West Papuan Refugee Reprisals

One of the great under-reported political debacles of the South Pacific region is the issue of West Papua (aka Irian Jaya).

It came sceaming into the Australian headlines this week when a boatload of asylum seekers showed up on Australian shores and were immediately flown by the government to Christmas Island for "processing."

Well, now it looks like the reprisals are starting and the Indonesians are turning up the heat.

Most of the asylum applicants are from the Paniai region and its surrounds, which is part of the heartland of the West Papuan independence movement. This week, four school children, one a close relative of one of the asylum seekers, were shot dead, with a fifth badly injured, by the Indonesian military.

The military has defended the shootings, claiming that the soldiers were only defending themselves from an angry mob.

It is however, pretty easy to see why some people are calling it a reprisal against the families and friends of those who are bringing the focus of the Australian media onto a region where the Indonesians really don't want it.

At the same time, the Indonesian government has stated that if the asylum seekers are granted refugee status in Australia, that it will "strain relations" between the two countries and spark a flood of asylum seekers from West Papua.

To confuse the situation further, Australia mining company Rio Tinto, is one of the principal owners of the mine at Freeport which is one of the largest copper mines and gold mines in the world - and the real reason that Indonesia is showing such a heavy hand in West Papua.

So now the Australian government is forced to make a choice.

Will they continue to sell out the human rights of the native inhabitants of West Papua or will they continue to turn a bling eye to the excesses of the Indonesian mililtary and government as well as powerful Australian mining interests?

The problem is that by granting the asylum seekers refugee status, the Australian government does indeed risk opening a Pandora's box of further asylum applications, not to mention giving semi-official legitimacy to the claim that the Indoesians are violating human rights in West Papua - partly at the behest of Australian mining interests. In turn they risk having to accept criticism that they have been selling out to those interests at the expense of human rights for the last several years.

So what will they do?


Technorati Tags: refugees, asylum seekers, West Papua

Thai Resort Death

It has been reported
that Thai police have recently found DNA evidence in the case of a Welsh backpacker murdered in Thailand.

The whole event is yet another blow for that nation which is struggling since the Tsunami to keep the tourist dollars flowing.

All they can hope for this time is to find the murderer and have them convicted with as little controversy as possible.

That will at least enable them to limit the damage to their already strained tourist industry.

ID Cards for Australia

So it looks like the national debate on ID cards will be reopened... again. With the PMs new push to strengthen anti-Terrorism laws, it's one of a raft of ideas that will be considered.

I guess advocates will then have to explain how an ID card would have stopped Bali, London or S11, all of which were perpetrated by "clean skins" or people with no prior criminal record.

Good luck with that.

Mauritanian Coup

Nobody panic - the Australians and Australian companies in Mauritania are OK! That's the news in Australian papers after last week's coup by the military in Mauritania. Well thank god for that!

Why is it that the Australian media will only ever report a story if they can find an Australian angle? So too the news of last month's elections in Bougainville barely raised a murmur in local papers or indeed the death of Francis Ona - that is until an Australian angle was found. Hey - Australian companies might get another shot at making some cash up in Bougainville!

Well, I guess there is always CNN...

Thailand and its Insurgency

While other SE Asian countries seem to be making some progress in stemming Islamist insurgents and terrorists, Thailand seems to be standing out as a comparative failure in this area. The last few years have seen a slew of policy and counterpolicy regarding the insuregency in the South of the country that has left almost everybody a little puzzled and has seen the violence continue, seemingly unabated.

If the experience of other South East Asian countries with a strong Islamic fundamentalist presence is anything to go by, then it may be time for Thailand to begin a steady policy of democratic engagement with their own Islamic elements. Other South-East Asian Islamic fundamentalist movements have recently been brought more under control by democratic engagement. Fundamentalist Islamic parties are now fighting at the polls in Indonesia and Malaysia. The meaningful political engagement of fundamentalist groups seems to have gone some way towards stemming the trouble in those countries by allowing the issues to be openly debated in the public arena. Whilst, concededly still not perfect, Indonesia has made strides in its efforts against Islamist violence, while Malaysia seems to be a prime example of how fundamentalist elements can be engaged in a modern, democratic system without violence.

The recent setup of the National Reconciliation Commission in Thailand, in combination with a consistent and engaging approach towards the Southern provinces (the heartland of the insuregncy), could be the beginning of progress in stemming the violence in that country also. If the ill-advised policies of holding back funding to the southern provinces, in combination with harsh police and army crackdowns has truly been left behind (and let's hope it has) then we can hope to see a legitimate improvement in the security situation. The Thai government's willingness to accept the suggestions of the NRC to abolish martial law and publicise the results of an official inquiry into the Tak Bai Protest Massacre are a good start. Let's hope the government's newfound willingness to compromise continues.

Japan's Military Role in the Region

The decision in late 2003 by Japan to commit troops to Iraq was widely welcomed by America and her allies (especially those already engaged in Iraq) as the beginning of Japan's efforts to take wider responsibilities for world security and stability. While certainly there are many obvious benefits to having the second largest economy in the world contribute its fair share to the "on the ground" tasks of ensuring peace and stability, there should also be consideration for ways in which to move forward from here.Pause for concern may not so much be directed at the act of Japan reintroducing itself into the dirty work of world security, but rather to the sources from which such impetus came.

Starting with the Japanese Prime Minister himself, we have a politician whose support is predominantly from the rank and file of the Liberal Democratic Party (LDP). This conservative, largely rural demographic often shows support for displays of blatant nationalism. The Japanese deployment to Iraq was popular amongst them as are Koizumi's annual visit to the controversial Yasakuni Shrine, the resting place of 11 Class A war criminals. Koizumi's reliance on this group also cannot be understated as he was elected against the general desire of the parliamentary element of the LDP who bowed to rank and file pressure. Bare in mind also that Koizumi himself is the son of a Prime Minister who supported re-militarisation immediately after WW2 and also did his political apprenticeship under a similarly inclined individual.

Central to the debate regarding the Iraqi troop deployment is the older debate conerning Japan's war-renouncing constitution. Within Japan, conservative elements of the government have long campaigned for changes to the document, effectively paving the way for complete removal of the militarily constricting elements. Although there is significant opposition to this, the move to deploy troops to Iraq can be seen as nothing less than a victory for those campaigning for constitutional change. Perhaps in itself, this is not so worriesome, until we take a look at some of the politicians supporting that change. Figures such as Shoichi Nakagawa (the former Trade Minister) have a long history of stirring arguments with neighbouring countries. His xenophobic comments during the recent anti-Japanese riots in China were terribly unhelpful in diffusing the situation. His involvement with oil companies in Japan has also led him to angering China by visiting (with his oil buddies) disputed areas in the South China Sea (thought to be ripe for oil exploration). One wonders what actions he would push in this area, had Japan no constraints on the use of the military. So too Sintaro Ishihara, the infamous governor of Tokyo whose gaffs have included remarks to the effect that Japan's invasion of Asia in WW2 was largely positive for those countries. Stunningly this man is the most popular politician in the country. These two figures are just the predominant figures of a much wider group whose ideas are not dissimilar.

With such characters who support remilitarisation, we also begin to enter the realm of Japanese ultra-conservative politics. Almost identical sentiments to those expressed by Ishihara and Nakagawa are regularly eschewed by a well organised minority of ultra nationalists who in the best traditions of facism eschew the benefits of remilitarisation and xenophobia. Such sentiments for some reason have far greater traction in mainstream Japan than they do in the west. Such groups are often seen at train stations in quasi-military uniforms and black Humvee-style veicles blaring nationalist speeches and songs on their loudspeakers. They also find supporters amongst the same group that supported Koizumi to the Prime Ministership.

With the main support for Japan's Iraqi deployment coming from such groups, politicians and their supporters, it may be time for the international community to start treading a little more carefully in regard to Japan's re-entry into world security responsibilities. While a fair argument can be made for Japan to contribute its share to security and UN sponsored missions, the repurcussions in Japanese domestic politics should also be taken into consideration. Tempered encouragement rather than an open arm welcome should be the call of the day.

Suicide Bombings and the Arc of Instability

A study on suicide bombers by Robert Pape of Chicago University has examined the common characteristics of every suicide bombing in the world since 1980. Pape's database of suicide bombings has included information on groups responsible, number of attacks, terrorist goals and the response of the intended targets. These findings have been published by Pape in "Dying to Win: The Strategic Logic of Suicide Terrorism." For those who follow terrorism closely, it is perhaps no surprise that the most prolific suicide bombers in this study are Sri Lanka's Tamil Tigers.

The study's main finding is that suicide bombing is not necessarily linked to religion (this dealing a major blow to the common conception that suicide bombing is an almost exclusively Islamist strategy) but "to compel modern democracies to withdraw military forces from territory
the terrorists view as their homeland." This has several implications for the region of territory to Australia's north known as the Arc of Instability.

Certainly few people would dispute the disruptive nature of suicide bombing as a strategy. Indeed, it is difficult to think of a country that has suffered at the hands of a suicide bomber in the last 20 years that itself could be called stable and prospering. It must surely be in everybody's interests to deter such acts in the region. But the only notable acts of suicide bombing in the Arc of Instability have been in Sri Lanka and of course Bali in 2002.

Sri Lanka's case can be explained by the ongoing dispute between the Tamil Tigers and the Sri Lankan government over an independent state for the Tamils. Thus Pape would explain this situation as the Tamil's attempting to gain strategic military advantage by use of suicide bombers. But what of Bali? No foreign power militarily occupies any part of Indonesia, a necessary precursor to any ongoing suicide bombing campaign, according to Pape's study.

We are therefore left with the distinct possibility that suicide bombing in the region will remain a rarely used tactic. The motivation for an individual to give their life in such an act is simply not as strong in most of the Arc of Instability as it is in places such as Sri Lanka, Iraq and the Occupied Territories. Going on the logic of Pape's study, it would be surpring if groups such as Jemmah Islamiah, Abbu Sayyef etc were able to recruit enough members willing to be suicide bombers for an ongoing campaign. Until there is direct military occupation of territory, this will thankfully be a rare occurence in this region.

Chinese Spy Network in Australia a Surprise?

The Chinese diplomat Chen Yonglin's attempt to defect to Australia towards the end of his diplomatic posting at the Chinese Consulate in Sydney has created a furore that is not surprising. The lengths to which the Howard government has gone recently to ensure smooth relations with Beijing means that such a high-profile dispute could throw a spanner in the works of mutually beneficial political and economic dealings. The surprising part is the faux-shock amongst the Australian media regarding Chen's allegations of a Chinese "spy ring" in Australia, primarily concerned with monitoring alleged Chinese dissidents.

After receiving a less than open welcome at the Immigration Department building in Sydney, Chen fled to Gosford and then into the arms of an eager media. The startling allegations he was to make? China has a thousand-strong spy network in Australia! GASP!

While Australia currently has cordial relations with Beijing, the press seems to have forgotten the fact that over the past 50 years, that the relationship hasn't been one of close alliance and friendship. To sum up the current relationship bluntly, Australia is happy to profit from the relationship, but there is still deep mistrust about Chinese strategic ambitions in the Asia Pacific region. The mistrust extends the other way too with concerns over Australia's seeming inability to seperate in foreign policy from that of Washington in any meaningful manner.

The media also seemed to have forgotten that Australia is home to a significant Chinese population as both permanent and temporary residents, including many asylum seekers of the famous Falun Gong religious cult and other movements that Beijing regards as dissident. As with any large diaspora, loyalties and opinions are divided within the Australian Chinese community. With the divisions within China over this group combined with the sheer size of the Chinese community in Australia, is it truly any surprise that Australian members of Falun Gong and others regarded as Chinese dissidents are being monitored by both local and foreign Beijing loyalists in Australia?