Help In These Times raise $5,000 in two weeks! Donate now!
PrintDiscuss
Features » September 13, 2005 » Web Only

Brothers in Arms

The United States moves a step closer to restoring military aid to Indonesia, despite its massive human rights abuses

By Ben Terrall

A human rights activist carries a poster of Munir, who was poisoned on a plane in route from Jakarta to Amsterdam, during a peace demonstration in Jakarta.

Tags   
Share   Facebook Digg del.icio.us Newsvine   StumbleUpon Reddit Furl Propeller

On June 28, the U.S. House of Representatives voted to remove all restrictions on foreign military financing for Indonesia in the fiscal year 2006 Foreign Operations Appropriations bill. The restrictions were first put in place after the Indonesian military’s destruction of East Timor following the half-island’s pro-independence vote in August of 1999.

The House decision follows years of Bush administration lobbying aimed at rehabilitating Jakarta’s image. When Indonesian President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono came to the United States in late May, the White House repeatedly described Yudhoyono as a reformer. “The president told me he’s in the process of reforming the military and I believe him,” Bush said.

But retired Foreign Service Officer Ed McWilliams, a political counselor to the U.S. Embassy in Jakarta from 1996 to 1999 and now a human rights activist, is not convinced. He points to this year’s State Department Country Report on Human Rights Practices, which said of Indonesia, “Security force members murdered, tortured, raped, beat, and arbitrarily detained civilians and members of separatist movements, especially in [the province] Aceh and to a lesser extent in Papua.”

“As a creature of the TNI [Indonesian military], Yudhoyono is even less likely to assert civilian control over the military than the previous three Indonesian presidents,” McWilliams says. “The TNI continues to act with impunity: It resisted allowing international help into Aceh for a critical three days after the January tsunami. It repeatedly sought early departure of international non-governmental organizations, and prevented international assistance from getting to 120,000 Acehnese displaced from pre-tsunami conflict.”

The TNI in Aceh

The TNI also refused calls for a ceasefire in Aceh, until just days before the government signed a tentative peace deal with Free Aceh Movement (GAM) resistance fighters on August 15. As written, the agreement gives the military a number of opportunities to circumvent it. The TNI has already exploited the deal’s ambiguities by arguing that a new human rights court and separate truth commission for Aceh should not deal with past crimes.

Contradicting every credible human rights organization to issue a report on the region, the new TNI commander in Aceh, Major-General Supiadin, told the Jakarta Post on June 16 that military forces had never committed a single human rights violation in the province. Regarding the impact of the tsunami, he said, “Heart wrenching is the loss of firearms and ammunition, buried under the sand.”

Shadia Marhaban, a member of a non-violent student group Aceh Referendum Information Center, which organized a rally supporting a referendum for self-determination in Aceh that brought out 1.5 million people, says, “TNI higher-ups in Aceh are mostly from the group responsible for the [1999] destruction of East Timor, and won’t go along with any reform agenda.”

One of those active duty commanding officers is retired general Kiki Syahnakri, indicted for crimes against humanity by a U.N.-backed court in East Timor for his actions as martial law commander during the 1999 Timor campaign. Syahnakri now represents the conglomerate Artha Graha in its efforts to profit from Aceh’s reconstruction.

Marhaban, who was a civil society representative in recent peace talks between GAM and TNI in Finland, believes Jakarta only agreed to the talks because of the international attention focused on Aceh by the tsunami and the enormous amounts of international aid money at stake. The previous talks abruptly ended in July 2002 when Jakarta arrested civilian negotiators, citing a sweeping, vaguely defined anti-terror law. The former chief negotiator for GAM was among many prisoners trapped in jails destroyed by the tsunami. The New York-based group Human Rights First wrote, “among those who died in detention were many accused GAM supporters who had been denied access to a lawyer, subjected to torture, and convicted in trials that did not meet international standards.”

Lessons from Iraq

In May, President Bush explained that in working to undo existing limits on military aid to Jakarta, “we want there to be exchanges between our military corps that will help lead to better understandings.” But for four decades, such “exchanges” have involved U.S. training of the notoriously brutal Kopassus special forces troops and other “security” forces specializing in internal repression. (Since it won its independence from the Dutch after WWII, Indonesia has never faced a serious external military threat).

In the May 2003 imposition of martial law in Aceh—during which the TNI launched its largest operation since the 1975 invasion of East Timor—the military “embedded” journalists and established a media center to control the flow of information. TNI spokesman Major General Sjafrie Sjamsuddin explained, “These regulations were sent to us by the U.S. Pacific Command. It is what they used in Iraq. … Of course, we have adapted them to our local environment.”

Human Rights First argues that another aspect of the Iraq war has served the TNI well: “Indonesian security officials responded to human rights criticism aggressively, pointing to the United States invasion of Iraq and subsequent acts of torture in Abu Ghraib prison to justify Indonesia’s own military operations and question the credibility of American human rights policies.”

A Climate of Impunity

Yudhoyono and his supporters in the West make much of efforts to combat corruption in Indonesia. Yudhoyono told Business Week, “Fighting corruption is very, very important to our competitiveness. If we fail, we will lose the battle to attract foreign capital.” But there is little evidence of any curbing of military corruption, which Karen Orenstein, Washington Coordinator of the East Timor and Indonesia Action Network (ETAN), calls “massive.” Orenstein points out that “the majority of the military’s budget comes from legal and illegal ventures, including extortion of U.S.-based corporations operating in Indonesia, environmentally devastating illegal logging, prostitution, and both drug and human trafficking.”

Nor does the climate of impunity seem to have shifted regarding past atrocities committed by the military. On May 26, a U.N. Commission of Experts appointed by Kofi Annan released a report on Jakarta’s Ad Hoc Human Rights Court for East Timor, which was set up to investigate crimes against humanity perpetrated by Indonesian security forces and their militia proxies in East Timor in 1999. The U.N. experts found that the Indonesian tribunal was “manifestly inadequate, primarily due to a lack of commitment on the part of the prosecution.” Of the 18 people indicted and tried, all but one (a Timorese civilian) were either acquitted or freed on appeal.

The report further noted, “The failure to investigate and prosecute the defendants in a credible manner has not achieved accountability of those who bear the greatest responsibility for serious violations.” It recommended that if Jakarta does not successfully prosecute those charged within six months, the United Nations should try them before an international tribunal or refer cases to the International Criminal Court.

The Murder of Munir

Justice has been similarly elusive in the investigation of the murder of Munir, a leading Indonesian human rights activist. The 38-year-old lawyer was poisoned with arsenic on September 7, 2004, while flying to the Netherlands. An Indonesian fact-finding team found that officials of BIN, Jakarta’s main intelligence agency, were involved in Munir’s killing. The former BIN chief, retired general A.M. Hendropriyono, refused to respond to a summons to testify before the team. Hendropriyono is infamous for serving as district military commander in Lampung when, in 1989, the TNI massacred hundreds of Muslim youth, an incident that Munir later investigated.

Hendropriyono received U.S. military training at Fort Leavenworth in 1980. He was later involved in a training program for Indonesian officers at Norwich University in Vermont, which was cancelled after sustained activist pressure. Norwich’s president conceded, “This army has not demonstrated a commitment to … respect for civilian authority by the military.”

The Commission for Disappearances and Victims of Violence (Kontras), an organization Munir founded, recently came to a similar conclusion. In a June 21 report, “Difficult to Imagine TNI’s Future Without Politics of Violence,” the group concluded that military impunity of human rights violations is growing stronger. Among the reasons they cited were the continued presence within structures of power of high military officers suspected of being responsible for such crimes; the cessation of efforts to revise laws on military tribunals; and the repeated refusal of the military to cooperate in efforts to uphold the law.

Back in Washington, the House Appropriations bill is currently being reconciled with the Senate version, which would keep some existing restrictions and add new reporting requirements about the TNI’s behavior. The two bills could be reconciled as early as late September.

Orenstein calls the Senate version of the Foreign Operations Appropriations bill “an improvement over the House version, which was nothing less than a total sell-out on human rights and justice, under the leadership of [Republican] Arizona Representative Jim Kolbe at the behest of the Bush administration.”

  • Help In These Times publish more articles like this. Donate today!
  • Subscribe today and save 46% off the newsstand price!
Ben Terrall is a freelance writer based in San Francisco.

More information about Ben Terrall
Tags   
Share   StumbleUpon Facebook Digg del.icio.us Reddit Newsvine Propeller Furl
  • subscribe to print magazine

  • Reader Comments

    “Indonesian security officials responded to human rights criticism aggressively, pointing to the United States invasion of Iraq and subsequent acts of torture in Abu Ghraib prison to justify Indonesia’s own military operations and question the credibility of American human rights policies.”

    Yes, the U.S. is the beacon of freedom and human rights to the rest of the world. How far low has this country sunk when corrupt, third-world governments justify their human rights abuses by pointing to America? Scorp, care to comment on the importance of faith in democracy? How do you explain the rehabilitation of U.S.-Indonesian ties under the Bush administration?

    Bush is disgusting when he uses gross oversimplifications to describe the policies of foreign leaders. Saddam is a madman, so we can’t believe a word he says, yet Yudhoyono is credible. Explain THAT logic. Anyone?

    Posted by Liberal on Sep 13, 2005 at 11:07 PM

    You picked out exactly the same line Rabbit wanted to point to. Liberal, Rabbit was making the point in the China thread that Chinese Human rights have been going backwards again after years of improvement, since the supposed leaders in human rights have dropped the ball in this regard. The same is certainly true of Indonesia.

    Indonesia and Australian governments have been getting very cosy over the last few years.

    We supported East Timorise independence so we could steal the Timorise oil as soon as they were no longer under Indonesian wing. Our elite forces have been training elite Indonesian forces for a while. There are a few issues recently which have begun to make Aussies more aware than ever that Indonesia is not a very nice neighbor and whats more our government seems to be sucking up to all the wrong people just now.

    Posted by GhostRabbit on Sep 14, 2005 at 8:38 AM

    Interesting, does Indonesia seem too far awy to most for it to be an issue?

    Odd since, the planet is really quite small.

    Posted by GhostRabbit on Sep 15, 2005 at 8:05 AM

    There’s a history lesson in here somewhere about the hazards of forced amalgamation of disparate cultures into a nation-state, particularly when so many of those cultures had so little identification with an entity called “Indonesia”, back in the day. It’s no wonder TNI had to bust a hard move against the East Timorese before and as they devolved, and GAM today; those people’s feel/felt imprisoned by an authority structure they neither chose nor felt compelled to accept.


    Nothing like a gun in your mouth to convince you to accept a “foreign” passport as your own.


    I imagine the US is getting close to Yodhoyono in part because of the jihadist movement embodied by Jemmah Islamiyya, said to be affiliated with al-Qaeda and the inspirational force behind the bombing in Oct 2002 in Bali. Enemy-of-my-enemy, yes? But that sort of strategy, in my reading of history, tends to backfire. Not necessarily for us, but for our kids when they grow up, at which time the oppressor we fed in order to combat our enemy du jour becomes the next generation’s enemy du jour.


    Is it just a cyclical habit of thought and policy that no one wants to learn from? A layered agenda with an exposed face as well as a hidden one (like accessing Indon resources more easily)? There’s so much room for so much speculation, little of it truly outlandish.

    Posted by Kuya on Sep 15, 2005 at 2:27 PM

    Kuya Rabbit thinks the friendliness between Indo and USA/OZ is older on certain levels than any Al-Qaeda bogeymen.

    There are events even in the news of late which lead thoughtful people to wonder that ther is not a hidden level of very intense co-operation on certyain levels.

    Maybe no more than a favour for a favour, but something is not right.

    We are being ‘Trained’ via media to hate the Indo’s, (Witness; Recent F*cked up drug convictions of Aussies over there eg: Michelle Corby) yet our elite SAS are training the Indo’s and there seems to be a strangely streamlined level of co-operation between our police forces.

    Fact is that this does not seem to be a natural evolution of international relationships due to world events, as much as it appears as an unmasking of a level of co-operation hithertoo barely hinted at.

    But why what appears to be an orchestrated campaign of events to make the Indonesians look lousy to us? More fear perhaps?

    Is the bogeyman who has existed at the back of Australian consciousness for many years, being given form and shape?

    A threatening Indonesia?  Especially easy if they are in on the game too?

    Just Rabbit speculating.

    Posted by GhostRabbit on Sep 17, 2005 at 4:24 PM
  • extended discussion >>>Continued...

    Discussions with more than 5 comments are continued on our special discussion page to encourage continuity and ease of use. There are currently 6 posts.

Also by Ben Terrall
  • Punk Manifesto

    Erick Lyle's On the Lower Frequencies collects material from the low-budget zines Scam and Turd-Filled Donut -- and deals with issues still important today Posted on September 25, 2008

  • King of the Crop
    Two years ago the federal government spent $9.4 billion to promote corn production, driving small farmers off their lands in Mexico, because they were unable to compete with U.S. importsPosted on December 11, 2007
  • Funding Indonesia’s Abusive Military
    Despite numerous human rights abuses, the United States continues to pump money into the Indonesian military under the guise of the war on terrorPosted on September 26, 2007
  • Democracy’s Death
    Haitian dissidents find themselves the targets of massive repressionPosted on May 12, 2005
If you like what you're reading, why not help pay for it?
IN THESE TIMES COMMUNITY MEMBERS
Help this website survive! Donate to In These Times now!