net.au/ra/newstories/RANewsStories_1167931.htm

WPPRO Briefing Paper 2004 -19-

F. Endnotes:

i Japan was the colonial power during 1942-1945. During this time, the colonial map of Dutch East Indies was already
invalid under the international law principles. The claim by Indonesia using the Dutch colonial map is, therefore invalid,
as the declaration of Independence was made during Japanese occupation, with the terms of the Japanese political
map, which means West Papua was not part of Indonesian map.
ii More Stories/ Realities are presented in Our Papers and Books that are available Online at

http://www.westpapua.net/docs/books/, produced by WestPaC, AMP and watchPAPUA.

iii The acknowledgement of the Indonesian President in this Triple Command further justifies the historical reality of the

Dutch acknowledgement of West Papua decolonisation plan.

iv The Reasons for such expressions and events during these years are well presented by Rumaseuw in West Papua:

The Case We Knew, WestPaC-AMP, 2001. [http://www.westpapua.net/docs/books/book3/]

v Papuans question today is: “How come the US company and Indonesia signed the CoW I while the territory’s future

was not yet determined through a democratic process?”

vi The Rome Joint Statement was again drafted by Mr. Bunker and signed by the Netherlands and Indonesia.

Surprisingly, the document contains the roles to be played by the USA, and the full right to the USA to extract West
Papua natural resources without limit of time or amount. The document is available at:
[http://www.westpapua.net/docs/rome-agreement.htm]. Also visit the dates of the agreement at
http://www.westpapua.net/docs/history-indo.htm and http://www.westpapua.net/docs/ books/book1/part03.htm
vii These revelations came out after the Papuan peoples passed one of the Second Papuan Congress Resolutions in

2000 that the AFC was unlawful and undemocratic, and therefore it requires a review in the light of the international
laws and democratic principles.
viii Part (1) of UN Resolution on West Papua’s annexation by Indonesia reads the UNGA: “(1) take note of the report of

the Secretary-General and acknowledge with appreciation the fulfilment by the Secretary-General and his
Representative of the tasks entrusted to them under the 1962 Agreement between Indonesia and the Netherlands.”
This actually means UNGA only ‘took note’ the outcome of the AFC 1969. Thus, there is a need to investigate why
the “taking note” happened, and not a resolution that approves or endorses or justifies the Indonesia’s occupation over
West Papua.

WPPRO Briefing Paper 2004 -20-