From: rich@pencil.cs.missouri.edu (Rich Winkel)
Subject: Timor: BURYING THE MEMORY OF A MASSACRE
Followup-To: alt.activism.d
Originator: rich@pencil.cs.missouri.edu
Organization: PACH
Date: Sat, 7 Nov 1992 01:05:21 GMT

/** reg.easttimor: 354.0 **/
** Topic: Exonerating Indonesia **
** Written  6:43 pm  Nov  4, 1992 by gn:tapol in cdp:reg.easttimor **
Exonerating Indonesia
 
Source: The Guardian
Date: 3 November 1992
Article written by Mark Curtis, a research fellow at the Royal
Institute of International Affairs
 
This article was placed on the Comment and Analysis page.
 
BURYING THE MEMORY OF A MASSACRE
 
Mark Curtis explores the international community's readiness
to exonerate Indonesia
 
 
On November 12 last year, Indonesian security forces killed
over 100 demonstrators in Dili, capital of East Timor. These
events provoked widespread international outrage, several
governments withheld their aid allocations and Portugal led
the European Community in attempting to condemn and punish
Indonesia.
 
A year later, Indonesia still gets arms from Britain and
increased aid from the World Bank. In a meeting held recently
in Manila, the EC, under Britain's chairmanship, appeared
close to signing a new co-operation agreement with the
Association of Southeast Asian Nations (Asean), of which
Indonesia is a leader member. Negotiations had been previously
held up by Portugal, in protest against human rights abuse in
East Timor.
 
With around 200,000 having been killed in East Timor since
Indonesia invaded in 1975, the extent of human rights abuses
is severe. Portuguese President Mario Soares described the
situation as one of "repeated acts of escalating violence by
the occupying Indonesian forces against the defenceless
population". 
 
The subsequent official Indonesian inquiry into the Dili
massacre concluded that "about 50" people had been killed and
that the security forces had acted "in self-defence" and
"under no command", all of which were plainly untrue, as was
later confirmed by witnesses. The massacre was an orchestrated
and unprovoked attack on innocent demonstrators. Portugal
refused to accept the report, Soares noting that "everyone
knows Indonesia is a brutal country that has killed opposition
leaders and has no respect for human rights".
 
Indonesia's most important partners reacted as though the
affair was merely a nuisance which would soon go away. After
Soares met George Bush in January this year to seek support in
punishing Indonesia, a White House statement did not even
mention East Timor but only alluded to "Asian developments".
Japan - by far Indonesia's largest aid donor - served notice
that it would "not change its mind in providing economic aid".
 
 
Britain continues to be a major arms supplier to Indonesia,
most recently with the announcement of a British
Aerospace/Rolls Royce deal to supply 40 Hawk trainer-fighter
aircraft. A Rolls Royce representative described Indonesia as
"a very exciting part of the world". These aircraft, as well
as US-supplied helicopters and British-supplied scout cars and
personnel carriers, are all thought to be available for use in
East Timor.
 
The announcement of the sale of a navy support ship was
delayed in January owing to the outcry over the Dili massacre:
it went ahead in February. Britain has recently also offered
places in military training programmes for three Indonesian
army officers. Their boss - chief of the armed forces, General
Try Sutrisno - formerly promised to "wipe out all separatist
elements". 
 
In 1991 the UK committed itself to an EC Declaration which
calls for member states to consider "human rights as an
element of their relations with developing countries". So what
are the underlying reasons for these double standards? The
first is Britain's position as Indonesia's second biggest
supplier ... (sic - some words appear to have been left out)
... is worth hundreds of millions of pounds. Secondly,
protection of human rights is seen as a selective rather than
absolute principle depending on the stake involved. Human
rights criteria can sometimes be applied as tools of foreign
policy, as with criticism of the Soviet bloc during the cold
war. National interests usually prevail over moral
considerations. It is, therefore, the national interests which
need to be redefined.
 
Thirdly, Indonesia is a key economic ally in the post-cold war
world. Overseas Development Minister Lynda Chalker has said
that Indonesia "has a well-deserved reputation for sound
macro-economic management", meaning that its economic climate
is generally favourable to Western corporate interests.
 
Having "deregulated" its economy throughout the 1980s,
Indonesia recently announced that foreign investors would be
allowed to hold 100 per cent equity in new companies. Gross
inequalities of wealth, consigning millions to live in
conditions of poverty, has been a natural consequence of these
economic policies, which have been supported by the World
Bank.
 
As the latter presses for further deregulation and opening up
to the world economy, the lowest 20 per cent of earners (some
40 million people) account for only 9 per cent of total
household income. Thirty-eight per cent of the population lack
access to safe drinking water. The top 10 per cent of earners,
meanwhile, account for over a quarter of all incomes.
 
Reports from East Timor suggest heightened security force
activity in the territory in preparation for commemorations of
last year's massacre. From their actions, it seems clear that
the leading members of the international community would wish
all this fuss would die down, and allow themselves to pursue
higher priorities.
** End of text from cdp:reg.easttimor **

Newsgroups: misc.activism.progressive