Preface ........................................................................... 3-4
Table of Contents .................................................................... 5-6
Introduction .......................................................................... 7
Chapter I : Historical Developments ....................................9-11
Chapter II : The Political Status of Irian Jaya: ......................... 13-22
Cotending Positions of Indonesia and the Netherlands
Chapter III : The New York Agreement: .............................. 23-29
Legal Basis to Restore Irian Jaya into
the Republic of Indonesia
Chapter IV : The Role of the UN Secretary-Generals ........ ..... 35-40
Representative in Resolving the Dispute over West Irian
Chapter V : Conclusion ........................................................ 45-48
ANNEXES
Annex I .............................................................................. 51-60
Agreement between the Republic of Indonesia and the
Kingdom of the Netherlands concerning West New Guinea
(West Irian), signed at the Headquarters of the United
Nations, New York, on 15 August 1962
Annex II .................................................................................... 61
Aide Memoires of 15August 1962 on modalities of the
transfer of authority over West New Guinea (West Irian)
Annex III .................................................................................... 62
United Nations General Assembly Resolution 1752 (XVII)
concerning West New Guinea of 21 September 1962
Annex IV ............................................................................... 63-77
Annual Report of the Secretary-General on the Work of
the Organization (16 June 1962-15 June 1963) regarding
West New Guinea (West Irian)
Annex V ............................................................................... 78-79
Report of the Secretary- General - Document A/5578
regarding the Agreement between the Republic of
Indonesia and the Kingdom of the Netherlands
concerning West New Guinea (West Irian)
Annex VI ................................................................................. 80-81
Text of the Joint Statement following discussions held
between the Netherlands Minister of Foreign Affairs,
Mr. Luns and the Netherlands Minister for Development
Cooperation, Mr. Udink with the Indonesian Minister for
Foreign Affairs, Mr. Malik, in Rome on 20th and
21st May 1969
Annex VII .................................................................................. 82-84
Report of the Secretary- General regarding the act of
self-determination in West Irian - Document A/7723
Annex VIII ................................................................................... 85-86
United Nations General Assembly Resolution
No. 2504 (XXIV) regarding the Agreement
between the Republic of Indonesia and the
Kingdom of the Netherlands concerning
West New Guinea (West Irian)
In recent times, some quarters have chosen to question the circumstances surrounding the restoration of Irian Jaya, formerly known as West Irian, into the Republic of Indonesia.* This is based on claims that the Irian Jayans were not a party to the key agreement signed in 1962 between Indonesia and the Netherlands concerning their fate; votes were manipulated during the act of free choice which lacked transparency; the conditions under which 1026 Irian Jayan representatives voted were not free and fair; and the application of the system of consultations (musyawarah) without the consent of the people rather than the one-man-one-vote principle in conducting the act of self-determination.
Furthermore, the recent Second Congress of Papua in June 2000 asserted that the Papuan Nation has already acquired sovereignty as an independent state since December 1961, which calls for the recognition of its sovereignty and political rights. Another argument put forward in support of its claim for independence from Indonesia is based on human rights abuses and the consequent sufferings inflicted upon its people as well as the deprivation of the benefits accrued from Irian Jaya's vast and rich mineral resources. It is also contended that New Guinea was not even mentioned in the 1945 Proclamation of Indonesia's Independence and this provides further evidence that it was never a part of Indonesia. On these grounds, the protagonists of Irian Jayan independence maintain that the entire process which determined the will of its people in 1969 should be reviewed and revised in order to redress the injustice of the past. In this regard, the United Nations which had noted the results of the act of free choice through General Assembly resolution 2504 (XXIV), adopted in 1969 should renew its consideration of this issue.
Historical facts and authoritative documents, however, attest that the process of Irian Jaya's restoration into the Republic of Indonesia was carried out democratically and in a transparent manner with the full knowledge and consent of its people which was ultimately recognized by the international community
This publication is intended to provide true and indisputable facts surrounding the processes that led to the fulfillment of Irian Jayans' legitimate aspiration for reuniting with the unitary State of Indonesia and to the realization of long-standing demand of the people of Indonesia for the restoration of their country's territorial integrity.
* "West Papua", "West Irian" or "New Guinea" refers to the same territory of Irian Jaya and is used interchangeably in this publication.
HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENTS
The first records of the archipelago date back from the period of the kingdom of Sriwijaya in South Sumatra, which lasted to the 12th century and ruled over many parts of the archipelago. At about the same time, the kingdom of Majapahit (1292-1521) ruled over East Java. During this period, West Irian was called Djanggi. In all the records dating from this time onwards, Djanggi was unquestionably considered a part of Indonesia, which at that time was named Nusantara. In a monumental book on national history, compiled and published by the statesman Gajah Mada in 1356 and written by the court-writer, Prapanca, we find that Indonesia was divided into western and eastern parts which included the present-day West Irian.
Prior to the arrival of the Dutch, the Indonesian islands constituted a field for competition between the two rivals - Portugal and Spain. They reached an agreement which partitioned Indonesia into two halves - the western half was to be frequented only by the Portuguese and the eastern half, including West Irian, by the Spanish. Soon after, the name of Nveba Gvince (New Guinea) was invented by a Spanish sailor, while the Portuguese had earlier referred to the big island in the east by the name of Ilha de Papoia.
When the 80 years war between Spain and Holland ended in favor of the Dutch, they concluded the Minister Pact (1648) by which the Dutch obtained privileges and gained complete monopoly over all the Indonesian islands. This Pact was reiterated and reinforced by the Utrecht Agreement (1714) and by the Agreement of St. Ildefonso (1797). Henceforth, it was the Dutch who exclusively carried on trade with the Indonesian islands, including West Irian.
The northern part of West Irian at that time was under the Sultanate of Tidore which was extended through Government Acts by the Netherlands in 1814, and to cover finally the whole western part of the island in 1848, as far as 140 degrees east longitude in the north and 141 degrees east longitude in the south. The Sultanate of Tidore in North Moluccas was used by the Dutch to establish their power in Irian because of the striking similarities in customs between Tidore and several parts of West Irian. This fact was recently confirmed by the Dutch scholar, Vollenhoven.
Afterwards, Dutch policy was aimed at gradually disassociating West Irian from the Sultanate and Pat bringing the region under their direct control. The first step was taken in 1905 by granting the Sultan 6000 guilders per annum in exchange for his rights to the southern part of West Irian. The second step was directed towards the remaining part - the north-west of Irian. But in this, the Dutch Government met with strong resistance even from among the Dutch themselves. Dr. Hovenkamp, a former commissioner for the residency of Ternate, said: It is a pure misconception to presume the absence of practical ties between Tidore and the northern and north-western Irian. There have always been close ties, but they have been weakened by our Government, who should have strengthened them for the benefit of the people.*
In the international context as well, West Irian had long been acknowledged as an integral part of Indonesia. During the war between England and Napoleon’s France, the Indonesian islands fell into the hands of the British. At the conclusion of the war, the colonies were returned to the Dutch according to the London Agreement (1814-1824). In the sixth article of that Agreement, special mention was made of the eastern islands, including West Irian. Thus, 141 degrees east longitude was accepted without question in history and in international agreements as the eastern boundary of Indonesia. Another confirmation is to be found in the English Parliamentary Letters of July 1886, the Correspondence respecting New Guinea which gave detailed particulars regarding the boundary of the Netherlands New Guinea.
Prior to the Second World War, West Irian was included in the Dutch East Indies administration as the Government (province) of Moluccas with the town of Ambon as the seat of the Governor. This Government (province) was sub-divided into two residencies, the residency of Ambon, to which belonged the southern part of West Irian, and the residency of Ternate, to which belonged the northern part of West Irian. As the world knows, the Moluccas, with the towns of Ambon and Ternate, are and have always been part of Indonesia. So is the territory of West Irian which was never mentioned apart from the Netherlands East Indies. It was and always has been looked upon as part of the Netherlands East Indies, and thus, also a part of Indonesia.
*The outbreak of the Second World War brought an end to the dispute. In July 1949, the Dutch made use of an agreement signed in 1909 between some Sultanates in East Indonesia and the Netherlands -Indies Government, in which the Dutch had managed to obtain the right of bringing under their direct control any of the self-governing territories at any time.
In sum, the claim that the people of West Irian are different in civilization and culture from Indonesia would not only be a ludicrous distortion of history but also a tendentious half-truth. For, inter-linkages between Indonesia and West Irian can be traced as far back as the pre-historic period. During that time, tribes originating from South-East Asia moved in a southern direction in several waves. Part of these migrations went through Indonesia and some reached Irian. Similarities in customs, manners, civilizations, culture and language strongly point to this truism. In modern times, the West Irianese use the national language of Indonesia - Bahasa Indonesia - as their lingua franca with their brethren from other parts of the country. This language is also used by the West Irianese to communicate with people from different linguistic groups within their territory. Regardless of ethnical, cultural and linguistic differences, people in different parts of the islands call themselves Indonesians. Indonesia is their nationality and they all live in the territory once governed by the Netherlands as a single entity known as the Netherlands East Indies, of which West Irian was an integral part.
---
The Political Status of Irian Jaya: Contending Positions of Indonesia and the Netherlands
The people of Indonesia had realized their right to self-determination after a long struggle against colonial rule when they proclaimed their independence on 17 August 1945, which led to the establishment of a free and independent Republic of Indonesia, covering the whole territory of the former Netherlands East Indies. Such a right, however, was challenged by the colonial power and an armed conflict between Indonesia and the Netherlands ensued. The conflict ended when the parties concluded a peace agreement under the auspices of the United Nations Commission for Indonesia resulting in the Round Table Conference, held at the Hague in 1949. The peace accord of 2 November 1949 was achieved as a result of the full recognition and acceptance by the Netherlands of the independence and sovereignty of Indonesia as reflected in Article 1 of the Charter of Transfer of Sovereignty (S/1417/Add.1) which provided :
" The Kingdom of the Netherlands unconditionally and irrevocably transfers complete sovereignty over Indonesia to the Republic of the United States of Indonesia and thereby recognizes said Republic of the United States of Indonesia as an independent and sovereign State ".*
The Round Table Conference agreement, however, did not settle the conflict between Indonesia and the Netherlands in a comprehensive manner. It left the question of the Indonesian territory of West New Guinea, constituting a substantial part of a its territory, to be resolved within a period of one year. This unsettled question found a temporary compromise in Article 2 of the Charter of Transfer of Sovereignty wherein it was decided that with regard to the residency** of New Guinea:
"In view of the fact that it has not been possible to reconcile the views of the parties on New Guinea, which remain, therefore, in dispute ".
* The formal transfer of sovereignty took place on 27 December 1949. In the course of 1950, the Republic of the United States of Indonesia transformed itself through internal processes into the Republic of Indonesia, which was admitted to the United Nations on 28 September 1950.
**Residency is an administrative unit of the Government of the Netherlands.
"In view of the dedication of the parties to the principle of resolving by peaceful and reasonable means any differences that may hereafter exist or arise between them."
" That the status quo of the residency of New Guinea shall be maintained with the stipulation that within a year from the date of transfer of sovereignty to the Republic of the United States of Indonesia, the question of the political status of New Guinea be determined through negotiations between the Republic of Indonesia and the Kingdom of the Netherlands."
For Indonesia, this was a difficult compromise for what this envisaged was that the Netherlands military presence and administrative control would remain in Indonesian territory for the stipulated period of one more year. It also presented Indonesia with great difficulties to have part of its territory under occupation and have such a position ratified by its Parliament. Therefore, it can be said that Indonesia’s acceptance of this compromise was a reflection of its sincere determination to resolve through peaceful means in accordance with the aims of the United Nations and its own national policies, a situation that had the potential to disturb international peace and security. What made this position even more unacceptable was that the newly independent Republic of Indonesia had to contend with a dispute over its territory, when it was not a question of its making.*
Indonesia’s right of sovereignty rests on two grounds: first, it had succeeded to Dutch sovereignty over the whole of the Netherlands East Indies, including Irian Jaya; second, there were historical ties between the rest of Indonesia and Irian Jaya.
As demonstrated in the previous chapter, it is a historical fact that West Irian was always an integral part of the territory of the former Netherlands East Indies, and therefore, of the Republic Indonesia. In this context, it is fitting to recall that never at any time prior to the Round Table Conference was there any doubt about the status of West Irian in the negotiations and agreements between the Dutch and the Indonesians. On 25 March 1947 the two parties signed the Linggadjati Agreement and Article 3 of the said Agreement specifically stated:
*On 2 November 1949, at the closing session of the Round Table Conference, the Chairman of the United Nations Commission for Indonesia spoke of this significant event as the end of the conflict, the solution of a problem "
"the United States of Indonesia shall comprise the entire territory of the Netherlands East Indies ". The status of the Netherlands East Indies territory including West New Guinea , was never in question is further confirmed by the following events concerning the validity of Indonesia’s position.
(i) In December 1946 the Dutch Governor-General Dr. H.J. Van Mook reiterated the view of his Government: Decidedly not the intention of the Government ( the Dutch Government) to exclude New Guinea from Indonesia.
(ii) On 17 January 1948, the Renville Agreement reached under the auspices of the United Nations Good Offices Committee stated inter alia:
Sovereignty throughout the Netherlands East Indies is and shall remain with the Kingdom of the Netherlands until, after a stated interval, the Kingdom of Netherlands transfers its sovereignty to the United States of Indonesia
Once again , it was apparent that the Netherlands East Indies would be replaced by a new sovereign and independent state of Indonesia.(iii) The preliminary agreement on the Round Table Conference, the so-called Roem-Van Royen Agreement of 7 May 1949 asserted:
the discussions will take place as to the way in which to accelerate the unconditional transfer of real and complete sovereignty to the United States of Indonesia in accordance with the Renville Agreements.
(iv) The same viewpoint was reaffirmed in the letter by the Netherlands representative to the United Nations dated 2 March 1949 :
the Netherlands Government has reached the conclusion that the best solution of the pending problem is to be found in an accelerated transfer of sovereignty over Indonesia to an Indonesian federal government which will be fully representative of the whole of Indonesia.
(v) Also, it is pertinent to note that the delegation of the Netherlands had concluded the earlier preliminary Roem Van Royen Agreement at the Round Table Conference and affirmed in the Security Council proceedings.
As I explained at the outset, this dispute is not about the question of whether or not Indonesia will become independent. All parties agree that what used to be the Netherlands East Indies should become an independent State as soon as possible.*
Furthermore, Dr. Van Royen stated at that meeting:
the population of Indonesia consists of about seventeen ethnic and linguistic groups which, in their turn, contain a still greater number of sub - groups. Common existence under the Netherlands Crown has created a sense of Indonesian nationality.
This statement is most relevant because it demonstrates not only the common existence but also common fate and common struggle of the people of Irian Jaya with the rest of Indonesia against colonial rule.
Despite these unquestionable grounds of commonality of interests between the peoples of Indonesia and West Irian, Indonesia found it deeply regrettable and troubling that during the Round Table Conference, the Government of the Netherlands took a position contrary to its previous commitments. By reneging on its commitments, the Dutch authorities insisted on retaining their control over West Irian. The reason being, it was widely believed, that the Dutch wanted the territory exclusively for settlement by Dutch-Indonesians under continued Dutch colonial rule. Indonesia protested and a deadlock was inevitable. At the end of the Round Table Conference, the Head of Indonesia’s delegation stated:
" Our happiness is rather suppressed because not all questions have been solved. Irian or New Guinea still remains a dispute"
When one defines " Indonesia" , it has national and political connotations as it was used in the national struggle for independence and was to replace the name Netherlands East Indies. The name Indonesia was legalized by the Netherlands itself and contained in article 1 of the Netherlands Constitution of 1922 which reads :
*Official Records of the Security Council, Third Year, No. 132, 388th meeting
The Kingdom of the Netherlands consists of the territories of the Netherlands, the Netherlands Indies, Surinam and the Netherlands Antilles.
Later in 1948, when the Constitution of the Netherlands was amended, it provided:
" The Kingdom of the Netherlands consists of the Netherlands, Indonesia, Surinam and the Netherlands Antilles."
Such a clear demarcation was also contained in the Constitution of Indonesia, in 1945 and 1950 as the separation of Indonesia from West Irian was only meant to be temporary pending negotiations between the concerned parties.
West Irian was thus never mentioned apart from the Netherlands East Indies. After the Second World War, it was part of the Residency of Ternate within the province of Moluccas with Ambon as its capital. Later, it became a residency itself. Thus, it was only logical for the Government of the Netherlands in the 1949 report to the United Nations to state:
" Indonesia consists of a series of island groups in the region of the equator, extending from the ainland of Asia to Australia. The principal groups are the Greater Sunda Islands, the Moluccas and New Guinea, west of 141 degrees east longitude. "In the contemporary world, Indonesia is accepted throughout the world as one nation comprising numerous and diverse ethnic and cultural groups that live in the territory of the former Netherlands Crown as a single entity.
Thus, no one can draw artificial distinctions between the Papua and Malay peoples. Mixed groups have developed in many parts of the Moluccas in the course of history. It can not be determined therefore that the West Irianese are an exclusive racial stock. There were and continues to be Indonesians coming from other islands to live in West Irian. The people of West Irian also live in other islands such as the Moluccas, Sulawesi, the Lesser Sundas and in Java. Hence, close relationships have been established over the years between this region and other parts of Indonesia.
The importance of Irian Jaya to Indonesia must be self-evident. In covering 413,000 square kilometers, West Irian is an area constituting 22 per cent of the entire Indonesian territory with a population of about 2 million and although under-developed was thoroughly neglected by the colonial authorities. It is also significant in the political and national spheres. As part of the Netherlands East Indies, West Irian and its people played an important role in the Indonesian struggle for freedom and independence. Hence, the Indonesian Proclamation of Independence of 17 August 1945 was of profound significance for the West Irian people who considered themselves as Indonesians. Following this Declaration by their national leaders, the people of West Irian, together with the rest of the Indonesian population resisted attempts to re-impose colonial rule.
In 1946, largely on the initiative of Mr. Silas Papare, who was decorated by the Allies for his prominent role in the resistance movement during the Japanese occupation of West Irian and later became a member of the Indonesian Parliament, the largest and most active political group emerged called Partai Kemerdekaan Indonesia Irian. This organization played a particularly significant role in the independence of the entire Indonesian nation by struggling for the noble cause of the exercise of self-determination of its people. Their acts rapidly won support and praise of the entire Indonesian population.
At that time in West Irian, the situation was described by the Netherlands Parliamentary mission that visited the area to be generally poor. In this regard, the report released in 1954 depicted social conditions of laborers as very bad, wage scales as discriminatory on a racial basis and educational program as unsuitable. 122 years of Dutch colonial rule had cemented even closer ties between the people of West Irian and their Indonesian brethren in the rest of the country.Since the conclusion of the Round Table Conference, Indonesia had sought to find ways for a peaceful settlement to the question of West Irian in line with Article 2 of the Charter of Transfer of Sovereignty:
a. In April 1950, an Indonesian-Netherlands Ministers Conference on financial matters in Jakarta did some preliminary work on the question of West Irian. Also a Commission comprising of Netherlands and Indonesian representatives was established to visit and make an investigation on West Irian. The Conference decided that negotiations on this question should continue, on the basis of the report of the Commission, at the Second Conference of Ministers of the Netherlands - Indonesia Union, at the Hague during 1950.
b. In December 1950, the Second Conference of Ministers of the Union was held at the Hague. During the course of these negotiations, the parties decided to stipulate a period of one year from 27 December 1950, the date of the conclusion of the Round Table Conference Agreement. At that Conference, the Indonesian,delegation submitted a note containing the following main point upon which to base the resolution of this dispute:
That de jure sovereignty over West Irian of the Republic of Indonesia be recognized by the Dutch without delay, and that the transfer of the Netherlands Administration could be implemented through mutual arrangements by the middle of 1951Ó.
In an effort to arrive at a compromise solution, the Indonesian delegation, aside from guaranteeing human rights and religious freedoms, also agreed to provide autonomy for the territory. It also recognized the present and future interests of the Dutch in West Irian, including the guarantee to employ Dutch officials in the administration and its nationals in the immigration department. On the other hand, in a significant departure from its past commitments, the counter proposals of the Dutch included the transfer of sovereignty over West Irian to the Netherlands-Indonesian Union and to retain in the Netherlands the administration of the Territory, with Indonesian members participating on a parity basis in a West Irian Council. These were totally unacceptable to Indonesia as it would perpetuate colonial domination and practices. The West Irian dispute thus failed to be settled.
c. In December 1951, a third Indonesia-Netherlands Conference was held. At this time the Netherlands proposed that the dispute be submitted to the International Court of Justice which Indonesia rejected arguing that the issue in question was a political and not of a juridical nature. Indonesia made sincere efforts to break the impasse but the negotiations had to be suspended due to a change of Government in Jakarta.
d. The Government of Indonesia had made this issue a priority to be resolved in a peaceful manner but the Dutch Government showed a reluctance to negotiate a final solution while remaining the colonial ruler. Throughout the dispute, Indonesia has challenged the sovereignty of the Netherlands over West Irian. The exercise of such sovereignty was unacceptable as it contravened the Charter of Transfer of Sovereignty to unconditionally transfer Complete sovereignty over Indonesia to the new Indonesian Republic.
It was against the backdrop of the aforementioned developments and the refusal of the Dutch to enter into negotiations thereafter that the Indonesian Government deemed it necessary to bring this matter to the General Assembly at its ninth session in 1954. After full consideration of the matter, the First Committee adopted by a two-third majority vote resolution A/C.1/760 which was thereafter submitted to the General Assembly. Regrettably, the General Assembly failed to adopt the resolution despite the support of many member States.
In April 1955, the Asian-African Conference, convened in Bandung and attended by 29 countries, representing two thirds of the world’s population, adopted the following resolution :The Asian-African Conference in the context of its expressed attitude on the abolition of colonialism, supported the position of Indonesia in the case of West Irian, based on the relevant agreements between Indonesia and the Netherlands.
The Asian-African Conference urged the Netherlands Government to reopen negotiations as soon as possible to implement their obligations under the above-mentioned agreements, and expressed the earnest hope that the United Nations would assist the parties concerned in finding a peaceful solution to the dispute
Such unstinted support of the Bandung Conference for a negotiated settlement of the colonial question of West Irian was greatly appreciated by Indonesia as well as all those member States that espoused the purposes and principles of the United Nations Charter. The efforts of the Asian-African Governments proved successful and General Assembly adopted resolution 915 (X) in 1955 on the question of West Irian. Regrettably, from the years 1954 to 1957 and in 1961, the United Nations General Assembly discussed this item but the adoption of a resolution proved elusive.
Meanwhile, in 1960, diplomatic relations between the two countries were broken after the Netherlands dispatch of its aircraft carrier to New Guinea waters in order to safeguard its on-going preparations for internal self-government in West Guinea. In response to such maneuvers, the Indonesian Government adopted a more assertive policy outlining a possible military take-over of the occupied territory by announcing the Tri Komando Rakyat (People’s Triple Command) i.e.;
1. to thwart the formation of a puppet state of Papua by the colonial power;
2. to raise the Indonesian Red and White flag in West Irian; and
3. to prepare a general mobilization to defend national independence and unity;
Such a pronouncement demonstrated beyond any doubt that a military confrontation between Indonesia and the Netherlands was inevitable.As a co-sponsor and ardent supporter of the historic landmark General Assembly resolution 1514 (XV), Indonesia objected to the Government of the Netherlands to invoke the said resolution not to complete the independence of the Indonesian nation but to partition its territory.*Indonesia continued to extend its cooperation to resolve the dispute in a peaceful way but made clear that it would not hesitate to use force to defend its territory.
The Government of Indonesia also took strong exception to the efforts of the Netherlands to confuse the meaning of Article 73 of the United Nations Charter and of General Assembly Resolution 1514 (XV). In this context, it emphasized that Article 73 could not apply to West Irian as it forms an integral part of the Republic of Indonesia and was occupied by force by the colonial authorities.** Likewise, it stated that Resolution 1514 (XV) had no relevance to the case of West Irian in view of paragraph 6 which declared that the partial or total disruption of national unity and the territorial integrity of a country is incompatible with the purposes and principles of the United Nations Charter. Furthermore, Indonesia maintained that if the United Nations was sincere in resolving this issue, it
*Document A/4944 Ð Note Verbale dated 27 October 1961 from the representative of Indonesia, transmitting a statement of the Minister for Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Indonesian.
**Document S/5128 Ð Letter dated 25 May 1962 from the representative of Indonesia to the Secretary-General
would eradicate Dutch colonialism and return that territory into the fold of the Republic of Indonesia. Bringing this dispute under Article 73 would mean a negation of the letter and spirit of the Round Table Conference as well as a denial of freedom and such an approach was contrary to the purposes of the United Nations Charter and, in essence Article 73 itself.
For eight long years, the General Assembly had been unable to assist the parties in finding a solution. Thus, it became apparent that only bilateral negotiations would provide a reasonable solution Ð the transfer of the administration of West Irian to Indonesia. Since such a transition was of compelling national interest as it concerned the completion of its territorial sovereignty and also in light of breakdown of diplomatic relations between the two countries, Indonesia had no alternative but to seek a third party as intermediary in the needed bilateral negotiations. Indonesia availed of the initiative of the UN Secretary-General to join the Netherlands in informal discussions. Both Governments agreed to the intermediary of the Secretary-General U That and Ambassador Ellsworth Bunker. Largely due to their tireless efforts and coupled with the desire of both Indonesia and the Netherlands, a settlement was reached within a period of two weeks which can be regarded in the annals of international affairs as a speedy settlement considering a conflict that had lasted for 13 years. This gave birth to the New York Agreement which was signed by Foreign Minister Dr. Subandrio of Indonesia and Ambassadors J.H. van Roijen and C. Schuurman of the Netherlands, in the presence of the Secretary-General, in New York, on 15 August 1962.
THE NEW YORK AGREEMENT:
LEGAL BASIS TO RESTORE IRIAN JAYA INTO THE REPUBLIC OF INDONESIA
As far as Indonesia was concerned, Irian Jaya was legally and constitutionally a part of the Netherlands East Indies. It is also an indisputable fact that the core of the Indonesian freedom struggle during the years 1945-1949 was independence for all of its people on the entire Indonesian archipelago comprising all of its islands. Proceeding from this basic premise, Indonesia viewed West Irian as an integral part of its territory that was forcefully occupied by the Dutch colonial authorities.
Consequently, Indonesia has since 1950, assiduously sought to reach a peaceful settlement both within and outside the United Nations. Imbued by the desire to bring back West Irian into the fold of the Republic, it accepted in principle the Bunker proposal and expressed its willingness to discuss it further. Indonesia, thus welcomed the initiative of the Acting Secretary-General to bring the parties together for informal discussions under his guidance. As noted in the previous chapter, after long years of conflict, the Bunker proposal resulted in the conclusion of the New York Agreement between the Republic of Indonesia and the Kingdom of the Netherlands concerning West New Guinea (West Irian)* on 15 August 1962. Instruments of ratification were exchanged between the two countries during 20-21 September 1962.
SALIENT FEATURES OF THE AGREEMENT
One of the salient features of the Agreement (Article II) was to provide for the initial transfer of administration of West Irian by the Netherlands to an interim UN authority - UNTEA - on 1 October 1962 and subsequent transfer from UNTEA to Indonesian control after 1 May 1963 (XII). In this context, it should be noted that the Agreement provided for the first phase of the UNTEA administration (Article IX, X, XI) which included, inter alia, the rapid replacement of top Netherlands officials with non-Netherlands and non-Indonesian officials. Furthermore, it authorized UNTEA to employ Indonesian personnel to disseminate the terms of the Agreement to the Irian Jayan population and to promulgate new laws.
*UN Doc. A/5150
The second phase of the Agreement (Article XII, XIII) envisaged the transfer of all or part of the administration to Indonesia and the replacement of United Nations security forces by Indonesian security officers. This meant the complete and final end of colonial rule as demanded by Indonesia. Following this significant event, the Secretary-General in his report* informed the General Assembly of the unique and highly successful cooperation that existed between UNTEA, Indonesia and the Dutch officials from 1 October 1962 to 1 May 1963. Reflective of such cooperation after long years of conflict, the Governments of Indonesia and the Netherlands established liaison missions to UNTEA on 1 October 1962, headed by Dr. Sudjarwo Tjondronegoro and Mr. L.J. Goedhart respectively.
Following his consultations with the Government of Indonesia and the United Nations Administrator, the Secretary-General’s Chef de Cabinet, Mr. C.V. Narasimhan announced in Jakarta that the transfer of administration would take place on 1 May 1963 and the replacement of Dutch officials by Indonesian officials would be accelerated. Following that announcement, Mr. C.V. Narasimhan representing the Secretary-General, attended the ceremony transferring full administrative control from the United Nations Administrator to the representative of the Republic of Indonesia and the United Nations flag was subsequently lowered.
It should be noted that throughout this period, from the transfer of Dutch administration to UNTEA and later from UNTEA to the Republic of Indonesia, the process was carried out peacefully and proceeded without an incident. The people of Irian Jaya were helped to adjust to the inevitable changes resulting from the agreement. Every effort was exerted to ensure a smooth transition, including the continuation of essential public services and utilities as well as employment.
The return of West Irian to Indonesia generated great enthusiasm among the peoples. Apart from fulfilling the provisions of the Agreement (Article XV), Indonesia was determined to ensure that West Irians would enjoy the fruits of their new-found freedom. To assist them in these challenges, hundreds of Indonesians - teachers, scientists, doctors and nurses and civilian administrators - joined in the effort of UNTEA. From the outset, Indonesia had actively assisted UNTEA in the opening of new schools and public projects in the territory, such as scientific and agricultural projects. Remote areas of West Irian received special attention from the Indonesian Government. What was particularly heartening was that the
*UN DOC.A/5578
population of the island voiced its enthusiasm by wholeheartedly participating in the nation-building process. Also noteworthy, was that a few hours after the UNTEA departed, the Indonesian Government appointed a native son of West Irian to the high office of Governor of the province. Such an appointment was more than what was called for in the Agreement, namely, to accelerate the participation of the people in the local government.Another central aspect of the Agreement was the act of free choice or the ascertainment of the wishes of the Irian Jayan people (Article XVII) to take place six years after the administration had been formally and fully transferred to Indonesia. The latter provision was a compromise solution to meet the demands of the Netherlands and was to be held by the Indonesian Government to ascertain the wishes of the Irian Jayan people. As had been clarified by the Representative of Indonesia to the United Nations*, the purpose of agreeing to the idea of self-determination was to promptly reach a peaceful resolution of the West Irian question which does not mean its exercise in the strict, traditional and orthodox sense. This is due to the fact that Indonesia had never considered Irian Jaya as another country. On the contrary, it was a matter of historical record that West Irian was part and parcel of Indonesia. The period of six years was to allow for its people to become reacquainted with the rest of Indonesia after having been divided by the colonial authorities.
As to the act of free choice, the Secretary-General’s functions were limited by the terms of the Agreement (Article XVI). In sum, the Agreement left the method and procedure to be followed in the act of free choice to the Indonesian Government (Article XVIII) which was to decide in consultation with the existing local representative councils in West Irian itself as legal representatives of its people. This was the real content and meaning of these provisions. Disregard of these critical provisions contained in the Agreement has led to deliberate misinterpretations.
For Indonesia, the implementation of the first part of the bilateral Agreement was satisfactory. As to the second part, it considered the act of free choice after six years to be conducted by the Indonesian Government and not the United Nations was a compromise to avoid the resumption of conflict. It was only with such assurances that the Indonesian Parliament adopted and ratified the Indonesian-Netherlands Agreement of 1962 on
1 September 1962.
* A/PV 1155, page 544-545, paras 203-205
The Agreement was of supreme national importance to Indonesia from the viewpoint of building its nation and national reconstruction which at the time was still in a period of growth and consolidation. Towards this end, the Agreement was a valuable contribution for it succeeded in bringing about a better level of understanding between Indonesia and the Netherlands as well as demonstrating in the early years of the United Nations its success in bringing about a settlement between two of its member States.* In this regard, it is pertinent to point out that the Agreement resolved the following two basic issues : the restoration of the territorial integrity of the Republic of Indonesia; and revalidation of the right of self-determination for the people of Irian Jaya. The Agreement contained 29 articles, supplemented by an exchange of letters and other annexes aimed towards serving the interests of the Irian Jayan people like the rest of fellow Indonesians. It was this fraternal spirit that would guide Indonesia in its task of administering the territory following the departure of UNTEA . The people of Indonesia were so determined to help them that contributions flowed in from all over the country, from the rich and poor alike to promote the development of Irian Jaya. In meeting its responsibilities, Indonesia viewed as its first duty the restoration of harmony among the people of West Irian itself as well as with the rest of the Republic. It did not view this challenge as something new or innovative. As a country comprising of numerous ethnic and regional groupings spread over 3,000 islands, the Indonesian people had always endeavored to live up to their motto of Unity in Diversity.The bilateral Agreement in resolving the dispute between Indonesia and Netherlands facilitated the normalization of bilateral relations on 13 March 1963 when the two countries exchanged diplomatic representatives.
GENERAL ASSEMBLY RESOLUTION 1752 (XVII)
With the adoption of General Assembly resolution 1752 (XVII) on 21 September 1962, the United Nations undertook an experiment in international administration in the process of settling a dispute. This view was expressed by the representative of Australia during the meeting of the General Assembly in 1963, stating:
Ò The United Nations undertook a novel role in the assistance which it gave towards the successes of the means which were found for resolving the dispute, and even more in its subsequent provisions of a temporary administrative authority for the territory.**
*1127th meeting of the General Assembly plenary session of 21 September 1962.
** 1255th meeting Ð 6 November 1963
In view of the fact that differing interoperations have been expressed as to the role of the United Nations on the issue of Irian Jaya, it is essential to understand that the New York Agreement between Indonesia and the Netherlands was a bilateral instrument concluded between the two parties themselves and was not reached on the basis of any resolution or any other mandate of the United Nations General Assembly. The underlying factor, which called on the Secretary-General to assume an intermediary role was in response to pressing international circumstances. Subsequent measures taken by the Secretary-General, including the establishment of UNTEA and the dispatch of the Special Representative, Ambassador Fernando Ortiz-Sanz of Bolivia, were based primarily on the provisions of the Agreement itself. In addition, the fact that the financial expenses were borne by the Governments of Indonesia and the Netherlands reflected the limited role of the United Nations.*
Under such circumstances the only course of action available for the General Assembly was to take note of the Agreement through the adoption of a resolution 1752 (XVII). The statement by the President of the General Assembly, Carlos Sosa Rodriguez, of Venezuela, during its 18th session is pertinent:
"(a)s I understand it, the only decision required of the General Assembly in connection with the Secretary-General’s report (A/ 5578) is to take note of the report."
Also relevant to point out was the statement by the representative of India, Mr. Chakravarty, at the 18th session of the General Assembly when he expressed the following detailed viewpoint:
"Year after year we have represented that West Irian is an integral part of Indonesia. Despite opinions to the contrary, my delegation had always held the view that when, by the Round Table Conference of 1949, the Kingdom of the Netherlands unconditionally and irrevocably transferred complete sovereignty over Indonesia to the Republic of Indonesia, what was transferred was complete sovereignty over the whole of the former Netherlands East-Indies. Sovereignty over West Irian, which was an integral part of the Netherlands East Indies, therefore, also passed on to the Republic of Indonesia. The administration of West Irian remained with the Netherlands pending a determination of the question of its political status, not of its sovereignty, through subsequent resolutions."
*Funding for this whole operation was borne equally by the Governments of Indonesia and the Netherlands in line with the Agreement (XXIV). A sum of $ US 10 million was made available for three years. This fund became the United Nations Fund for West Irian (FUNDWI) and was entrusted to the Secretary-General.
From [1] ý those statements, it is apparent that the United Nations from the outset had a clear understanding that Irian Jaya was a bilateral matter concerning an unresolved issue of desalinization in the territory of the Indonesian Republic. More precisely, the United Nations was aware that the whole process was an effort on behalf of Indonesia to facilitate the exercise of its full control and sovereignty over the last part of what was once the Netherlands East-Indies.
As a consequence of the internationally accepted principle that colonial boundaries constitute the borders of newly independent states, it follows that all the territories, which once were a part of the Netherlands East-Indies, have since been transferred to Indonesia. This fundamental tenet has long been recognized under the principle of us possidentis. Reflecting this new reality, United Nations documents of 1963 show that the issue of Irian Jaya was removed from the agenda of Trust and Non-Self-Governing territories. The question of Irian Jaya has always been a case of an incomplete decolonization process of Indonesia the facts of which have been already been set out in other sections of this publication.
It is a matter of record that this process of transition to independence has not been smooth when states are intent on holding on to their colonies and putting a strong resistance to having these territories seized from them. Irian Jaya offers a striking example. In this case, Indonesia struggled to protect its territorial Untegrity for over half a decade and that obviously brought home to the international community the importance of ensuring an orderly and peaceful decolonization process.
The adoption by the United Nations General Assembly in 1960 of the historic Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and People reflected the legitimate aspirations of the vast majority of mankind for freedom and independence. It is significant to note in this context, that the definition of self-determination was qualified in that Declaration:
" Any attempt aimed at the partial or total disruption of the national unity and the territorial integrity of a country is incompatible with the purposes and principles which are the United Nations."
It is apparent that the aforementioned formulation is aimed towards preventing the fragmentation of a nation and thereby a threat to its national cohesion. The rationale for this position for both newly independent states and the former colonial powers was based on pragmatism.
" The reasoning behind this principle (the sanctity of borders) was quite clear; without it, the newly decolorized states would be condemned to fight each other over the unrealistic borders established by the haphazard nature of the conquests by the colonizers.*
Finally, the principle of sanctity of borders was reaffirmed in the 1970 Declaration on Principles of International law concerning Friendly Relations and Cooperation among States. This Declaration served to preserve the former boundaries and underpinned the claims of states that internal conflicts fall within the ambit of domestic jurisdiction and are not subject to external scrutiny.
*Roland Rich in a paper on Problems of Self-Determination in Central and Eastern Europe delivered at the " New dimensions of the Right to Self-Determination : its implications for the Wold and Australia in the 1990's ", Seminar organized by the Human Rights Council of Australia.
---
---
---
---
---
THE ROLE OF THE UN SECRETARY-GENERAL’S REPRESENTATIVE IN RESOLVING THE DISPUTE OVER WEST IRIAN
The UN Secretary-General’s Representative, Ambassador Fernando Ortiz-Sanz , acknowledged early on that he "...was not given any political or administrative authority, not even a supervisory function". Rather, his role was to "advise, assist and participate in arrangements which are the responsibility of Indonesia for the act of free choice, having in mind the interests and welfare of the people of the territory.* "Advice" was meant "To express views, offer counsel, make recommendations and suggest appropriate measures to the Government, having in mind the existing principles of the Agreement." ** This was to be done through the modality of consultations with the representative councils on procedures and appropriate methods to ascertain the will of the people; the formulation of questions in such a way as to permit the inhabitants to decide whether they wish to remain or sever their ties with Indonesia; and the preparation of a list of persons eligible to participate in the act of free choice. Although these were not binding, the Government of Indonesia had accepted these suggestions in an earnest effort to facilitate the task entrusted to the Secretary-General. "Assistance " was to be extended as and when needed. The meaning of the term " Participation" was not clearly defined in the Agreement but the UN Representative interpreted it to mean UN "presence in the territory" in an effort " to improve the democratic conditions of the exercise " of the act of free choice. Thus, the UN staff traveled all over the territory and communicated with the people concerning the political situation and state of public opinion. They were also present at the consultations with the representative councils, during the election of members of the consultative assemblies and when the act of free choice took place.
On its part, the obligations of Indonesia was to make arrangements for these purposes in order to give the people of the territory "The opportunity to exercise freedom of choice" (Article XVII). In this context, Indonesia was expected to take into account the advice of the UN Representative, the position taken by the representative councils as well as the rights and freedoms guaranteed to the people of Papua especially the right of free speech, freedom of movement and of assembly and the freely expressed will of the population.
*
See Article XVII and the preamble. UN doc.
A/7723, 1969, p. 4.
** Ibid
The UN Representative has thus tacitly acknowledged the willingness of the Central Government and local authorities to give serious consideration to his suggestions, took every opportunity to spread information about the significance of the act of free choice, and in fact, was present in the territory observing its exercise in various Regencies. The Representative went even so far to conclude, it can be stated that, with the limitations imposed by the geographical characteristics of the territory and the general political situation in the area, an act of free choice has taken place in West Irian (Irian Jaya) in accordance with Indonesian practice, in which the representatives of the people have expressed their wish to remain with Indonesia.
However, there exists a critical difference between the use of the words in accordance with Indonesian practice and the call in the Agreement for an act of free choice In accordance with international practice. This was reflected in the reservations expressed in the concluding remarks of the Representative’s Report concerning the implementation of some provisions of the Agreement relating to the rights, including the rights of free speech, freedom of movement and of assembly, of the inhabitants of the area. This was an attempt to diffuse Indonesia’s responsibility inherent in the Agreement, deflect attention from the limited role of the UN envisioned therein and belittle the special circumstances prevailing in the territory, deriving mainly from its ruggedness, the difficulties in communication
And generally the low level of development of the population. Such a stance ignored the fact that the act of free choice was a delicate political issue in Indonesia, and hence, should be dealt with care and caution. It was also a source of controversy among the politically conscious Irian Jayans which called for discretion and circumspection. These factors taken together, had internal security implications which could not have been marginalized without jeopardizing the nation’s stability. Still, legally organized political groups were allowed to function. Because it was not easy to make people comprehend the complicated nature of the Agreement and the real issues at stake. Freedom of speech to the extent of immunity from prosecution were granted to deputies in all representative councils. Thus, the exercise of basic rights and freedoms which goes along with responsibilities were not denied.
Notwithstanding these formidable obstacles, the Government of Indonesia responded favorably to the UN Representative’s suggestions to provide the inhabitants with information concerning the basic issues involved so that they would be able to decide with an open mind and objectivity whether to maintain or sever ties with Indonesia. This was done through an information paper explaining the New York Agreement and additional information concerning what the Government was doing regarding the act of free choice through newspapers, newssheets and radio broadcasts. Thus, the Government has fulfilled its duty in adequately informing the people of Irian Jaya and explaining at some length the methods to be followed for the act of free choice.
Indonesia was also conscious of its responsibility to ensure - within the framework of law and order, the social and political complexities of the country and democracy as practiced in Indonesia - the basic rights and freedoms which alone will enable the people of the territory to translate their convictions into realities. These were guaranteed by the Indonesian Constitution. It was equally important to satisfy the international community that a fair and truly democratic judgment has been rendered by the people of Irian Jaya. However, the situation was immeasurably complicated by the activities of the so-called Free Papua Movement or Free Papua Organization which was aided and abetted from abroad and engaged in terrorist methods to achieve its nefarious political aims. They never secured any support from the average Irian Jayan who preferred to remain loyal to Indonesia. Hence, from the beginning, their intention was to oppose, sabotage and wreck the implementation of the act of free choice. The chosen policy was widespread intimidation, threats and terror. The difficult economic situation was a fertile ground for propaganda, indoctrination and agitation. Despite provocations, the authorities pursued a policy of restraint and moderation in combating insurrection and armed confrontation and adopted a policy of clemency and leniency. Accordingly, scores of political detainees were released in order to create an atmosphere conducive for the exercise of the act of free choice. The same lenient policy was also evident towards the question of the return of exiles who could then participate in this exercise. In sum, contrary to the assertions of the UN Representative, the rights and freedoms of West Irians were upheld, there was freedom of speech, and political and other organizations were allowed to function in accordance with the laws of the country.Another issue on which divergent positions were taken was the UN Representative’s proposal for a one-man-one-vote to be used in the urban areas where communications and transportation were comparatively better, while advanced cultural level of the population and the availability of administrative apparatus would facilitate such a process. This was to be complemented by collective consultations in the less accessible and less advanced areas of the interior. It was claimed that such a Mixed system would be the best possible modality considering the geographic terrain and human realities which called for Ò a realistic criteria
The inapplicability of one-man-one-vote was based on the reality that with the exception of the tribal chiefs and other community leaders whose contacts with the missionaries and local authorities have made them prone to express their views on political issues but the population were illiterate and not interested in these issues. Furthermore, Indonesia has consistently opposed the right of self-determination on the ground that it would challenge the struggle for, and the Proclamation of Indonesia’s Independence which already constituted the exercise of such a right for all the people of Indonesia. In effect, the people of West Irian could not be separated from their historical background and Indonesia’s struggle for freedom and their feeling of oneness with the rest of the country to achieve this objective.
A compromise was found to resolve these differing approaches : an act of self-determination or an act of free choice. The latter modality was chosen whereby the wishes of the people would be ascertained. In Indonesian terminology and practice, this is called musjawarah, i.e.,
consultations towards consensus to secure their approval for implementing the act of free choice through the regional councils which would be enlarged to form consultative assemblies. These assemblies would not reach a decision through voting but through musjawarah which is a decision-making procedure based on discussion, understanding and knowledge of the problem. The results of the musjawarah in the assemblies constituted the final result of the act of free choice for the whole province.
The validity of the Government's position has to be seen in the imperative need to conform to the specific geographical, social and human realities which existed in Irian Jaya and which unavoidably conditioned the method to be adopted for the act of free choice. Still, in a spirit of compromise and cooperation, Indonesia agreed with the UN Representative for three pre-requisites to be fulfilled both prior to and during election of members to the consultative assemblies: sufficiently large membership, the representation of all sectors of the society and new members to be elected by the people.
It can be seen from the foregoing that the Government of Indonesia accepted many but not all proposals and recommendations of the UN Representative for the implementation in a democratic manner the provisions of the New York Agreement. The letter and spirit of that document was clear. It was more a political than a juridical document. This is because the implementation of the act of free choice was from the outset a political proposition and as conceded by the UN Representative, only Indonesia had the political authority to take decisions concerning the act of free choice. Consequently, the role of the UN Representative was limited and devoid of any political function. Hence, the task of devising a simple and practical method of carrying out the act of free choice became Indonesia’s responsibility and was submitted to the representatives of the people of Irian Jaya who were capable of understanding the complexities involved and who represented all segments of the people in the territory. The requirements of democracy was also taken into account, albeit adapted to the specific socio-cultural conditions that prevailed in the territory.
Barring the lapses and indiscretions noted above, the role of the UN Representative was professional, indeed exemplary, in implementing the provisions of the New York Agreement and in fulfilling his responsibilities on behalf of the Secretary-General. Yet, there have been allegations that the
UN was utilized by Indonesia as a cover to carry out the disputed act of free choice as Jakarta was determined never to offer an opportunity for Papuans to separate from the Republic. Such a dubious claim was based on the assertion that the reduction of UN staff from the original number of 50 to a token 16 was not sufficient to monitor and supervise the act of free choice for the large area of Irian Jaya; the UN never had any intention of pressing Jakarta to hold a genuine act of self-determination; and, in fact, the UN leadership was in collusion with Indonesia to legitimize their take over and annexation of the territory. All of these taken together have violated the terms of the New York Agreement which has become null and void.
On closer examination, however, these allegations are without foundation, and hence, warrant summary dismissal. To transplant Western democratic methods and practices would not only be erroneous but also unrealistic in the context of the realities in Irian Jaya. This is due to the specific conditions, the internal social dynamics and tradition of society, the level of advancement and the philosophy of life of Indonesians - all of which differ from those prevailing in Western countries. The Dutch did not challenge the veracity or outcome of the act of free choice. Any derogation or significant departures from the Agreement might have provoked criticism or even condemnation by the General Assembly. In fact, the General Assembly did not discuss or pass judgment; it only took note of the Secretary-General’s Report. For, the act of free choice was in conformity with the generally accepted norms of political representation in some parts of the world where representatives were elected or selected by their respective communities, thus given an opportunity to the general population to be involved in that process. This was the litmus test about the fairness and validity of the act of free choice and constituted the ultimate solution to the question of West Irian.
---
---
---
---
---
CONCLUSION
Although the Government of Indonesia believed that Irian Jaya was part of Indonesia - politically and administratively - and whose future as a free people lies in its restoration with Indonesia, it had agreed to the act of free choice in order to settle the dispute with the Netherlands. It was not possible to apply the system of one-man-one-vote considering the geographic terrain of the territory and the low level of socio-economic and cultural development of its people. It would only lead to uncertainties to an already complex situation. Since these extra ordinary circumstances militated against its application, the act of free choice through musyawarah was chosen and carried out to fulfill a bilateral agreement. The people of the territory were given an opportunity and the freedom to express themselves democratically. The members of the representative councils, acting on behalf of the people deliberated thoroughly prior to reaching a decision. Adults were given the opportunity to participate in the election of their representatives and this indirect act of self-determination was consistent with international practice.Furthermore, towards the implementation of Article XVII of the Agreement, the representative councils of Irian Jaya were duly consulted on the appropriate procedures and methods to ascertain the freely expressed will of the population. They accepted Indonesia’s proposal for their enlargement through elections by the people of Irian Jaya who would decide whether the territory wishes to remain or sever ties with Indonesia. These enlarged councils which included a total of 1026 members pronounced themselves unanimously, on behalf of the people of Irian Jaya, to remain with Indonesia. Thus, the people of Irian Jaya have clearly and unequivocally expressed their decision to remain with Indonesia. This is final, legal and irrevocable. It cannot be voided under any pretext.
The New York Agreement constituted the ultimate peaceful solution to a long-standing dispute between Indonesia and the Netherlands. For Indonesia, Irian Jaya was an issue of territorial integrity and, hence, of critical national interest. The main thrust of Indonesia’s position can be summed up as follows: Indonesia is the natural successor to all territories which during the colonial times were called the Netherlands
East Indies. The Agreement provided for the transfer of administration of Irian Jaya from the Netherlands to Indonesia and was the culmination of the end of colonial rule over all of Indonesia. It is viewed from the angle of anti-colonialism, legality and nationalism. In essence, Indonesia without Irian Jaya cannot be fully independent.Therefore, any effort to revisit the past with the intent of rectifying perceived injustices or assumed misconduct would be an illusion, impractical and even counter-productive. Backward-looking to argue about history rather than forward-looking with a sense of realism will not resolve the perceived grievances let alone those of the future. Consequently, the argument that the process must be re-examined because the people of Irian Jaya were not a party to the Agreement has no basis, since the issue was one of incomplete transfer Of sovereignty of the former territories under the Netherlands East Indies. The fact that the territory was under the rule of the Netherlands after the Round Table Conference in 1949 and until the transfer of authority to UNTEA in 1963 does not invalidate Indonesia’s claim. It follows that any agreement concerning the future status of the territory must be between Indonesia as the successor to the Netherlands East Indies, and the former colonial power, the Netherlands. And in recognition of this reality, the UN documents on non-self-governing territories demonstrate that since 1963, the status of the territory has changed.
The result of the act of free choice was, therefore, a revalidation of the exercise of the right ^ of self-determination of all the people of Indonesia begun by the Proclamation of Independence on 17 August 1945, and encompassing the entire territory that was formerly the Netherlands East Indies. The Proclamation declared that we, the people of Indonesia, do hereby proclaim the independence of Indonesia. All matters pertaining to the transfer of power, etc., will be carried out expeditiously and in the shortest possible time.* It can be seen that there is no mention of any particular province or geographical area for the simple reason that Soekarno-Hatta proclaimed independence for the whole territory previously under the Netherland East Indies, including Irian Jaya.*Indonesia, An Official Handbook, 1994, p.51
Consequently, allegations that the 1969 act of free choice was an act of no choice and was a sham are without any foundation. Bt is an undeniable truism that the people of Irian Jaya exercised their right of self-determination through an act of free choice conducted from 14 July to 2 August 1969 in accordance with the relevant provisions of the 1962 New York Agreement. Having met the requirements, Irian Jaya was rightfully restored as an integral part of Indonesia. The West Irianese share Indonesian sovereignty. They occupy a status equal to the other provinces, join political parties, take part in elections and send representatives to the Indonesian Parliament.The Government of Indonesia, therefore, categorically rejects the resolution adopted by the Second Congress of the Council of Papua in June 2000 declaring the independence of Papua as it is in contravention to the 1945 Indonesian Constitution and the relevant provisions of the UN Character upholding the sacrosanct principle of the sovereignty and territorial integrity of member states. Its convening without any hindrance, however, is not only a concrete manifestation of the progress that has been made towards democratic governance based on the rule of law and a new political culture in Indonesia but also Irian Jaya's contribution to the attainment of these objectives. It must also be seen as a call for unity throughout the archipelago in the tradition of Indonesian patriotism.
Indonesia is a multi-ethnic, multi-cultural and multi-linguistic nation. Unity in Diversity is its motto. As such, the interests, aspirations and needs of its people are diverse and sometimes conflicting. It is, therefore, imperative to identify ways and means to accommodate and reconcile these differences for the mutual benefit of the whole nation. It is on this premise that the new, democratic Indonesia is endeavoring to redress the past mistakes concerning human rights abuses and economic disparities through dialogue and the introduction of regional autonomy in all the provinces, including Irian Jaya.
The primary objective of autonomy is to establish democratic institutions at the regional level, improve citizens access to the Government and their standard of living. Once these objectives are achieved, it is expected that a system based on laws that respects human rights and human dignity, with more room for participation by the people in all aspects of life would emerge. Thus, regional autonomy is destined to emerge as the unifying factor of a heterogeneous and diverse Indonesia and not as a dividing and destabilizing factor.
Having instituted measures to transform Indonesia into a democratic nation, the detrimental impact on the provinces resulting from past policies and practices would substantially diminish and eventually disappear. Perceived injustices can only be redressed through the constitutional and political framework of the Government of Indonesia. Since economic, social and humanitarian grievances do not constitute legitimate grounds for secession, the Government of Indonesia has made its position clear that any effort to subvert its sovereignty and territorial integrity over Irian Jaya or to instigate separatism in that province will be considered provocative and meet with a stern response. As a legitimate and integral part of the Republic of Indonesia, any attempt to question the legality of Irian Jaya's restoration into Indonesia would constitute an unwarranted interference in the internal affairs of a sovereign state. As a recognition of the uniqueness of Irian Jaya, President Abdurrahman Wahid has agreed to change the name of the province from Irian Jaya to Papua in accordance with the wishes of its people.
---
Agreement between the Republic of Indonesia and the Kingdom of the Netherlands concerning West New Guinea (West Irian)
The Republic of Indonesia and the Kingdom of the Netherlands,
Having in mind the interests and welfare of the people of the territory of West New Guinea (West Irian) hereinafter referred to as the territory,
Desirous of settling their dispute regarding the territory,
Now, therefore, agree as follows:
RATIFICATION OF AGREEMENT AND RESOLUTION OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF THE UNITED NATIONS
Article I
After the present Agreement between Indonesia and the Netherlands has been signed and ratified by both Contracting Parties, Indonesia and the Netherlands will jointly sponsor a draft resolution in the United Nations under the terms of which the General Assembly of the United Nations takes note of the present Agreement, acknowledges the role conferred upon the Secretary-General of the United Nations therein, and authorizes him to carry out the tasks entrusted to him therein.TRANSFER OF ADMINISTRATION