X-Envelope-to: seasia-l@msu.edu
X-VMS-To: IN%"seasia-l@msu.edu"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.seasia-l
Date:         Sun, 16 Aug 1992 14:40:00 +1000
From:         DAVIDB@VAXC.CC.MONASH.EDU.AU
Subject:      IN: Bishop of Dili interview 1
X-To:         seasia-l@msu.edu

/* Written  6:56 pm  Aug 12, 1992 by igc:apakabar in

reg.indonesia*/ */Topic 613 Belo 'Matra' Interview - 1 */



Remark: The poster has done a service by translating this

remarkably  frank interview by Mgr Belo.  My own reading of

the entire article in  the original Indonesian leads me to a

slightly different interpretation,  however, of Belo's

position.  He appears to argue that he personally   can get

along within Indonesia, but the matter really is up to the

East Timorese people to decide through a referendum.  As a man

of the  Church, he feels East Timor's political status is

outside his proper  domain.  His several remarks on the likely

outcome of a referendum  seem in fact in some conflict,

perhaps the result of not always  entirely precise phrases

which occur in any conversation, and the entire   thrust of

his very critical remarks on Indonesian and military

governance   in East Timor hardly provide even a weak argument

that East Timorese   would _freely_ vote in favor of

integration.  He is instead prescribing   a _short term_

limited autonomy in which the military would return to   their

barracks and ideally withdraw from the territory, largely

leaving   East Timorese to conduct their own affairs in this

period.  As a   practical matter, he doesn't seem to expect

this will happen, since  he sees so many structural

impediments in the path toward a 'freer'  democracy.  While he

usefully points up cleavages among East Timorese  on many

basic matters, he generally blames the resulting conflicts  on

Indonesians, especially the military.  In brief, he sees his

role  as trying to provide hope amidst prevailing pessimism,

that is to say,   his fundamental position is pastoral in

nature, not political.  Matra  also carries a good deal of

biographic background on Belo not heretofore  available which

is in synchrony with his outlook in the interview.  Overall,

Belo, speaking quite astutely and sharply in simple

Indonesian,   seems very willing to take on all comers and

'speak truth to power.'    No wonder that he and outgoing

Governor Mario Carrascalao are considered   'soulmates.'

  -- John (apakabar@igc.apc.org)





Forwarded from GreenNet reg.easttimor conference:

Topic 354'Matra' interviews Belo: Part I

gn:tapolreg.easttimor11:38 pm  Aug 12, 1992



Matra interview of Bishop Belo: Part I



BISHOP BELO INTERVIEWED BY 'MATRA'



'We want more freedom'



The following interview of Carlos Filipe Ximenes Belo, Bishop

of Dili, was published by the Jakarta monthly, Matra, in

August 1992.



Shortly after this interview appeared, Jawa Pos which has a

correspondent in Dili, reproduced excerpts from it. In an

introduction, the paper commented that following the 12

November 'incident', the Bishop was interviewed several times

by the paper. Recently however, the Bishop said he only wanted



to be interviewed about religious and spiritual affairs. The

day after the Matra interview appeared, Jawa Pos again sought

an interview with him but was refused. This interview shows

why Bishop Belo is so angry with the Indonesian press.



Comment: From this interview it appears that Bishop Belo is

resigned to accepting integration though he insists that a

referendum is necessary to legitimise it. He apparently

believes that a referendum would result in a victory for

integration though he says nothing to explain why.



                   ----------------------



Q:   This bay here makes the place romantic, Monseigneur.  A:



This town has long stopped being romantic. But, yes, it  looks

quite calm.



Q:   Perhaps this house is the safest place around?

A:   Ha... ha... ha! Yes, conditions here are unsettled. There



is still something wrong.



Q:   What's wrong, in your opinion?

A:   The people of East Timor must be able to live in an

atmosphere where they feel they have a place, that they are

human beings, that they are being given attention; they must

be given the freedom to be complete human beings. These

conditions can be achieved if physical and material

development is accompanied by human development. That's what

is not yet happening here.



Q:   Human development? What do you mean?

A:   People should have the freedom to move, the freedom to

think, the freedom to express their opinions. The freedom to

say that there are things they don't like. There is no such

democracy yet. We have to start teaching democracy at the

lowest level, at primary school. If people live in a democracy



they will happily get involved in working for progress. The

important thing now is to give them the key, to become

involved. What I have noticed recently is that people have

closed up more than ever. They have become more and more

closed. This is happening here. I sometimes even feel that

society is very apathetic. People at the top say everything's

OK, everything's alright, and the people answer in unison,

saying yes, everything's alright, everything's OK.



Q:   From what you hear and feel, what is it that lies deep in



the hearts of the people?

A:   This is something basic. People feel that this is their

region, their home. They consider themselves to be the ones

who own this place and they want to be placed in a proper

position as the owners. They say, we must be able to feel that



we are the owners of our own home.



Q:   But what actually happens?

A:   We Timorese behave like robots. We're told go here, or to



go there. But we cannot see who is telling us to do this. They



are playing behind the scenes.



Q:   As far as you know, what has the government done for the

people?

A:   The government has indeed done things for the community,

especially for the small folk. I would like development to be

focused on the more remote places. But the most important

thing is that people in the towns and the villages must feel

that development is for them. Who is the asphalt road in Dili

for? Who is that luxury building for? Who uses it?



Q:   Are you saying that development is not for the people?

A:   The infrastructure achieves its target though not yet

perfectly. Let's hope that in the next phase, the desires and

aspirations of the community will be fulfilled. The most

important thing of all is that we want to be a little freer.

This is something very fundamental. Not free from Indonesia

but free as citizens of this country. Others are free in Java;



those living in Maluku are free. We also want to be as free as



they are, here in East Timor. Not like the present, when I

feel freer in Jakarta than here in Dili. This means that

there's something wrong.



Q:   Have there been any efforts to struggle for this freedom?



A:   Oh yes, within the limits possible. The leaders and the

people are afraid to strive for freedom. Ha... ha... ha!

Indeed, people's representatives who should speak up in fact

say nothing. I don't know who is to blame. Maybe it's our

fault for choosing people who are afraid (to speak up) as

representatives of the people. That's what our democracy has

led to. Ha... ha... ha!



Q:   If that's the case, the basic question isn't integration?



A:   For me, no. I think that being part of Indonesia is no

longer a problem. The problem is, how this young region called



East Timor can grow up. If there are those who still make an

issue of integration, that's their problem. For me, the

problem is no longer integration.



Q:   At present, there are still groups that make an issue of

integration. As leader of the religious community, don't their



activities worry you?

A:   Yes, they are still with us. It doesn't worry me. I want

to be a democrat. As a democrat, everyone from the extreme

right to the extreme left will have a place in my heart,

although I don't necessarily agree with them. Neo-Liberals,

neo-Fascists or extreme Communists all have a place in my

heart, above all because they are human beings. We must have

the courage to sit down together, to have dialogue as

civilised human beings, as democrats, to seek out the truth

and put to rights those things that are still wrong.



Q:   What do you feel about the fact that the UN still does

not recognise integration?

A:   We should try to get this recognition. That's what I

meant when I wrote to the UN Secretary-General asking for a

referendum to be held. People regarded this as a mistake. What



would happen is that, if a referendum is held and the majority



want integration, the referendum will be accepted by the UN

and everyone will be happy. In the first place, because the

majority supports integration and secondly, because the UN

supports it. Then we would all be happy.



Q:   If you were in the government's place, would it be

correct to hold a referendum?

A:   The government's position is different. The government's

position is that integration is a fact, both de jure and de

facto. This is what the government thinks. But we should not

forget that we also have to deal with the world outside, that

we must place ourselves in this international context. But,

that's enough of this. This is politics....



Q:   Would it be more beneficial if a referendum were held?

A:   The important thing is to give us the freedom to choose.

I think the people can see for themselves and judge the

benefits of the past fifteen years. After seeing all that, the



people may choose integration. But what I want to emphasise is



if a process of choice happens, with everyone aware of what

has happened, those who made the choice will be responsible

for the result. Since we were the ones who made the choice but



then have to suffer the consequences, we would be able to take



responsibility. But if no-one knows what happened, as at

present... (Mgr Belo did not continue.) Oh yes, there is still



a great deal to be done.



Q:   What was it that prompted you to send that letter asking

for a referendum?

A:   At the time, I was extremely disappointed with the

worsening state of affairs here. The letter was an attempt on

my part to change things for the better. Indeed, there are

times when we have to act firmly because the normal way of

doing things simply doesn't work. Now, thank goodness, there

have been corrections and improvements.



Q:   Which is more effective, to make efforts through foreign

channels or to struggle here inside?

A:   After my private letter was made public (in the world's

press, Ed.) and they (the government) made corrections in the

general situation here, I felt that I should adopt a different



position. I now think it's better to struggle here inside in

order to get a status for East Timor that gives our people

greater opportunities to be responsible for the region.



Q:   What was it that prompted that change in the kind of

struggle?

A:   I began to think that I, as an individual and as an

Indonesian citizen, should make my small contribution to the

state and to all the Indonesian people, not just to East

Timor. If possible,  I would like my ideas and attitudes - if

they are of any use - to be used by the entire nation.



Q:   Do you think that the security forces are dealing

correctly with groups that don't yet support integration?  A:



I don't want to teach others about Pancasila but I think  that

we should get back to Pancasila and especially the

principles of justice and humanity. The interests of the human



being stand above the interests of the state and above the

interests of security. Those groups should be properly

treated. They should be coaxed, encouraged, and so on, before

military action is taken.



Q:   Hasn't ABRI begun to conduct a territorial operation to

mingle closely with the people?

A:   I see this in two ways. On the one hand, okay, they

produce results for the people and I appreciate that. On the

other hand, I am deeply afraid because everything is done and

built by the military. This could result in the people being

even less willing to get involved. "Why should we bother, why

do we have to do things ourselves. Let them get on with

it...."

     Excessive involvement of the military can mean not giving



the community or civilians the chance to work for development.



What should be happening is that the general public,

civilians, should be encouraged, so that a time will come when



they will do it themselves. The military should withdraw so

that the community takes responsibility for progress and for

their lives.



Q:   How do you think the territorial operation (opster)

should be conducted?

A:   I think opster should only aim at helping the community.

It should not be for the purpose of staying at the side of the



community, so as to watch everyone's movements. They should

not be there as intel. Let me be quite clear. I hear many

complaints. Five kilometres of road is built and there's a

ceremony officiated by a minister. Another thing. There are

village heads, district chiefs, sub-district chiefs, a local

assembly. But often, after they have been chosen, they adopt

a bad attitude, act like feudals. There should be no place for



a feudal attitude in an era of development. It's not right. It



won't help.



Q:   What are you yourself doing to draw those in the upper

echelons closer to the idea of giving the people a role?  A:

I do whatever is possible within the office I hold. When  I

travel to the regions, I speak to people and to their

leaders. I also speak to the government and to ABRI. These are



my methods. It's rather different. I don't hold public

meetings.



Q:   Do you not try to encourage dialogue....?

A:   Yes, there should be dialogue (Mgr Belo cut in). But

dialogue must be free. That is essential. There have been

dialogues and meetings, but the impression I have is that

people only raise things which they think are acceptable. If

they raise things that are not likely to be acceptable, those

who said such things go home and can't sleep peacefully

because they are afraid of being summoned and interrogated.

Q:   What have you done to create good relations between the

Church and ABRI?

A:   I don't have military force and I don't want to make any

comments. But I want to say that I find it very regrettable

that many people believe that I am obstructing development,

that I am anti-integration, that I am two-faced, that I

encourage the young people to go on demonstrations. I am

really unhappy about this. Maybe they have evidence to support



their opinion, but if so, why don't they bring it out into the



open? (Mgr Belo was quiet for a while, Ed.) This is very

unpleasant. The result is that we live in a state of mutual

distrust. This is what makes me very unhappy. In the first

place, I am not two-faced. Second, if we all want to restore

tranquillity and freedom in East Timor, I think priority

should be given to civilians. If possible, our friends in the

army should stick to purely military duties.



Q:   But ABRI has a dual function.

A:   Yes, and I personally don't understand where the limits

between the functions lie. This should be explained. As things



are here in East Timor, the military are everywhere, in social



affairs, the economy, culture, tourism, social communications.



So what is left for civilians? If this is the case, let's just



have mono-function. Ha... ha... ha! Those who have followed a

military calling should stick to military tasks and leave

everything else to others.



Q:   In other words, you want things to be as normal here as

in other regions.

A:   (Mgr Belo said nothing for a while.) What is clear is

that this region should not be treated as a province in a

state of emergency. We have a different background, a

different history and culture from other parts of Indonesia.

This is what the central government should realise. We

understand Bhinneka Tunggal Ika [Unity in Diversity, the State



Motto]. If East Timor is just equated with other provinces, it



means that Bhinneka Tunggal Ika will not apply in East Timor.

If you want to apply that motto, then East Timor must be

treated in a special way, given a special status - but I don't



mean a state of emergency.



Q:   Do you mean that these differences should be properly

recognised?

A:   Yes, in formal juridical terms and in implementation.

There should be greater regional autonomy.



Q:   Have relations between the Church and the local

government been good?

A:   Yes. I have been here for nine years. I cooperate with

the governor, with district chiefs, with sub-district chiefs.

With central government agencies, for instance, their local

offices, it's less so, but, in general, it's alright.



Q:   Governor Carrascalao has almost come to the end of his

term. There have been strong calls for his successor to be

someone from the region. What do you want?

A:   Ha... ha... ha! My demand is, listen to what the people

want. The East Timorese are often called ignorant and

backward. The views of these simple, ignorant people often

astonish me. They say: we here are the ones who have a direct

interest in who becomes the governor here. That's why we'd

like the governor to be an East Timorese and a Catholic.

Q:   The law says nothing about the governor of East Timor

having to be someone from the region and a Catholic.

A:   Isn't it so that an East Timorese who is a Catholic is

also an Indonesian citizen? There are many candidates. But

don't choose a candidate who favours certain groups, certain

circles, certain groups or conglomerates. I say again that I

think that the governor of East Timor should be someone from

this region who is a Catholic.



Q:   Are these two conditions a matter of principle?

A:   Yes. It's because very few people have learnt to

understand the innermost feelings of the people of East Timor.



As the saying goes, the voice of the community is the voice of



God. What I would say is that this voice of the people is the

voice of God. Ha... ha... ha!



Q:   What is the position of the Catholic Church in the

everyday life of the East Timorese people?

A:   The church lives in the midst of the community in order

to spread news about one thing, that it must be saved. The

church is the congregation and the congregation is the church.



Whatever the congregation feels is felt by the church.

Whatever the church feels is felt by the congregation. The two



are inseparable. Sometimes, people see the church as a

hierarchy. That is something different though hierarchy is a

part of the congregation.

     The role of the church is none other than that preached

by Christ at the very beginning of the life of the church, to

spread the Gospel to all humanity. That's why the church came

to East Timor in the 16th century. Although Portugal left East



Timor, the church remained. Indonesia came in. The church

remained, living alongside the people to achieve God's call to



save the world,  especially the soul and the whole of

humanity. And so the church strives to do everything in its

power to create whole human beings, in the spiritual and

material sense.



Q:   Some people think that the church goes too far,

particularly in matters that lie outside the realm of prayer.

What do you say to this?

A:   The church's message relates to the whole human being.

Our message relates to the soul, the sacraments and

deliverance. We are also able to save people in other

respects. We have ideas and opinions about social and economic



matters, about justice and peace. This is what is sometimes

misunderstood by some people. If I speak out, they say I'm

engaging in politics. When I only busy myself with the

sacraments, they say this is what the priests and bishops

should be doing. But our duty relates to all aspects of life,

in particular the moral, the ethical and the spiritual. We

don't practise these things at a technical level. It is for

the politicians to strive to realise the church's view of

things in practice.



Q:   What is the best way to combine your position as citizen

with your position as a bishop directly responsible to the

Vatican?

A:   There have been many prejudices about this, leading to

mistaken views. All dioceses and all bishops are directly

under the Vatican's control. All bishops are required to make

a full report about their diocese to the Holy Father every

five years. And they go personally to submit their report

orally. There's no difference between the Diocese of Menado

and the Diocese of Dili.



Q:   Is the problem then that the Dili Diocese is not yet

inside the KWI (the Bishops' Conference of Indonesia)?

A:   This brings us onto the international arena. East Timor

is still on the agenda of the UN. The Vatican does not want to



pre-empt a decision by the UN. When the UN no longer makes an

issue of integration, the Dili Diocese will join the KWI. I

sometimes ask those who make an issue of this: do you think

that if we were to join the KWI, all our problems would be

solved?



Q:   It could be that if you were to join the KWI, it would be



easier to solve the problems.

A:   Solved? By who? By Mgr Leo (Mgr Leo Soekoto, KWI

secretary-general) or Mgr Darmaatmadja (KWI chairman) in

Jakarta?  If we wanted to regulate the church and the

dioceses, we would be on the way to becoming a theocracy. This



would no longer be a Pancasila state but a state like Iran.

Q:   What is the best way to build the link between religion

and the state?

A:   In my opinion, there should be a clear separation. The

secular should handle secular affairs. The religious should

handle religious affairs. This is why I do not believe that

religion should be used for worldly objectives. Religion is

above politics. Religion should push things from inside, as a

moral force.



Q:   Should you, as a religious leader, speak up or stay

silent when others accuse you and when you see your

congregation being unjustly treated?

A:   I think that the voice of the congregation should be

heard. As a religious leader, there are times when one should

speak out and times when one should stay silent.



Q:   When is it right to speak out and when is it right to

stay silent?

A:   I speak out when people are in a state of unrest, when

they are being oppressed, when they are being treated unjustly



and in conflict with Pancasila. I speak out because sometimes

the situation demands that I should. I don't speak out for the



sake of opposition but so as to help improve things.



Q:   And what if the things you say damage your own position?

A:   That's all part of my life's calling. I cannot stand by

in silence when something needs to be changed. I must have the



courage to take a stand. Sometimes people accuse me of being

too strong. If this means my taking positions that are

unpopular, so be it. That's the risk. But not everyone is

unhappy with this. Those who like what I do say that, because

people have no voice and cannot speak out, the bishop must do

so. Others don't have the space to speak probably because they



are afraid.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU