ABC’s The Pacific has gained rare access into West Papua, a region ruled by Indonesia that has been plagued by military violence and political unrest for decades.
Now, as well as the long-running struggle for independence, some say the Melanesian region’s pristine environment is under threat by the expansion of logging and mining projects, reports The Pacific.
As Indonesia prepares to inaugurate a new President, Prabowo Subianto, a man accused of human rights abuses in the region, West Papua grapples with a humanitarian crisis.
The Pacific talks to indigenous Papuans in a refugee settlement about being displaced, teachers who want change to the education system and locals who have hope for a better future.
A spokesman for the Indonesian Foreign Ministry told The Pacific that Indonesia was cooperating with all relevant United Nations agencies and was providing them with up to date information about what is happening in West Papua.
The Indonesian Ministry of Defence (MoD) announced on 2 October that the armed forces have received 569 domestically produced military vehicles, including tracked and wheeled armoured combat vehicles, during a ceremony in Jakarta. The latest batch of new military vehicles were supplied by the state-owned PT Pindad – a key subsidiary of the Defend ID […]
Racism, torture and arbitrary arrests are some examples of discrimination indigenous Papuans have dealt with over the last 60 years from Indonesia, according to a new report by Human Rights Watch.
“I have heard about this day to day racism since I had my first Papuan friend when I was in my 20s in my college, it means that over the last 40 years, that kind of story keeps on going on today,” Harsono said.
“Regarding torture again this is not something new.”
The report said infant mortality rates in West Papua in some instances are close to 12 times higher than in Jakarta.
Pemerintah Indonesia seharusnya meninjau kebijakan soal Papua Barat, mengakui dan mengakhiri sejarah rasisme sistematis terhadap orang asli Papua, minta pertanggungjawaban dari mereka yang bertanggung jawab atas pelanggaran hak-hak orang Papua https://t.co/JfnAZhsi0Epic.twitter.com/lzB6n0zrJ5
Papuan children denied education
Papuan children are denied adequate education because the government has failed to recruit teachers, in some instance’s soldiers have stepped into the positions “and mostly teach children about Indonesian nationalism”.
It said Papuan students find it difficult to find accommodation with landlords unwilling to rent to them while others were ostracised because of their racial identity.
In March, a video emerged of soldiers torturing Definus Kogoya in custody. He along with Alianus Murib and Warinus Kogoya were arrested in February for allegedly trying to burn down a medical clinic in Gome, Highland Papua province.
According to the Indonesian army, Warinus Kogoya died after allegedly “jumping off” a military vehicle.
President-elect Prabowo Subianto’s takes government next month.
Harsono said the report was launched yesterday because of this.
“We want this new [Indonesian] government to understand the problem and to think about new policies, new approaches, including to answer historical injustice, social injustice, economic injustice.”
Subianto’s poor human rights record
Harsono said Subianto has a poor human rights record but he hopes people close to him will flag the report.
He said current President Joko Widodo had made promises while he was in power to allow foreign journalists into West Papua and release political prisoners, but this did not materialise.
When he came to power the number of political prisoners was around 100 and now it’s about 200, Harsono said.
He said few people inside Indonesia were aware of the discrimination West Papuan people face, with most only knowing West Papua only for its natural beauty.
This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.
The armed faction of the West Papua National Liberation Army (TPNPB) kidnapped Phillip Merhtens, a 38-year-old pilot working for the Indonesian internal feeder airline Susi Air, in February last year after he landed a small commercial plane in a remote, mountainous area.
It is now asking the New Zealand government, including the police and army, to escort the pilot and for local and international journalists to be involved in the release process.
Both Foreign Affairs and the minister’s office say they are aware of the proposed plan.
In a statement, they say their focus remains on securing a peaceful resolution and the pilot’s safe release.
“We continue to work closely with all parties to achieve this and will not be discussing the details publicly.”
This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.
The Guardian reports that Indonesian human rights advocate Andreas Harsono, who covers the country for Human Rights Watch, said the proposal was “realistic”, despite Indonesia’s ongoing restriction on reporters and human rights monitors in the region.
“The top priority should be to release this man who has a wife and kids,” The Guardian quoted Harsono as saying.
West Papua’s armed group issued a proposal to release a New Zealand hostage, asking more than a dozen foreign journalists and rights monitors to be present in Wamena and Jayapura to witness the process https://t.co/4LAYNiipaLpic.twitter.com/yhRKYsX605
Sebby Sambom, the TPN-PB spokesman, and Terianus Satto, a general affairs chief of the armed group, state that they issued a proposal to release the New Zealand pilot unconditionally but need witnesses to secure the release in West Papua pic.twitter.com/dg8InXQo6h
The Indonesian Air Force has placed an order for four Airbus H145 helicopters as part of its training modernisation programme. The order was announced during the Bali International Airshow taking place this week. Under the agreement between the Indonesian Air Force and PT Dirgantara Indonesia (PTDI), Airbus will deliver the five-bladed H145s to PTDI, who […]
The Land of Papua is widely known as a land full of milk and honey. It is a name widely known in Indonesia that refers to the western half of the island of New Guinea.
Its natural wealth and beauty are special treasures entrusted by the Creator to the Papuan people who are of Melanesian ethnicity.
The beauty of the land inhabited by the blackish and brownish-skinned people is often sung about by Papuans in “Tanah Papua”, a song created by the late Yance Rumbino. The lyrics, besides being musical art, also contain expressions of gratitude and prayer for the masterpiece of the Creator.
For Papuans, “Tanah Papua” — composed by a former teacher in the central highlands of Papua — is always sung at various important events with a Papuan nuance, both in the Land of Papua and other parts of the world in Papuan gatherings.
The rich, beautiful and mysterious Land of Papua as expressed in the lyrics of the song has not been placed in the right position by the hands of those in power.
So for Papuans, when singing “Tanah Papua”, on one hand they admire and are grateful for all of God’s works in their ancestral land. On the other hand, by singing that song, they remind themselves to stay strong in facing daily challenges.
The characteristics of the Land of Papua geographically and ethnographically are the same as the eastern part of the island of New Guinea, now the independent state of Papua New Guinea.
Attractive to Europe
The beauty and wealth of natural resources and the richness of cultural heritage initially become attractions to European nations.
Therefore, the richness attracted the Europeans who later became the colonisers and invaders of the island.
The Dutch invaded the western part of the island and the British Empire and Germany the eastern part of the island.
The Europeans were present on the island of New Guinea with a “3Gs mission” (gospel, gold, glory). The gospel mission is related to the spread of Christianity. The gold mission is related to power over natural resource wealth. The glory mission is related to reigning over politics and territory on indigenous land outside of Europe.
The western part of the island, during the Dutch administration, was known as Dutch New Guinea or Netherlands New Guinea. Later when Indonesia took over the territory, was then named West Irian, and now it is called Papua or internationally known as West Papua.
The Land of Papua is divided into six provinces and it is home to 250 indigenous Melanesian tribes.
Meanwhile, the eastern part of the island which currently stands on its independent state New Guinea is home to more than 800 indigenous Melanesian tribes. Given the anthropological and ethnographic facts, the Land of Papua and PNG collectively are the most diverse and richest island in the world.
Vital role of language
In the process of forming an embryo and giving birth to a new nation and country, language plays an important role in uniting the various existing indigenous tribes and languages.
In Papua, after the Dutch left its territory and Indonesia took over control over the island, Bahasa Indonesia — modified Malay — was introduced. As a result, Indonesian became the unifying language for all Papuans, all the way from the Sorong to the Merauke region.
Besides Bahasa Indonesia, Papuans are still using their ancestral languages.
Meanwhile, in PNG, Tok Pisin, English and Hiri Motu are three widely spoken languages besides indigenous Melanesian languages. After the British Empire and Germany left the eastern New Guinea territory,
The relationship between the Land of Papua and its Melanesian sibling PNG is going well.
However, the governments of Indonesia and Papua New Guinea with the spirit of sharing the same land and ocean, culture and values, and the same blood and ancestors, should take tangible steps.
Melanesian policies
As an example, the foreign policy of each country needs to be translated into deep-rooted policies and regulations that fulfill the inner desire of the Melanesian people from both sides of the divide.
And then it needs to be extended to other Melanesian countries in the spirit of “we all are wantok” (one speak). The Melanesian countries and territories include the Fiji, Papua New Guinea, Solomon Islands, Vanuatu and Kanak and Socialist National Liberation Front (FLNKS).
In that forum, Indonesia is an associate member, while the United Liberation Movement for West Papua (ULMWP) and Timor-Leste are observers. The ULMWP is the umbrella organisation for the Papuans who are dissatisfied with at least four root causes as concluded by Papua Road Map (2010), the distortion of the historical facts, racial injustice and discrimination, human rights violations, and marginalisation that Papuans have been experiencing for years.
Fiji:
Here is a brief overview of the diplomatic relationship between the Indonesian government and Melanesian countries. First, Indonesia-Fiji bilateral affairs. The two countries cooperate in several areas including defence, police, development, trade, tourism sector, and social issues including education, broadcasting and people-to-people to contact.
PNG:
Second, Indonesia-PNG bilateral affairs. The two countries cooperate in several areas including trade cooperation, investment, tourism, people-to-people contact and connectivity, energy and minerals, plantations and fisheries.
Quite surprisingly there is no cooperation agreement covering the police and defence sectors.
Solomon Islands:
Third, Indonesia-Solomon Islands diplomacy. The two countries cooperate in several areas including trade, investment, telecommunications, mining and tourism.
Interestingly, the country that is widely known in the Pacific as a producer of “Pacific Beat” musicians receives a significant amount of assistance from the Indonesian government.
Indonesia and the Solomon Islands do not have security and defence cooperation.
Vanuatu:
Fourth, Indonesia-Vanuatu cooperation. Although Vanuatu is known as a country that is consistent and steadfast in supporting “Free Papua”, it turns out that the two countries have had diplomatic relations since 1995.
They have cooperation in three sectors: trade, investment and tourism. Additionally, the MSG is based in Port Vila, the Vanuatu capital.
FLNKS — New Caledonia:
Meanwhile, New Caledonia, the territory that is vulnerable to political turmoil in seeking independence from France, is still a French overseas territory in the Pacific. Cooperation between the Indonesian and New Caledonia governments covers the same sectors as other MSG members.
However, one sector that gives a different aspect to Indonesia-New Caledonia affairs is cooperation in language, society and culture.
Indonesia’s relationship with MSG member countries cannot be limited to political debate or struggle only. Even though Indonesia has not been politically accepted as a full member of the MSG forum, in other forums in the region Indonesia has space to establish bilateral relations with Pacific countries.
For example, in June 2014, then President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono was invited to be one of the keynote speakers at the Pacific Islands Development Forum (PIDF) summit in Nadi, Fiji.
PIDF is home to 12 member countries (Fiji, Federated States of Micronesia, Kiribati, Nauru, Marshall Islands, Palau, Solomon Islands, Timor-Leste, Tokelau, Tonga, Tuvalu, Vanuatu). Its mission is to implement green economic policies in the Pacific.
Multilateral forums
Indonesia has also joined various multilateral forums with other Pacific countries. The Archipelagic and Island States (AIS) is one example — Pacific states through mutual benefits programs.
During the outgoing President Joko Widodo’s administration, Indonesia initiated several cooperation projects with Pacific states, such as hosting the Pacific Exposition in Auckland, New Zealand, in 2019, and initiating the Indonesia-Pacific Development Forum.
Will Indonesia be granted a full membership status at the MSG? Or will ULMWP be granted an associate or full membership status at the MSG? Only time will reveal.
Both the Indonesian government and the United Liberation Movement for West Papua see a home at the MSG.
At this stage, the leaders of MSG countries are faced with moral and political dilemmas. The world is watching what next step will be taken by the MSG over the region’s polarising issue.
Laurens Ikinia is a Papuan lecturer and researcher at the Institute of Pacific Studies, Indonesian Christian University, Jakarta, and is a member of the Asia Pacific Media Network (APMN).
A South African company is reported to be the most probable bidder for shares in New Caledonia’s Prony Resources.
As part of an already advanced takeover of the ailing southern plant of Prony Resources, the most probable bidder is reported to be South African group Sibaneye-Stillwater, local new media report.
Just like the other two major mining plants and smelters in New Caledonia, Prony Resources is facing acute hardships due to the emergence of Indonesia as a major player on the world market, compounded with New Caledonia’s violent unrest that broke out in May.
The Johannesburg-based entity is a significant player on the minerals world market (including nickel, platinum and palladium) and owns, amongst other assets, a hydro-metallurgic processing plant in Sandouville (near Le Havre, western France) with a production capacity of 12,000 tonnes per year of high-grade nickel which it bought in February 2022 from French mining giant Eramet for 85 million euros (NZ$153 million).
Sibanye-Stillwater appears to follow a well-planned scheme, aiming at building an integrated project that would control all of the nickel extraction and production stages.
The ultimate goal would be, for the South African player, to become a leader on the production market for innovative electric vehicles batteries, especially on the European market.
Southern Province President Sonia Backès had already hinted last week that one buyer had now been found and that one bidder had successfully reached advanced stages in the due diligence process.
If the deal eventuated, the new entity would take over the shares held by Swiss trader Trafigura (19 percent) and another block of shares held by the Southern Province to reach a total of 74 percent participation in Prony Resources stock, as part of a major restructuration of the company’s capital.
Prony Resources, in full operation mode, employs about 1300 staff.
Another 1700 are employed indirectly through sub-contractors.
It has paused its production to retain only up to 300 staff, in safety and maintenance mode, partly due to New Caledonia’s current unrest.
New Caledonia’s Koniambo (KNS) mining site aerial view. Image: KNS
The plant’s furnaces were placed in “cold care and maintenance” mode at the end of August, six months after major shareholder Anglo-Swiss Glencore announced it wanted to withdraw and sell the 49 percent shares it has in the project.
This caused close to 1200 job losses and further 600 among sub-contractors.
Other bidders still interested
KNS claimed at least three foreign investors were still interested at this stage, but none of these have so far materialised.
Talks were however reported to continue behind the scenes, with interested parties even ready to travel and visit on-site, KNS Vice-President and spokesman Alexandre Rousseau told Reuters news agency earlier this month.
‘Okelani Group One’ But a so-called “Okelani Group One” (OGO), made up of three local partners, said their offer could revive the project with a different business model.
They say they have made an offer to KNS’s majority shareholder SMSP (Société Minière du Sud Pacifique, New Caledonia’s Northern province financial arm).
OGO president Florent Tavernier told public broadcaster NC la 1ère much depended on what Glencore intended to do with the staggering debt of some US$13.7 billion which KNS had accumulated over the past 10 years.
Another OGO partner, Gilles Hernandez, explained: “We would be targeting a niche market of very high quality nickel used in aeronautics and edge-cutting technologies, especially in Europe, where nickel is now classified as ‘strategic metal’.”
Although KNS was designed to produce 60,000 tonnes of nickel a year, that target was never reached.
OGO said it would only aim for 15,000 tonnes per year and would only re-employ 400 of the 1200 laid-off staff.
New Caledonia’s third nickel plant, owned by historic Société Le Nickel (SLN, a subsidiary of French mining giant Eramet), which is also facing major hardships for the same reasons, is said to currently operate at minimal capacity.
This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.
Under Pope Francis’ leadership, many church traditions have been renewed. For example, he gives space to women to take some important leadership and managerial roles in Vatican.
Many believe that the movement of the smiling Pope in distributing roles to women and lay groups is a timely move. Besides, during his term as the head of the Vatican state, the Pope has changed the Vatican’s banking and financial system.
Now, it is more transparent and accountable.
Besides, the Holy Father bluntly acknowledges the darkness concealed by the church hierarchy for years and graciously apologises for the wrong committed by the church.
The Pope invites the clergy (shepherds) to live simply, mingling and uniting with the members of the congregation (sheep).
The former archbishop of Buenos Aires also encourages the church to open itself to accepting congregations who identify as lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT).
However, Papa Francis’ encouragement was flooded with protests from some members of the church. And it is still an ongoing spiritual battle that has not been fully delivered in Catholic Church.
Two encyclicals Pope Francis, the successor of Apostle Peter, is a humble and modest man. Under his papacy, the highest authority of the Catholic Church has issued four apostolic works, two in the form of encyclicals, namely Lumen Fidei (Light of Faith) and Laudato si’ (Praise Be to You) and two others in the form of apostolic exhortations, namely Evangelii Gaudium (Joy of the Gospel) and Amoris Laetitia (Joy of Love).
Of the four masterpieces of the Pope, the encyclical Laudato si’ seems to gain most attention globally.
The encyclical Laudato si’ is an invitation from the Holy Father to human beings to be responsible for the existence of the universe. He begs us human beings not to exploit and torture Mother Nature.
We should respect nature because it provides plants and cares for us like a mother does for her children. Therefore, caring for the environment or the universe is a calling that needs to be responded to genuinely.
This apostolic call is timely because the world is experiencing various threats of natural devastation that leads to natural disasters.
The irresponsible and greedy behaviour of human beings has destroyed the beauty and diversity of the flora and fauna. Other parts of the world have experienced and are experiencing adverse impacts.
This is also taking place in the Pacific region.
Sinking cities The World Economy Forum (2019) reports that it is estimated there will be eleven cities in the world that will “sink” by 2100. The cities listed include Jakarta (Indonesia), Lagos (Nigeria), Houston (Texas-US), Dhaka (Bangladesh), Virginia Beach (Virginia-US), Bangkok (Thailand), New Orleans (Louisiana-US), Rotterdam (Netherlands), Alexandra (Egypt), and Miami (Florida-US).
During the visit of the 266th Pope, he addressed the importance of securing and protecting our envirinment.
During the historic interfaith dialogue held at the Jakarta’s Istiqlal Mosque on September 5, the 87-year-old Pope said Indonesia was blessed with rainforest and rich in natural resources.
He indirectly referred to the Land of Papua — internationally known as West Papua. The message was not only addressed to the government of Indonesia, but also to Papua New Guinea.
The apostolic visit amazed people in Indonesia which is predominantly a Muslim nation. The humbleness and friendliness of Papa Francis touched the hearts of many, not only Christians, but also people with other religious backgrounds.
Witnessing the presence of the Pope in Jakarta firsthand, we could certainly testify that his presence has brought tremendous joy and will be remembered forever. Those who experienced joy were not only because of the direct encounter.
Some were inspired when watching the broadcast on the mainstream or social media.
The Pope humbly made himself available to be greeted by his people and blessed those who approached him. Those who received the greeting from the Holy Father also came from different age groups — starting from babies in the womb, toddlers and teenagers, young people, adults, the elderly and brothers and sisters with disabilities.
Pope brings inner comfort
An unforgettable experience of faith that the people of the four nations did not expect, but experienced, was that the presence of the Pope Francis brought inner comfort. It was tremendously significant given the social conditions of Indonesia, PNG and Timor-Leste are troubled politically and psychologically.
State policies that do not lift the people out of poverty, practices of injustice that are still rampant, corruption that seems endemic and systemic, the seizure of indigenous people’s customary land by giant companies with government permission, and an economic system that brings profits to a handful of people are some of the factors that have caused disturbed the inner peace of the people.
In Indonesia, soon after the inauguration on October 20 of the elected President and Vice-President, Prabowo Subianto and Gibran Rakabuming Raka, the people of Indonesia will welcome the election of governors and deputy governors, regents and deputy regents, mayors and deputy mayors.
This will include the six provinces in the Land of Papua. The simultaneous regional elections will be held on November 27.
The public will monitor the process of the regional election. Reflecting on the presidential election which allegedly involved the current President’s “interference”, in the collective memory of democracy lovers there is a possibility of interference from the government that will lead the nation.
Could that happen? Only time will tell. The task of all elements of society is to jointly maintain the values of honest, honest and open democracy.
Pope Francis in his book, Let Us Dream, the Path to the Future (2020) wrote:
“We need a politics that can integrate and dialogue with the poor, the excluded, and the vulnerable that gives people a say in the decisions that impact their lives.”
Hope for people’s struggles
This message of Pope Francis has a deep meaning in the current context. What is common everywhere, politicians only make sweet promises or give fake hope to voters so that they are elected.
After being elected, the winning or elected candidate tends to be far from the people.
Therefore, a fragment of the Holy Father’s invitation in the book needs to be a shared concern. The written and implied meaning of the fragment above is not far from the democratic values adopted by Indonesia and other Pacific nations.
Pacific Islanders highly value the views of each person. But lately the noble values that were well-cultivated and inherited by the ancestors are increasingly diminishing.
Hopefully, the governments will deliver on the real needs and struggles of the people.
“Our greatest power is not in the respect that others have for us, but the service we can give others,” wrote Pope Francis.
Laurens Ikinia is a lecturer and researcher at the Institute of Pacific Studies, Indonesian Christian University, Jakarta, and is a member of the Asia Pacific Media Network (APMN).
SPECIAL REPORT:By Te Aniwaniwa Paterson of Te Ao Māori News
West Papuan independence advocate Octo Mote is in Aotearoa New Zealand to win support for independence for West Papua, which has been ruled by Indonesia for more than 60 years.
Mote is vice-president of the United Liberation Movement for West Papua (ULMWP) and is being hosted in New Zealand by the Green Party, which Mote said had always been a “hero” for West Papua.
ULMWP president Benny Wenda has alleged more than 500,000 Papuans have been killed since the occupation, and millions of hectares of ancestral forests, rivers and mountains have been destroyed or polluted for “corporate profit”.
The struggle for West Papuans “Being born a West Papuan, you are already an enemy of the nation [Indonesia],” Mote says.
“The greatest challenge we are facing right now is that we are facing the colonial power who lives next to us.”
If West Papuans spoke up about what was happening, they were considered “separatists”, Mote says, regardless of whether they are journalists, intellectuals, public servants or even high-ranking Indonesian generals.
“When our students on the ground speak of justice, they’re beaten up, put in jail and [the Indonesians] kill so many of them,” Mote says.
Mote is a former journalist and says that while he was working he witnessed Indonesian forces openly fire at students who were peacefully demonstrating their rights.
“We are in a very dangerous situation right now. When our people try to defend their land, the Indonesian government ignores them and they just take the land without recognising we are landowners,” he says.
The ‘ecocide’ of West Papua The ecology in West Papua iss being damaged by mining, deforestation, and oil and gas extraction. Mote says Indonesia wants to “wipe them from the land and control their natural resources”.
He says he is trying to educate the world that defending West Papua means defending the world, especially small islands in the Pacific.
West Papua is the western half of the island of New Guinea, bordering the independent nation of Papua New Guinea. New Guinea has the world’s third-largest rainforest after the Amazon and Congo and it is crucial for climate change mitigation as they sequester and store carbon.
Mote says the continued deforestation of New Guinea, which West Papuan leaders are trying to stop, would greatly impact on the small island countries in the Pacific, which are among the most vulnerable to climate change.
Mote also says their customary council in West Papua has already considered the impacts of climate change on small island nations and, given West Papua’s abundance of land the council says that by having sovereignty they would be able to both protect the land and support Pacific Islanders who need to migrate from their home islands.
In 2021, West Papuan leaders pledged to make ecocide a serious crime and this week Vanuatu, Fiji and Samoa submitted a court proposal to the International Criminal Court (ICJ) to recognise ecocide as a crime.
Support from local Indonesians Mote says there are Indonesians who support the indigenous rights movement for West Papuans. He says there are both NGOs and a Papuan Peace Network founded by West Papuan peace campaigner Neles Tebay.
“There is a movement growing among the academics and among the well-educated people who have read the realities among those who are also victims of the capitalist investors, especially in Indonesia when they introduced the Omnibus Law.”
The so-called Omnibus Law was passed in 2020 as part of outgoing President Joko Widodo’s goals to increase investment and industrialisation in Indonesia. The law was protested against because of concerns it would be harmful for workers due to changes in working conditions, and the environment because it would allow for increased deforestation.
Mote says there has been an “awakening”, especially among the younger generations who are more open-minded and connected to the world, who could see it both as a humanitarian and an environmental issue.
The ‘transfer’ of West Papua to Indonesia “The [former colonial nation] Dutch [traded] us like a cow,” Mote says.
The former Dutch colony was passed over to Indonesia in 1963 in disputed circumstances but the ULMWP calls it an “invasion”.
From 1957, the Soviet Union had been supplying arms to Indonesia and, during that period, the Indonesian Communist Party had become the largest political party in the country.
The US engineered a meeting between both countries, which resulted in the New York Agreement, giving control of West Papua to the UN in 1962 and then Indonesia a year later.
The New York Agreement stipulated that the population of West Papua would be entitled to an act of self-determination.
The ‘act of no choice’ This decolonisation agreement was titled the 1969 Act of Free Choice, which is referred to as “the act of no choice” by pro-independence activists.
Mote says they witnessed “how the UN allowed Indonesia to cut us into pieces, and they didn’t say anything when Indonesia manipulated our right to self-determination”.
The manipulation Mote refers to is for the Act of Free Choice. Instead of a national referendum, the Indonesian military hand-picked 1025 West Papuan “representatives” to vote on behalf of the 816,000 people. The representatives were allegedly threatened, bribed and some were held at gunpoint to ensure a unanimous vote.
Leaders of the West Papuan independence movement assert that this was not a real opportunity to exercise self-determination as it was manipulated. However, it was accepted by the UN.
Pacific support at UN General Assembly Mote has came to Aotearoa after the 53rd Pacific Island Forum Leaders summit in Tonga last week and he has come to discuss plans over the next five years. Mote hopes to gain support to take what he calls the “slow-motion genocide” of West Papua back to the UN General Assembly.
“In that meeting we formulated how we can help really push self-determination as the main issue in the Pacific Islands,” Mote says.
Mote says there was a focus on self-determination of West Papua, Kanaky/New Caledonia and Tahiti. He also said the focus was on what he described as the current colonisation issue with capitalists and global powers having vested interests in the Pacific region.
The movement got it to the UN General Assembly in 2018, so Mote says it is achievable. In 2018, Pacific solidarity was shown as the Republic of the Marshall Islands, Tuvalu and the Republic of Vanuatu all spoke out in support of West Papua.
They affirmed the need for the matter to be returned to the United Nations, and the Solomon Islands voiced its concerns over human rights abuses and violations.
ULMWP vice-president Octo Mote . . . in the next five years Pacific nations need to firstly make the Indonesian government “accountable” for its actions in West Papua. Image: Poster screenshot
What needs to be done He says that in the next five years Pacific nations need to firstly make the Indonesian government accountable for its actions in West Papua. He also says outgoing President Widodo should be held accountable for his “involvement”.
Mote says New Zealand is the strongest Pacific nation that would be able to push for the human rights and environmental issues happening, especially as he alleges Australia always backs Indonesian policies.
He says he is looking to New Zealand to speak up about the atrocities taking place in West Papua and is particularly looking for support from the Greens, Labour and Te Pāti Māori for political support.
The coalition government announced a plan of action on July 30 this year, which set a new goal of $6 billion in annual two-way trade with Indonesia by 2029.
“New Zealand is strongly committed to our partnership with Indonesia,” Foreign Affairs Minister Winston Peters said at the time.
“There is much more we can and should be doing together.”
Te Aniwaniwa Paterson is a digital producer for Te Ao Māori News. Republished by Asia Pacific Report with permission.
On 28 July 2024 Muhammadiyah, Indonesia’s second largest Islamic organisation, officially announced that it would accept an offer of mining concessions from President Joko Widodo’s government. This followed the decision of the nation’s largest Islamic organisation, Nahdlatul Ulama (NU), which accepted their concession a month earlier.
Opponents within and outside both organisations have criticised their decisions to accept the mining concessions. Such criticism was often expressed on environmental grounds: NU and Muhammadiyah should not engage in mining activities, critics said, since doing so would mean depriving local communities—including those where their followers live—of their economic and communal rights.
Another line of argument against the adoption of the mining concessions is that once NU or Muhammadiyah agreed to accept them, it would endanger their reputation as independent and democratic civil society organisations.
Former president and NU leader Abdurrahman Wahid thought that NU’s autonomy from the state was necessary because the organisation seeks to promote “social transformation on a more complete and fundamental level.” He further defined social transformation within NU to include: freedom of speech, an impartial legal system, and economic and social equality. Similar sentiments were also expressed by Amien Rais as Muhammadiyah general chairman during the mid-1990s, when he stated that he wished to transform Indonesia’s leading modernist Muslim organisation into a pro-reform and pro-democracy movement.
As Robin Bush has written, by the mid-1990s many young NU activists responded to Wahid’s increasingly oppositional position to the Suharto regime by developing a “civil society discourse” comprising three elements: NU autonomy vis-a-vis the state; opposition to conservative and radical Islamism; and the promotion of pluralism and tolerance.
NU-affiliated NGOs like the Institute for the Study and Development of Human Resources (Lakpesdam) regularly sponsored workshops featuring NU’s promotion of pluralism, religious tolerance, and human rights, alongside coursework on political education and participation, all directed to promote NU’s civil society discourse to a new generation of NU activists throughout Indonesia.
After Indonesia’s democratic transition, NU and Muhammadiyah resumed their political activism by founding political parties: the National Awakening Party (PKB) for NU and the National Mandate Party (PAN) for Muhammadiyah. Politicians from both organisations received ministerial appointments and participated in national and regional legislative elections. From 1998 until 2014, both participated in national politics through the two parties, while contributing to civil, democratic political discourses in Indonesia.
The price of patronage
However, the relationship between the two religious CSOs and the state has changed under the Widodo presidency. Under pressure to counter the narratives of hardline Islamist groups like the Islamic Defenders Front (FPI), Jokowi made NU his primary partner to counter FPI-like groups and to promote a “moderate” Indonesian Islam both domestically and worldwide.
Over his decade-long presidency Widodo has bestowed extensive patronage towards NU clerics and politicians. This patronage has taken the form of political appointments (e.g. Vice President Ma’ruf Amin, Minister of Religious Affairs Yaqut Cholil Qomas, and others) as well as financial benefits (e.g. subsidies toward NU-run pesantren boarding schools, credit facilities for shari’a-based cooperatives and rural financial institutions, and more).
During Widodo’s second term (2019––2024) NU received even more state patronage from the Religious Affairs Ministry, now under control of Minister for Religious Affairs Yaqut Cholil Qomas, who is the brother of NU chairman Yahya Cholil Staquf. Such patronage has included financial support towards construction of nearly two dozen NU-affiliated universities; a religious moderation program that supports NU preachers and lecturers to promote “moderate Islam” in other ministries and state-owned enterprises suspected of being infiltrated by “radical’’ Islamic preachers and groups; and various state projects directed to support NU and its various affiliates (badan otonom).
This patronage has come at the price of NU’s ability to criticise, among other things, the recent legislation pushed by the Widodo administration that critics say has contributed to Indonesia’s ongoing democratic regression. This includes the 2019 revisions to anti-corruption laws that significantly weakened Indonesia’s anti-corruption commission, and the 2023 Criminal Code, which curtails freedom of expression and the rights of religious minorities and LGBTQ people.
Several NU public intellectuals, including prominent advocates of the organisation’s “civil society discourse” during the late 1990s and early 2000s, are now defending the Widodo administration’s policy and priorities, contradicting their earlier support for liberal democratic norms. Ulil Abshar Abdalla, co-founder of the Liberal Islam Movement (Jaringan Islam Liberal or JIL) and formerhead of NU’s Lakpesdam think tank, wrote the day after the February 2024 presidential elections that the victory of Prabowo Subianto and Gibran Rakabuming Raka showed that the majority of Indonesians wanted to continue President Widodo’s policies. He claimed that the results showed that Indonesians “have other pressing interests” than safeguarding democracy, which he dismissed as an idea expressed primarily by “a few middle-class academics”.
My recent conversations with sources within NU have confirmed that following Ulil’s lead, NU is in the process of revising its position on state–civil society relations. Instead of being an independent and autonomous CSO—like what Wahid and other NU activists were advocating in the 1990s—NU now views itself as an integral partner of the Indonesian state. In the new mindset, NU, as an ulama-led organisation, is mandated by Islamic teachings “to assist and defend” the state from any potential threats, whether from radical Islamists or from other civil society actors who express critical views against the state and its policies. Meanwhile, the earlier NU ethos pioneered by Wahid is dismissed, according to my sources, as an idea inspired by liberal Western political thought that is not applicable to the contemporary Indonesian socio-political context.
It was within this context that in June 2024 NU formally announced its acceptance of a coal mining concession offered by the Jokowi administration by the then investment minister Bahlil Lahadalia. NU chairman Yahya Cholil Staquf publicly stated that his organisation agreed to accept the concession because “it needed all available revenue sources to fund the [its] activities—as long as they are religiously permissible (halal)”.
The kretek cigarette industry and its devastating public health impacts are sustained via a huge apparatus of labour, and appeals to cultural nationalism
Sources close to the NU leadership board I spoke with have suggested that the decision to accept mining concessions was also influenced by a concern that NU might receive fewer cabinet appointments and state patronage under the Prabowo administration, which will assume office on 20 October. Historically, Prabowo has developed closer relationships with Islamic leaders and activists from modernist-leaning organisations like Muhammadiyah and the Indonesian Islamic Propagation Council (Dewan Dakwah Islam Indonesia, or DDII). His relationship with figures like former Muhammadiyah chairman Din Syamsuddin date back to the 1990s, when Prabowo was a mid-career army officer.
Prabowo has few similarly close relations with NU figures (though he has won the endorsement of senior NU officials, such as the organisation’s former chair Said Aqil Siradj, in his past presidential campaigns). His landslide victory in the 2024 Indonesian presidential election, and the overwhelming support from NU voters towards Prabowo, was largely attributed to Widodo’s tacit endorsement of his campaign, which led to the NU leadership supporting him as well. Accepting the state’s offer of mining concessions, my enquiries have suggested, was driven by NU leaders’ belief that mining income would be substantive enough to offset any potential downturns in state patronage from Prabowo.
Muhammadiyah takes the NU path
Muhammadiyah’s decision to accept mining licences is more puzzling. Unlike NU, Muhammadiyah is not considered a close ally of the outgoing president. It has either publicly opposed, or at least raised serious concerns about, many of Widodo’s major legislative initiatives, including the 2019 amendments to the Anti-Corruption Law, the 2020 Omnibus Law on Job Creation, and the 2023 Criminal Code. Muhammadiyah leaders have frequently issued statements criticising ethical and legal misconduct by Widodo and other senior officials.
Most recently, in November 2023 former KPK chief and current Muhammadiyah national board member Busyro Muqqodas declared that the Constitutional Court (MK) ruling that allowed Widodo’s son Gibran Rakabuming Raka to stand for the vice presidency was a “poison affecting Indonesian democracy”. Muhammadiyah’s Law, Human Rights and Philosophy Council, which Busyro chairs, also issued a statement declaring that former MK chief justice Anwar Usman ought to be “dishonourably discharged from his position” for committing major violations of the MK’s code of ethics.
Sources close to the Muhammadiyah national board I recently interviewed revealed that the board had received significant pressure from the presidential palace to accept its offer of mining concessions, through one of the board’s members Muhadjir Effendy, who also serves in Widodo’s cabinet as Coordinating Minister for Human Development and Cultural Affairs. According to these sources, Muhadjir forwarded Widodo’s message to the leadership board, stating that Muhammadiyah must accept this concession because it would otherwise be considered as a personal insult by the president, who feels he has done a great deal to support the “moderate” Islam promoted by both Muhammadiyah and NU. The message concluded that if Muhammadiyah continues to refuse the offer of mining concessions then it will not receive any state patronage—especially cabinet appointments—under the Prabowo administration.
Muhadjir, according to my contacts, also made a personal appeal to other Muhammadiyah board members, saying that he was the only person seeking to ensure that organisation still gets the kind of political benefits—both high-level appointments and other state patronage—from Widodo (even if the amount was much less than what NU received). For instance, Muhadjir’s ministerial office has run its own religious moderation program, staffed by Muhammadiyah activists and separate from the main moderation programs run by the NU-controlled Ministry of Religious Affairs. Given these considerations, Muhadjir implored other Muhammadiyah leaders to consider whether they really want to risk their organisation being left with nothing under Prabowo if they dare to refuse the mining concession offer. Due to these considerations, the leadership board finally decided to accept the concession as a “hedging” tactic to ensure that they will not lose favour of the outgoing president.
Muhammadiyah’s leadership also believes that unlike Widodo, who has primarily aligned himself with NU when it comes to promoting “moderate” Islam, Prabowo is more willing to accommodate Muhammadiyah, given his past close relations with the organisation’s figures. Hence, they expect him to give them ministerial and other key appointments. Muhammadiyah leaders are very keen to regain several ministries that its politicians have historically been appointed in the past, particularly the education ministry. Hence, its decision to accept the mining concessions is part of a ”pay-to-play” strategy to be in line for ministerial and other high-level appointments under the incoming administration.
Conclusion
Muhammadiyah and NU’s decision to accept mining concessions is part of a process of political bargaining both organisations are engaged in with Indonesia’s political establishment in anticipation of future appointments and patronage. For both organisations, their decision is a rational measure to retain their political influence and safeguard their financial interests amid the uncertainties surrounding the ongoing presidential transition.
Their decision to bargain with the state and accept the mining concessions has nonetheless diminished their credentials as independent civil society organisations — particularly among their own activists. It also raises serious questions about whether in the long run, both organisations will be able to retain their autonomy as civil society organisations and their willingness to speak out strongly against decisions made by the Prabowo administration that may have adverse effects not only on NU and Muhammadiyah’s constituencies, but on Indonesia’s democratic norms and institutions.
Development of the KF-21 combat aircraft is going well, and Korea Aerospace Industries (KAI) is now exploring manned-unmanned teaming possibilities. Korea Aerospace Industries (KAI) is making good progress on development of the KF-21 Boramae (Young Hawk) combat aircraft. Since the first flight in July 2022, six prototypes including two twin-seaters have logged nearly 800 test […]
On 17 August 2024, Indonesia’s president, Joko Widodo, travelled to the still-under-construction new capital, Nusantara, to celebrate Independence Day. The presence of both the president and his successor, Prabowo Subianto, however, has not been enough to quell the ongoing controversies and discontent. Five years after Jokowi’s announcement of the Nusantara Capital City (Ibu Kota Nusantara, or IKN) project, widespread scepticism has emerged, often from drastically opposing perspectives.
Some question whether Jakarta-based public servants will be willing to relocate to Nusantara’s location in East Kalimantan, a region perceived as backward and isolated. Others express concern for the land and the local residents who are soon to be displaced. The president had once proudly announced his intention to personally move from Jakarta to the new presidential palace by the time of Independence Day this year. Three days before the date, he declared that the plan would be postponed due to incomplete infrastructure. This leaves critics in a difficult position: should they rejoice over the project’s slow progress, or worry about the prolonged uncertainty over its prospects?
Standing in front of the unfinished presidential palace, the Istana Garuda, Widodo would be picturing a finished building that looks surprisingly comparable to something like in the image below, which shows the business service centre of China’s Xiong’an New Area, a planned city in the hinterland of Beijing that has been dubbed Xi Jinping’s “pet project”. Surprisingly, few have discussed the ideological and practical similarities between these two projects. Indeed, Indonesia has its own history of planning to relocate its capital from Jakarta that is almost as long as the history of the republic itself. When international comparisons are given, the examples are usually Canberra and Brasilia (Putrajaya and Naypyidaw come next). Xiong’an, situated in north China, is rarely talked about—perhaps precisely because Xiong’an’s own controversies are too similar to those of the IKN.
Business and Service Convention Center, Xiong’an (Photo: Wikimedia Commons)
Dubbed a “millennium plan”, Xiong’an New Area is the crown jewel of Xi Jinping’s era of mega-projects. It aims to gradually shift much of Beijing’s population and activities to a previously desolate area 180 kilometres to its south, in order to alleviate the capital’s perceived worsening overpopulation. With billions of Chinese yuan invested in its preliminary construction, the project emphasises sustainability and quality rather than the rapid pace of development that characterised China’s previous four decades of urbanisation. By “millennium”, Xi’s administration shows its determination to bring about permanent changes to the nation that are beyond the limits of presidential terms—or in the Chinese historical consciousness, dynastic rotations.
Many legitimately speculate that pushing through this costly project was a major motivation behind Xi’s pursuit of a third term—a scenario not unfamiliar to Indonesians after witnessing Jokowi’s political manoeuvring in the recent election. After years of intensive construction, local villages have been razed, new buildings have sprung up, but few newcomers have moved in. Xiong’an’s experience over the past decade shows us both the best and worst-case scenarios Jokowi could imagine: speedy, high-quality construction, but with lacklustre economic returns.
Xi Jinping visits the Xiong’an New Area, January 2019. (Photo: Xiong’an New Area on Facebook)
Deindustrialisation
A common pitfall for both defenders and sceptics of the infant IKN was to wishfully imagine a place of purity—of pristine nature and undisturbed natives. Similarly, observations on the Chinese equivalent often emphasise the tabula rasa state of the Baiyangdian wetland chosen for Xiong’an’s development. The media tend to be preoccupied with events within the specific administrative boundaries of Penajam Paser Utara district, the site of IKN, and Xiong’an, which are indeed rural. Once we zoom out to the larger economic structures of East Kalimantan and eastern Hebei province, the pictures will look very different.
In East Kalimantan, mining, oil and gas refining, and timber processing have been traditionally the dominating economic sectors. The society of East Kalimantan came under as much, if not more, influence of exploitative industrialisation, demographic displacement, and settlement from outsiders than any the other major island of Southeast Asia. Coal mines and oil wells had begun invading the Balikpapan area for more than 130 years, bringing in large numbers of labourers from Java and China. Even before these industrial developments, the towns of Samarinda and Paser were urbanised by generations of migrants from the south coast of Borneo as well as Sulawesi.
The psychological shock, or “kaget”, of building modern industrial cities amidst the jungle is already relegated to the past tense. Expecting environment-oriented criticism of IKN, the Indonesian government had been gradually shifting its narratives about the new capital from that of “building a green city in the primary forest” to that of “reclaiming a green city from misused and depleted wastelands.” The effort could be seen in the gestural closing of several illegal mining concessions on land reserved for IKN. Observers doubt the substance of this move, as many mines and drills, including those owned by the very individuals pushing for the project, continue to operate unhindered.
The experience of Hebei, the province where Xiong’an is located, in the past decades offer some lessons for the potential future of East Kalimantan. Once a predominantly agricultural region, the province rapidly industrialised in the 20th century thanks to the discovery of mineral reserves. As nearby Tianjin and Beijing shifted towards service and technological sectors, Hebei received most of the heavy industries moving out from these large cities in the 1990s and early 2000s, worsening the already severe pollution of its environment. Degradation of the land’s arability made the populace even more dependent on the industrial jobs in a vicious cycle. Even though it is located right next to the capital, Hebei has ironically long been considered a peripheral “backwater” amidst China’s extremely uneven economic development.
Xiong’an New Area photographed from a drone, March 2024 (Photo: Xinhua)
After Xi assumed power in 2012, he had been determined to curtail the worsening air pollution in Beijing and to return “clear water and green mountains” to China’s heavily industrialised north, pushing for Hebei’s deindustrialisation. A large number of cottage industries were shut down every year since then, and air quality in Beijing had been largely restored. Baoding, the prefecture-level city (equivalent to an Indonesian district or kabupaten) where Xiong’an is located, proudly broadcasts itself in 2018 as the first one of the province achieving “steel-free” status, meaning that every steel mill has closed down.
In this sense, IKN and Xiong’an are ideologically motivated projects imposed by political elites in the centre to transform a periphery perceived as backward, dirty, and inefficient. The catch lies in the obvious economic dependence of both China and Indonesia on the very sectors they ostensibly seek to eliminate. Local governments in Hebei struggle financially without the tax revenues from smaller industries, not to mention the livelihoods lost by ordinary citizens. Fearing a similar outcome, Jokowi and Prabowo Subianto have yet to commit to removing dirty industries from East Kalimantan. IKN’s initiative to install solar panels pales in comparison to the province’s colossal coal-producing capacity, which sustains hundreds of thousands of families. Jokowi has also repeatedly promised to build, expand, or retain oil and gas facilities in East Kalimantan, likely to maintain morale in one of the few regions of Indonesia where hilirisasi, or industrial down-streaming, has yielded tangible economic benefits.
Deglobalisation
At first glance, the two projects receive markedly different treatment in their respective countries. While Xi’s team showers Xiong’an with grandiose terms such as “millennium plan” and “ecological civilisation” in official rhetoric, it is not an attempt to create a new political centre from scratch. Critics have noted certain political symbolism in Xi’s vision for Xiong’an, but these pale in comparison to the heaps of nationalistic narratives surrounding IKN. In this year’s Independence Day celebrations, the participating grandees dressed colourfully in traditional ethnic fashions (pakaian adat) from across the archipelago. A real-life version of Tien Soeharto’s nationalistic playground, Taman Mini Indonesia Indah, was broadcasted in front of the whole country, matching the actual installation of a miniature IKN in Taman Mini itself in 2023. Xiong’an has had its moments like this, but after seven years it has largely faded from the Chinese public attention.
If we look beneath the surface of nationalism, however, IKN and Xiong’an projects share another layer of shared ideology. By deemphasising metropolises such as Beijing and Jakarta, IKN and Xiong’an represent the two governments’ disengagement from global capitalism as source of legitimacy. Asia’s political elites are seeking new paradigms in a deglobalising world, and this introspective turn is a part of it. As seen in the landmark structures of IKN and Xiong’an, there is a clear effort to create aesthetically distinctive images and icons that diverge from the typical modern Asian city. Yet, an uncanny similarity emerges: an architectural style reminiscent of Stalin-era Soviet bloc and the imperial Japanese Teikan Yoshiki of Manchukuo. Both were attempts to deliver nationalistic bearings for architectural aesthetics in an industrialising and globalising world, comparable to those promised by IKN and Xiong’an. At their core is the symbolic purification of the self from Western pollution. The pool of alternative artistic inspiration, however, appears limited.
Indonesian President Joko Widodo delivering a presentation on the then-unnamed new capital city, October 2022 (Photo: Joko Widodo on Facebook)
In the case of IKN, various Indonesian officials have already emphasised its aesthetic mission to represent an Indonesia free of Dutch colonial influences . The Indonesian government does not shy from admitting Jakarta’s myriad problems, but seems to blame many of them on the colonial origins of the city. Ridwan Kamil, a potential contender for the governorship of Jakarta who also holds the office of IKN’s “curator”, repeatedly made promises about purging IKN from colonial “concepts” and “nuances” of Jakarta. Such was also the reason why cities with deep colonial histories, such as Bandung and Bogor, were dropped as candidates. Balikpapan’s colonial origins, meanwhile, could be conveniently ignored, as IKN comfortably sits outside its administrative boundaries. Superficial as it sounds, Jokowi is indeed bringing into reality an ideological ambition that had been dreamt of by generations of Indonesia’s nationalists. By way of the trans-Kalimantan highway, one can reach IKN from Palangkaraya, Soekarno’s own attempt to create a purely Indonesian city unpolluted by colonialism.
Similarly, Xiong’an is designed to be flat, low, and sparse. It is a deliberate move to divorce from the previous “new areas” such as Shenzhen, Pudong (Shanghai), and Binhai (Tianjin), where development was more vertical, and oriented toward speed and connectivity. Some observers argue that for Xi, Xiong’an symbolises China’s return to a distinctively Chinese mode of development, rejecting the previous decades of “reform and opening Up” as compromises to a world order dominated by the west. Anticipating criticisms of Xiong’an’s immediate economic utility and attractiveness, Xi gave it the unusual official designation of a “millennium plan”, creatively situating it within an imagined continuum of Chinese history and detaching it from the logic of global capitalism.
Both projects thus encompass some degree of deterrence or resistance against the West-dominated world order. Unfortunately, to a large degree, the common people who actually live in these countries still have to abide by the rules of global capitalism. Jakarta and Beijing will continue to attract migrants from the provinces, while Nusantara and Xiong’an’s current desolation might persist for a while. Slow return of investment is far from the worst case scenario, though: thanks to the late James C. Scott we know how bad and costly it can get if governments indeed turn to draconian measures to force particular demographic patterns or to force mostly any grand designs. With Beijing’s violent eviction of migrant workers from its suburbs in 2017 still looming in the residents’ memory, would the two governments actually wait for a thousand years?
A future for the locals?
By 2024, the Xiong’an New Area has moved most of its original villagers into newly completed apartment buildings. A video on Bilibili shows us an honest conversation between the content creator and a villager-turned-taxidriver in Xiong’an. As expected, being uprooted from one’s community and dropped into cell-like units makes a shocking experience. Driving through empty streets, the middle-aged man complained about a few things. Costs for utilities and groceries used to be negligible in a rural economy, but suddenly has to be dealt with. Isolation in gated communities makes life tedious and boring. He is still hopeful about the future. He feels that it will be worth it as long as his children and grandchildren may one day benefit by way of having access to good education in a country with extremely unevenly distributed education resources.
Such is one of the few lessons IKN might learn from Xi’s gamble. While East Kalimantan boasts cities with some of the best quality of life throughout Indonesia, its rural population rarely reap the benefits— especially in terms of access to education. Indigenous and rural communities in Penajam Paser Utara have already made an explicit petition that some of the educational resources that might show up as the Indonesian capital moves should be reserved for them. Amidst all the grand narratives of nation, colonialism, and environment, education remains perhaps the only substantial asset that urbanisation could potentially hope to bring to the displaced locals. As IKN moves forward at a speed that starts to far outpace Xiong’an, we cannot be sure of anything just yet.
The Indonesian electronics defense company Hariff Defense Technologies recently conducted live-firing trials of its new SLT – Senjata Lawan Tank (Anti-tank Weapon). Developed in collaboration with the propellent manufacturer PT Dahana, SLT is a lightweight low-cost, shoulder-fired recoilless weapon. The weapon is under three kilograms loaded with a length of one meter. It fires […]
Australia and Indonesia have struck a new security pact that will lead to more joint military exercises and visits, prompting human rights advocates to call for safeguards.
The Australian prime minister, Anthony Albanese, told the Indonesian defence minister and president-elect, Prabowo Subianto, in Canberra on Tuesday that there was “no more important relationship than the one between our two great nations”.
Australia and Indonesia have struck a new security pact that will lead to more joint military exercises and visits, prompting human rights advocates to call for safeguards.
The Australian prime minister, Anthony Albanese, told the Indonesian defence minister and president-elect, Prabowo Subianto, in Canberra on Tuesday that there was “no more important relationship than the one between our two great nations”.
Of the international intelligence information that comes to Australian agencies from the Five Eyes, 90 percent comes from the CIA and related US intelligence agencies. So in effect we have the colonisation of our intelligence agencies These agencies dominate the advice to ministers, writes John Menadue.
Michael Lester:Hello again listeners to Community Radio Northern Beaches Community Voices and also the Pearls and Irritations podcast. I’m Michael Lester.
Our guest today is the publisher and founder of the Pearls and Irritations Public Policy online journal, the celebrated John Menadue, with whom we’ll be so pleased to have a discussion today. John has a long and high profile experience in both the public service, for which he’s been awarded the Order of Australia and also in business.
As a public servant, he was secretary of a number of departments over the years, prime minister and cabinet under a couple of different prime ministers, immigration and ethnic affairs, special minister of state and the Department of Trade and also Ambassador to Japan.
And in his private sector career, he was a general manager at News Corp and the chief executive of Qantas. These are just among many of his considerable activities.
These days, as I say, he’s a publisher, public commentator, writer, and we’re absolutely delighted to welcome you here to Radio Northern Beaches and the P&I podcast, John.
John Menadue: Thank you, Michael. Thanks for the welcome and for what you’ve had to say about Pearls and Irritations. My wife says that she’s the Pearl and I’m the Irritation.
ML:You launched, I think, P&I, what, 2013 or 2011; anyway, you’ve been going a long while. And I noticed the other day you observed that you’d published some 20,000 items on Pearls and Irritations to do with public policy. That’s an amazing achievement itself as an independent media outlet in Australia, isn’t it?
JM: I’m quite pleased with it and so is Susie, my wife. We started 13 years ago and we did everything. I used to write all the stories and Susie handled the technical, admin, financial matters, but it’s grown dramatically since then. We now contract some of the work to people that can help us in editorial, in production and IT. It’s achieving quite a lot of influence among ministers, politicians, journalists and other opinion leaders in the community.
We’re looking now at what the future holds. I’m 89 and Susie, my wife, is not in good health. So we’re looking at new governance arrangements, a public company with outside directors so that we can continue Pearls and Irritations well into the future.
Pearls and Irritations publisher John Menadue . . . “I’m afraid some of [the mainstream media] are just incorrigible. They in fact act as stenographers to powerful interests.” Image: Independent AustralianML: So you made a real contribution through this and you’ve given the opportunity for so many expert, experienced, independent voices to commentate on public policy issues of great importance, not least vis-a-vis, might I say, mainstream media treatment of a lot of these issues.
This is one of your themes and motivations with Pearls and Irritations as a public policy journal, isn’t it? That our mainstream media perhaps don’t do the job they might do in covering significant issues of public policy?
JM: That’s our hope and intention, but I’m afraid some of them are just incorrigible. They in fact act as stenographers to powerful interests.
It’s quite a shame what mainstream media is serving up today, propaganda for the United States, so focused on America.Occasionally we get nonsense about the British royal family or some irrelevant feature like that.
But we’re very badly served. Our media shows very little interest in our own region. It is ignorant and prejudiced against China. It is not concerned about our relations with Indonesia, with the Philippines, Malaysia, Vietnam.
It’s all focused on the United States.We’re seeing it on an enormous scale now with the US elections. Even the ABC has a Planet America programme.
It’s so much focused on America as if we’re an island parked off New York. We are being Americanised in so many areas and particularly in our media.
ML: What has led to this state of affairs in the way that mainstream media treats major public policy issues these days? It hasn’t always been like that or has it?
JM: We’ve been a country that’s been frightened of our region, the countries where we have to make our future. And we’ve turned first to the United Kingdom as a protector. That ended in tears in Singapore.
And now we turn to the United States to look after us in this dangerous world, rather than making our own way as an independent country in our own region. That fear of our region, racism, white Australia, yellow peril all feature in Australia and in our media.
But when we had good, strong leaders, for example, Malcolm Fraser on refugees, he gave leadership and our role in the region.
Gough Whitlam did it also. If we have strong leadership, we can break from our focus on the United States at the expense of our own region. In the end, we’ve got to decide that as we live in this region, we’ve got to prosper in this region.
Security in our region, not from our region. We can do it, but I’m afraid that we’ve been retreating from Asia dreadfully over the last two or three decades. I thought when we had a Labor government, things would be different, but they’re not.
We are still frightened of our own region and embracing at every opportunity, the United States.
ML: Another theme of the many years of publishing Pearls and Irritations is that you are concerned to rebuild some degree of public confidence and trust that has been lost in the political system and that you seek to provide a platform for good policy discussion with the emphasis being on public policy. How has the public policy process been undermined or become so narrow minded if that’s one way of describing it?
JM: Contracting out work to private contractors, the big four accounting firms, getting advice, and not trusting the public service has meant that the quality of our public service has declined considerably. That has to be rebuilt so we get better policy development.
Ministers have been responsible, particularly Scott Morrison, for downgrading the public service and believing somehow or other that better advice can be obtained in the private sector.
Another factor has been the enormous growth in the power of lobbyists for corporate Australia and for foreign companies as well. Ministers have become beholden to pressure from powerful lobby groups.
One particular example, with which I’m quite familiar is in the health field. We are never likely to have real improvements in Medicare, for example, unless the government is prepared to take on the power of lobbyists — the providers, the doctors, the pharmaceutical companies and pharmacies in Australia.
But it’s not just in health where lobbyists are causing so much damage. The power of lobbyists has discredited the role of governments that are seduced by powerful interests rather than serving the community.
The media have just entrenched this problem. Governments are criticised at every opportunity. Australia can be served by the media taking a more positive view about the importance of good policy development and not getting sidetracked all the time about some trivial personal political issue.
The media publish the handouts of the lobbyists, whether it’s the health industry or whether it’s in the fossil fuel industries. These are the main factors that have contributed to the lack of confidence and the lack of trust in good government in Australia.
ML: A particular editorial focus that’s evident in Pearls and Irritations is promoting, I think in your words, a peaceful dialogue and engagement with China. Why is this required and why do you put it forward as a particularly important part of what you see as the mission of your Pearls and Irritations public policy journal?
JM; China, is our largest market and will continue to be so. There is a very jaundiced view, particularly from the United States, which we then copy, that China is a great threat. It’s not a threat to Australia and it’s not a threat to the United States homeland.
But it is to a degree a threat, a competitive threat to the United States in economy and trade. America didn’t worry about China when it was poor, but now that it’s strong militarily, economically and in technology, America is very concerned and feels that its future, its own leadership, its hegemony in the world is being contested.
Unfortunately, Australia has allowed itself to be drawn into the American contest with China. It’s one provocation after another. If it’s not within China itself, it’s on Taiwan, human rights in Hong Kong. Every opportunity is found by the United States to provoke China, if possible, and lead it into war.
I think, frankly, China will be more careful than that.
China’s problem is that it’s successful. And that’s what America cannot accept. By comparison, China does not make the military threat to other countries that the United States presents.
America is the most violent, aggressive country in the world. The greatest threat to peace in the world is the United States and we’re seeing that particularly now expressed in Israel and in Gaza.
But there’s a history. America’s almost always at war and has been since its independence in 1776. By contrast, China doesn’t have that sort of record and history. It is certainly concerned about security on its borders, and it has borders with 14 countries.
But it doesn’t project its power like the US. It doesn’t bomb other countries like the United States. It doesn’t have military bases surrounding the United States.
The United States has about 800 bases around the world. It’s not surprising that China feels threatened by what the United States is doing. And until the United States comes to a sensible, realistic view about China and deals with it politically, I think they’re going to make continual problems for us.
We have this dichotomy that China is our major trading partner but it’s seen by many as a strategic threat. I think that is a mistake.
ML: But what about your views about the public policy process underlying Australia’s policy in reaching the positions that we’re taking vis-a-vis China?
JM: There are several reasons for it, but I think the major one is that Australian governments, the previous government and now this one, takes the advice of intelligence agencies rather than the Department of Foreign Affairs.
Our intelligence agencies are part of Five Eyes. Of the international intelligence which comes to Australian agencies, 90 percent comes from the CIA and related US intelligence agencies. So in effect we’ve had the colonisation of our intelligence agencies and they’re the ones that the Australian government listens to.
Very senior people in those agencies have direct access to the Prime Minister. He listens to them rather than to Penny Wong or the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade. On most public issues involving China, the Department of Foreign Affairs has become a wallflower.
It’s a great tragedy because so much of our future in the region depends on good diplomacy with China, with the ASEAN, with the countries of our region.
Those intelligence agencies in Australia, together with American funded, military funded organisations such as the Australian Strategic Policy Institute have the ear of governments. They’ve also got the ear of the media.
Stories are leaked to the media all the time from those agencies in order to heighten our fear of the region. The Americanisation of Australia is widespread. But our intelligence agencies have been Americanised as well, and they’re leading us down a very dangerous path.
ML: I’m speaking with our guest today on Reno Northern Beaches Community Voices and on the Pearls and Irritations podcast with the publisher of Pearls and Irritations Public Policy Journal, John Menadue, distinguished Australian public servant and businessman.
John, again, it’s one thing to talk about that, but governments, when they change, and we’ve had a change of government recently, very often, as I’m sure you know from personal experience, have the opportunity and do indeed change their advisors and adopt different policies, and one might have expected this to happen.
Why didn’t we see a change of the guard like we saw a change of government?
JM: I think this government is timid on almost everything. It was timid from day one on administrative arrangements, departmental arrangements, heads of departments.
For example, there was no change made to dismantle the Department of Home Affairs with Michael Pezzullo. That should have happened on day one, but it didn’t happen.
Concerns we’ve had in migration, the role of foreign affairs and intelligence with all those intelligence agencies gathered together in one department has been very bad for Australia.
Very few changes were made in the leadership of our intelligence agencies, the Office of National Assessments, in ASIO. The same advice has been continued. In almost every area you can look at, the government has been timid, unprepared to take on vested interests, lobbyists, and change departments to make them more attuned to what the government wants to do.
But the government doesn’t want to upset anyone. And as a result, we’re having a continuation of badly informed ministers and departments that have really not been effectively changed to meet the requirements and needs of, what I thought was a reforming government.
ML: In that context, AUKUS and the nuclear submarine deal might be perhaps a case in point of the broader issues and points you’re making. How would you characterise the nature of the public policy process and decision behind AUKUS? How were the decisions made and in what manner?
JM: By political appointees and confidants of Morrison. There’s been no public discussion. There’s been no public statement by Morrison or by Albanese about AUKUS — its history, why we’re doing it.
It’s been left to briefings of journalists and others. I think it’s disgraceful what’s happened in that area. It’s time the Australian government spelled out to us what it all means, but it’s not going to do it. Because I believe the case is so threadbare that it’s not game to put it to the public test.
And so we’re continuing in this ludicrous arrangement, this fiscal calamity, which Morrison inflicted on the Albanese government which it hasn’t been game to contest.
My own view is that frankly, AUKUS will never happen. It is so absurd — the delay, the cost, the failure of submarine construction or the delays in the United States, the problems of the submarine construction and maintenance in the United Kingdom.
For all those sorts of reasons, I don’t think it’ll really happen. Unfortunately, we’re going to waste a lot of money and a lot of time. I don’t think the Department of Defence could run any major project, certainly not a project like this.
Defence has been unsuccessful in the frigate and numerous other programmes. Our Department of Defence really is not up to the job and that among other reasons gives me reason to believe, and hope frankly, that AUKUS will collapse under its own stupidity.
But what I think is of more concern is the real estate, which we are freely leasing to the Americans. We had it first with the Marines in Darwin. We have it also coming now with US B-52 aircraft based out of Tindal in the Northern Territory and the submarine base in Perth, Western Australia.
These bases are being made available to the United States with very little control by Australia. The government carries on with nonsense about how our sovereignty will be protected.
In fact, it won’t be protected. If there’s any difficulties, for example, over a war with China over Taiwan, and the Americans are involved, there is no way Americans will consult with us about whether they can use nuclear armed vessels out of Tindal, for example.
The Americans will insist that Pine Gap continues to operate. So we are locked in through ceding so much of our real estate and the sovereignty that goes with it.
Penny Wong has been asked about American aircraft out of Tindal, carrying nuclear weapons and she says to us, sorry but the Americans won’t confirm or deny what they do.
Good heavens, this is our territory. This is our sovereignty. And we won’t even ask the Americans operating out of Tindal, whether they’re carrying nuclear weapons.
Back in the days of Malcolm Fraser, he made a statement to the Parliament insisting that no vessels or aircraft carrying nuclear weapons or ships carrying nuclear weapons could access Australian ports or operate over Australia without the permission of the Australian government.
And now Penny Wong says, we won’t ask. You can do what you like. We know the US won’t confirm or deny.
When it came to the Solomon Islands, a treaty that the Solomons negotiated with China on strategic and defence matters, Penny Wong was very upset about this secret agreement. There should be transparency, she warned.
But that’s small fry, compared with the fact that the Australian government will allow United States aircraft to operate out of Tindal without the Australian government knowing whether they are carrying nuclear weapons. I think that’s outrageous.
ML: Notwithstanding many of the very technical and economic and other discussions around the nuclear submarine’s acquisition, it does seem that politically, at least, and not least from the media presentation of our policy position that we’re very clearly signing up with our US allies against contingency attacks on Taiwan that we would be committed to take a part in and we’re also moving very closely, to well the phrase is interoperability, with the US forces and equipment but also personnel too.
You mentioned earlier, intelligence personnel and I believe there’s a lot of US personnel in the Department of Defence too?
JM: That’s right. It’s just another example of Americanisation which is reflected in our intelligence agencies, Department of Defence, interchangeability of our military forces, the fusion of our military or particularly our Navy with the United States. It’s all becoming one fused enterprise with the United States.
And in any difficulties, we would not be able, as far as I can see, to disengage from what the United States is doing. And we would be particularly vulnerable because of the AUKUS submarines. That’s if they ever come to anything. Because the AUKUS submarines, we are told, would operate off the Chinese coast to attack Chinese submarines or somehow provide intelligence for the Americans and for us.
These submarines will not be nuclear armed, which means that in the event of a conflict, we would have no bargaining or no counter to China. We’d be the weak link in the alliance with the United States.
China will not be prepared to strike the mainland United States for fear of massive retaliation. We are the weak link with Pine Gap and other real estate that I mentioned. We would be making ourselves much more vulnerable by this association with the United States.
Those AUKUS submarines will provide no deterrence for us, but make us more vulnerable if a conflict arises in which we are effectively part of the US military operation.
ML: How would you characterise the mainstream media’s presentation and treatment of these issues?
JM: The mainstream media is very largely a mouthpiece for Washington propaganda. And that American propaganda is pushed out through the legacy media, The Washington Post, The New York Times, the news agencies, Fox News which in turn are influenced by the military/ business complex which Eisenhower warned us about years ago.
The power of those groups with the CIA and the influence that they have, means that they overwhelm our media. That’s reflected particularly in The Australian and News Corporation publications.
I don’t know how some of those journalists can hold their heads. They’ve been on the drip feed of America for so long. They cannot see a world that is not dominated and led by the United States.
I’m hoping that over time, Pearls and Irritations and other independent media will grow and provide a more balanced view about Australia’s role in our region and in our own development.
We need to keep good relations with the United States. They’re an important player, but I think that we are unnecessarily risking our future by throwing our lot almost entirely in with the United States.
Minister for Defence, Richard Marles is leading the Americanisation of our military. I think Penny Wong is to some extent trying to pull him back. But unfortunately so much of the leadership of Australia in defence, in the media, is part and parcel of the mistaken United States view of the world.
ML: What sort of voices are we not hearing in the media or in Australia on this question?
JM: It’s not going to change, Michael. I can’t see it changing with Lachlan Murdoch in charge. I think it’s getting worse, if possible, within News Corporation. It’s a very, very difficult and desperate situation where we’re being served so poorly.
ML: Is there a strong independent media and potential for voices through independent media in Australia?
JM: No, we haven’t got one. The best hope at the side, of course, is the ABC and SBS public broadcasters, but they’ve been seduced as well by all things American.
We’ve seen that particularly in recent months over the conflict in Gaza. The ABC and SBS heavily favour Israel. It is shameful.
They’re still the best hope of the side, but they need more money. They’re getting a little bit more from the government, but I think they are sadly lacking in leadership and proper understanding of what the role of a public broadcaster should be.
I don’t think there’s a quick answer to any of this. And I hope that we can extricate ourselves without too much damage in the future. Our media has a great responsibility and must be held responsible for the damage that it is causing in Australia.
ML: Well, look, thank you very much, John Menadue, for joining us on Radio Northern Beaches and on the Pearls and Irritations podcast. John Menadue, publisher, founder, editor-in-chief of, for the last 13 years, the public policy journal Pearls and Irritations. We’ve been discussing the role of the mainstream media, independent media, in the public policy processes too in Australia, and particularly in the context of international relations and in this case our relationships with the US and China.
Thank you so much John for taking the time and for sharing your thoughts with us here today. Thanks for joining us John.
JM: Thank you. Let’s hope for better days.
John Menadue, founder and publisher of Pearls and Irritations public policy journal has had a senior professional career in the media, public service and airlines. In 1985, he was made an Officer of the Order of Australia (AO) for public service. In 2009, he received the Distinguished Alumni Award from the University of Adelaide in recognition of his significant and lifelong contribution to Australian society. This transcript of the Pearls and Irritations podcast on 10 August 2024 is republished with permission.
Of the international intelligence information that comes to Australian agencies from the Five Eyes, 90 percent comes from the CIA and related US intelligence agencies. So in effect we have the colonisation of our intelligence agencies These agencies dominate the advice to ministers, writes John Menadue.
Michael Lester:Hello again listeners to Community Radio Northern Beaches Community Voices and also the Pearls and Irritations podcast. I’m Michael Lester.
Our guest today is the publisher and founder of the Pearls and Irritations Public Policy online journal, the celebrated John Menadue, with whom we’ll be so pleased to have a discussion today. John has a long and high profile experience in both the public service, for which he’s been awarded the Order of Australia and also in business.
As a public servant, he was secretary of a number of departments over the years, prime minister and cabinet under a couple of different prime ministers, immigration and ethnic affairs, special minister of state and the Department of Trade and also Ambassador to Japan.
And in his private sector career, he was a general manager at News Corp and the chief executive of Qantas. These are just among many of his considerable activities.
These days, as I say, he’s a publisher, public commentator, writer, and we’re absolutely delighted to welcome you here to Radio Northern Beaches and the P&I podcast, John.
John Menadue: Thank you, Michael. Thanks for the welcome and for what you’ve had to say about Pearls and Irritations. My wife says that she’s the Pearl and I’m the Irritation.
ML:You launched, I think, P&I, what, 2013 or 2011; anyway, you’ve been going a long while. And I noticed the other day you observed that you’d published some 20,000 items on Pearls and Irritations to do with public policy. That’s an amazing achievement itself as an independent media outlet in Australia, isn’t it?
JM: I’m quite pleased with it and so is Susie, my wife. We started 13 years ago and we did everything. I used to write all the stories and Susie handled the technical, admin, financial matters, but it’s grown dramatically since then. We now contract some of the work to people that can help us in editorial, in production and IT. It’s achieving quite a lot of influence among ministers, politicians, journalists and other opinion leaders in the community.
We’re looking now at what the future holds. I’m 89 and Susie, my wife, is not in good health. So we’re looking at new governance arrangements, a public company with outside directors so that we can continue Pearls and Irritations well into the future.
Pearls and Irritations publisher John Menadue . . . “I’m afraid some of [the mainstream media] are just incorrigible. They in fact act as stenographers to powerful interests.” Image: Independent AustralianML: So you made a real contribution through this and you’ve given the opportunity for so many expert, experienced, independent voices to commentate on public policy issues of great importance, not least vis-a-vis, might I say, mainstream media treatment of a lot of these issues.
This is one of your themes and motivations with Pearls and Irritations as a public policy journal, isn’t it? That our mainstream media perhaps don’t do the job they might do in covering significant issues of public policy?
JM: That’s our hope and intention, but I’m afraid some of them are just incorrigible. They in fact act as stenographers to powerful interests.
It’s quite a shame what mainstream media is serving up today, propaganda for the United States, so focused on America.Occasionally we get nonsense about the British royal family or some irrelevant feature like that.
But we’re very badly served. Our media shows very little interest in our own region. It is ignorant and prejudiced against China. It is not concerned about our relations with Indonesia, with the Philippines, Malaysia, Vietnam.
It’s all focused on the United States.We’re seeing it on an enormous scale now with the US elections. Even the ABC has a Planet America programme.
It’s so much focused on America as if we’re an island parked off New York. We are being Americanised in so many areas and particularly in our media.
ML: What has led to this state of affairs in the way that mainstream media treats major public policy issues these days? It hasn’t always been like that or has it?
JM: We’ve been a country that’s been frightened of our region, the countries where we have to make our future. And we’ve turned first to the United Kingdom as a protector. That ended in tears in Singapore.
And now we turn to the United States to look after us in this dangerous world, rather than making our own way as an independent country in our own region. That fear of our region, racism, white Australia, yellow peril all feature in Australia and in our media.
But when we had good, strong leaders, for example, Malcolm Fraser on refugees, he gave leadership and our role in the region.
Gough Whitlam did it also. If we have strong leadership, we can break from our focus on the United States at the expense of our own region. In the end, we’ve got to decide that as we live in this region, we’ve got to prosper in this region.
Security in our region, not from our region. We can do it, but I’m afraid that we’ve been retreating from Asia dreadfully over the last two or three decades. I thought when we had a Labor government, things would be different, but they’re not.
We are still frightened of our own region and embracing at every opportunity, the United States.
ML: Another theme of the many years of publishing Pearls and Irritations is that you are concerned to rebuild some degree of public confidence and trust that has been lost in the political system and that you seek to provide a platform for good policy discussion with the emphasis being on public policy. How has the public policy process been undermined or become so narrow minded if that’s one way of describing it?
JM: Contracting out work to private contractors, the big four accounting firms, getting advice, and not trusting the public service has meant that the quality of our public service has declined considerably. That has to be rebuilt so we get better policy development.
Ministers have been responsible, particularly Scott Morrison, for downgrading the public service and believing somehow or other that better advice can be obtained in the private sector.
Another factor has been the enormous growth in the power of lobbyists for corporate Australia and for foreign companies as well. Ministers have become beholden to pressure from powerful lobby groups.
One particular example, with which I’m quite familiar is in the health field. We are never likely to have real improvements in Medicare, for example, unless the government is prepared to take on the power of lobbyists — the providers, the doctors, the pharmaceutical companies and pharmacies in Australia.
But it’s not just in health where lobbyists are causing so much damage. The power of lobbyists has discredited the role of governments that are seduced by powerful interests rather than serving the community.
The media have just entrenched this problem. Governments are criticised at every opportunity. Australia can be served by the media taking a more positive view about the importance of good policy development and not getting sidetracked all the time about some trivial personal political issue.
The media publish the handouts of the lobbyists, whether it’s the health industry or whether it’s in the fossil fuel industries. These are the main factors that have contributed to the lack of confidence and the lack of trust in good government in Australia.
ML: A particular editorial focus that’s evident in Pearls and Irritations is promoting, I think in your words, a peaceful dialogue and engagement with China. Why is this required and why do you put it forward as a particularly important part of what you see as the mission of your Pearls and Irritations public policy journal?
JM; China, is our largest market and will continue to be so. There is a very jaundiced view, particularly from the United States, which we then copy, that China is a great threat. It’s not a threat to Australia and it’s not a threat to the United States homeland.
But it is to a degree a threat, a competitive threat to the United States in economy and trade. America didn’t worry about China when it was poor, but now that it’s strong militarily, economically and in technology, America is very concerned and feels that its future, its own leadership, its hegemony in the world is being contested.
Unfortunately, Australia has allowed itself to be drawn into the American contest with China. It’s one provocation after another. If it’s not within China itself, it’s on Taiwan, human rights in Hong Kong. Every opportunity is found by the United States to provoke China, if possible, and lead it into war.
I think, frankly, China will be more careful than that.
China’s problem is that it’s successful. And that’s what America cannot accept. By comparison, China does not make the military threat to other countries that the United States presents.
America is the most violent, aggressive country in the world. The greatest threat to peace in the world is the United States and we’re seeing that particularly now expressed in Israel and in Gaza.
But there’s a history. America’s almost always at war and has been since its independence in 1776. By contrast, China doesn’t have that sort of record and history. It is certainly concerned about security on its borders, and it has borders with 14 countries.
But it doesn’t project its power like the US. It doesn’t bomb other countries like the United States. It doesn’t have military bases surrounding the United States.
The United States has about 800 bases around the world. It’s not surprising that China feels threatened by what the United States is doing. And until the United States comes to a sensible, realistic view about China and deals with it politically, I think they’re going to make continual problems for us.
We have this dichotomy that China is our major trading partner but it’s seen by many as a strategic threat. I think that is a mistake.
ML: But what about your views about the public policy process underlying Australia’s policy in reaching the positions that we’re taking vis-a-vis China?
JM: There are several reasons for it, but I think the major one is that Australian governments, the previous government and now this one, takes the advice of intelligence agencies rather than the Department of Foreign Affairs.
Our intelligence agencies are part of Five Eyes. Of the international intelligence which comes to Australian agencies, 90 percent comes from the CIA and related US intelligence agencies. So in effect we’ve had the colonisation of our intelligence agencies and they’re the ones that the Australian government listens to.
Very senior people in those agencies have direct access to the Prime Minister. He listens to them rather than to Penny Wong or the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade. On most public issues involving China, the Department of Foreign Affairs has become a wallflower.
It’s a great tragedy because so much of our future in the region depends on good diplomacy with China, with the ASEAN, with the countries of our region.
Those intelligence agencies in Australia, together with American funded, military funded organisations such as the Australian Strategic Policy Institute have the ear of governments. They’ve also got the ear of the media.
Stories are leaked to the media all the time from those agencies in order to heighten our fear of the region. The Americanisation of Australia is widespread. But our intelligence agencies have been Americanised as well, and they’re leading us down a very dangerous path.
ML: I’m speaking with our guest today on Reno Northern Beaches Community Voices and on the Pearls and Irritations podcast with the publisher of Pearls and Irritations Public Policy Journal, John Menadue, distinguished Australian public servant and businessman.
John, again, it’s one thing to talk about that, but governments, when they change, and we’ve had a change of government recently, very often, as I’m sure you know from personal experience, have the opportunity and do indeed change their advisors and adopt different policies, and one might have expected this to happen.
Why didn’t we see a change of the guard like we saw a change of government?
JM: I think this government is timid on almost everything. It was timid from day one on administrative arrangements, departmental arrangements, heads of departments.
For example, there was no change made to dismantle the Department of Home Affairs with Michael Pezzullo. That should have happened on day one, but it didn’t happen.
Concerns we’ve had in migration, the role of foreign affairs and intelligence with all those intelligence agencies gathered together in one department has been very bad for Australia.
Very few changes were made in the leadership of our intelligence agencies, the Office of National Assessments, in ASIO. The same advice has been continued. In almost every area you can look at, the government has been timid, unprepared to take on vested interests, lobbyists, and change departments to make them more attuned to what the government wants to do.
But the government doesn’t want to upset anyone. And as a result, we’re having a continuation of badly informed ministers and departments that have really not been effectively changed to meet the requirements and needs of, what I thought was a reforming government.
ML: In that context, AUKUS and the nuclear submarine deal might be perhaps a case in point of the broader issues and points you’re making. How would you characterise the nature of the public policy process and decision behind AUKUS? How were the decisions made and in what manner?
JM: By political appointees and confidants of Morrison. There’s been no public discussion. There’s been no public statement by Morrison or by Albanese about AUKUS — its history, why we’re doing it.
It’s been left to briefings of journalists and others. I think it’s disgraceful what’s happened in that area. It’s time the Australian government spelled out to us what it all means, but it’s not going to do it. Because I believe the case is so threadbare that it’s not game to put it to the public test.
And so we’re continuing in this ludicrous arrangement, this fiscal calamity, which Morrison inflicted on the Albanese government which it hasn’t been game to contest.
My own view is that frankly, AUKUS will never happen. It is so absurd — the delay, the cost, the failure of submarine construction or the delays in the United States, the problems of the submarine construction and maintenance in the United Kingdom.
For all those sorts of reasons, I don’t think it’ll really happen. Unfortunately, we’re going to waste a lot of money and a lot of time. I don’t think the Department of Defence could run any major project, certainly not a project like this.
Defence has been unsuccessful in the frigate and numerous other programmes. Our Department of Defence really is not up to the job and that among other reasons gives me reason to believe, and hope frankly, that AUKUS will collapse under its own stupidity.
But what I think is of more concern is the real estate, which we are freely leasing to the Americans. We had it first with the Marines in Darwin. We have it also coming now with US B-52 aircraft based out of Tindal in the Northern Territory and the submarine base in Perth, Western Australia.
These bases are being made available to the United States with very little control by Australia. The government carries on with nonsense about how our sovereignty will be protected.
In fact, it won’t be protected. If there’s any difficulties, for example, over a war with China over Taiwan, and the Americans are involved, there is no way Americans will consult with us about whether they can use nuclear armed vessels out of Tindal, for example.
The Americans will insist that Pine Gap continues to operate. So we are locked in through ceding so much of our real estate and the sovereignty that goes with it.
Penny Wong has been asked about American aircraft out of Tindal, carrying nuclear weapons and she says to us, sorry but the Americans won’t confirm or deny what they do.
Good heavens, this is our territory. This is our sovereignty. And we won’t even ask the Americans operating out of Tindal, whether they’re carrying nuclear weapons.
Back in the days of Malcolm Fraser, he made a statement to the Parliament insisting that no vessels or aircraft carrying nuclear weapons or ships carrying nuclear weapons could access Australian ports or operate over Australia without the permission of the Australian government.
And now Penny Wong says, we won’t ask. You can do what you like. We know the US won’t confirm or deny.
When it came to the Solomon Islands, a treaty that the Solomons negotiated with China on strategic and defence matters, Penny Wong was very upset about this secret agreement. There should be transparency, she warned.
But that’s small fry, compared with the fact that the Australian government will allow United States aircraft to operate out of Tindal without the Australian government knowing whether they are carrying nuclear weapons. I think that’s outrageous.
ML: Notwithstanding many of the very technical and economic and other discussions around the nuclear submarine’s acquisition, it does seem that politically, at least, and not least from the media presentation of our policy position that we’re very clearly signing up with our US allies against contingency attacks on Taiwan that we would be committed to take a part in and we’re also moving very closely, to well the phrase is interoperability, with the US forces and equipment but also personnel too.
You mentioned earlier, intelligence personnel and I believe there’s a lot of US personnel in the Department of Defence too?
JM: That’s right. It’s just another example of Americanisation which is reflected in our intelligence agencies, Department of Defence, interchangeability of our military forces, the fusion of our military or particularly our Navy with the United States. It’s all becoming one fused enterprise with the United States.
And in any difficulties, we would not be able, as far as I can see, to disengage from what the United States is doing. And we would be particularly vulnerable because of the AUKUS submarines. That’s if they ever come to anything. Because the AUKUS submarines, we are told, would operate off the Chinese coast to attack Chinese submarines or somehow provide intelligence for the Americans and for us.
These submarines will not be nuclear armed, which means that in the event of a conflict, we would have no bargaining or no counter to China. We’d be the weak link in the alliance with the United States.
China will not be prepared to strike the mainland United States for fear of massive retaliation. We are the weak link with Pine Gap and other real estate that I mentioned. We would be making ourselves much more vulnerable by this association with the United States.
Those AUKUS submarines will provide no deterrence for us, but make us more vulnerable if a conflict arises in which we are effectively part of the US military operation.
ML: How would you characterise the mainstream media’s presentation and treatment of these issues?
JM: The mainstream media is very largely a mouthpiece for Washington propaganda. And that American propaganda is pushed out through the legacy media, The Washington Post, The New York Times, the news agencies, Fox News which in turn are influenced by the military/ business complex which Eisenhower warned us about years ago.
The power of those groups with the CIA and the influence that they have, means that they overwhelm our media. That’s reflected particularly in The Australian and News Corporation publications.
I don’t know how some of those journalists can hold their heads. They’ve been on the drip feed of America for so long. They cannot see a world that is not dominated and led by the United States.
I’m hoping that over time, Pearls and Irritations and other independent media will grow and provide a more balanced view about Australia’s role in our region and in our own development.
We need to keep good relations with the United States. They’re an important player, but I think that we are unnecessarily risking our future by throwing our lot almost entirely in with the United States.
Minister for Defence, Richard Marles is leading the Americanisation of our military. I think Penny Wong is to some extent trying to pull him back. But unfortunately so much of the leadership of Australia in defence, in the media, is part and parcel of the mistaken United States view of the world.
ML: What sort of voices are we not hearing in the media or in Australia on this question?
JM: It’s not going to change, Michael. I can’t see it changing with Lachlan Murdoch in charge. I think it’s getting worse, if possible, within News Corporation. It’s a very, very difficult and desperate situation where we’re being served so poorly.
ML: Is there a strong independent media and potential for voices through independent media in Australia?
JM: No, we haven’t got one. The best hope at the side, of course, is the ABC and SBS public broadcasters, but they’ve been seduced as well by all things American.
We’ve seen that particularly in recent months over the conflict in Gaza. The ABC and SBS heavily favour Israel. It is shameful.
They’re still the best hope of the side, but they need more money. They’re getting a little bit more from the government, but I think they are sadly lacking in leadership and proper understanding of what the role of a public broadcaster should be.
I don’t think there’s a quick answer to any of this. And I hope that we can extricate ourselves without too much damage in the future. Our media has a great responsibility and must be held responsible for the damage that it is causing in Australia.
ML: Well, look, thank you very much, John Menadue, for joining us on Radio Northern Beaches and on the Pearls and Irritations podcast. John Menadue, publisher, founder, editor-in-chief of, for the last 13 years, the public policy journal Pearls and Irritations. We’ve been discussing the role of the mainstream media, independent media, in the public policy processes too in Australia, and particularly in the context of international relations and in this case our relationships with the US and China.
Thank you so much John for taking the time and for sharing your thoughts with us here today. Thanks for joining us John.
JM: Thank you. Let’s hope for better days.
John Menadue, founder and publisher of Pearls and Irritations public policy journal has had a senior professional career in the media, public service and airlines. In 1985, he was made an Officer of the Order of Australia (AO) for public service. In 2009, he received the Distinguished Alumni Award from the University of Adelaide in recognition of his significant and lifelong contribution to Australian society. This transcript of the Pearls and Irritations podcast on 10 August 2024 is republished with permission.
Many in the international community are finally coming to accept that the earth’s ecosystem can no longer bear the weight of military occupation.
Most have reached this inevitable conclusion, clearly articulated in the environmental movement’s latest slogan “No Climate Justice on Occupied Land”, in light of the horrors we have witnessed in Gaza since October 7.
While the correlation between military occupation and climate sustainability may be a recent discovery for those living their lives in relative peace and security, people living under occupation, and thus constant threat of military violence, have always known any guided missile strike or aerial bombardment campaign by an occupying military is not only an attack on those being targeted but also their land’s ability to sustain life.
A recent hearing on “State and Environmental Violence in West Papua” under the jurisdiction of the Rome-based Permanent Peoples’ Tribunal (PPT), for example, heard that Indonesia’s military occupation, spanning more than seven decades, has facilitated a “slow genocide” of the Papuan people through not only political repression and violence, but also the gradual decimation of the forest area — one of the largest and most biodiverse on the planet — that sustains them.
West Papua hosts one of the largest copper and gold mines in the world, is the site of a major BP liquefied natural gas (LNG) facility, and is the fastest-expanding area of palm oil and biofuel plantation in Indonesia.
All of these industries leave ecological dead zones in their wake, and every single one of them is secured by military occupation.
At the PPT hearing, prominent Papuan lawyer Yan Christian Warinussy spoke of the connection between human suffering in West Papua and the exploitation of the region’s natural resources.
Shot and wounded
Just one week later, he was shot and wounded by an unknown assailant. The PPT Secretariat noted that the attack came after the lawyer depicted “the past and current violence committed against the defenceless civil population and the environment in the region”.
What happened to Warinussy reinforced yet again the indivisibility of military occupation and environmental violence.
I’m stand in solidarity with West Papuans rising up against colonialism, racism, state violence, sexual violence, and environmental destruction.
West Papua’s “special autonomy” is another euphemism for control and exploitation pic.twitter.com/cvP7fp2Ml0
In total, militaries around the world account for almost 5.5 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions annually — more than the aviation and shipping industries combined.
Our colleagues at Queen Mary University of London recently concluded that emissions from the first 120 days of this latest round of slaughter in Gaza alone were greater than the annual emissions of 26 individual countries; emissions from rebuilding Gaza will be higher than the annual emissions of more than 135 countries, equating them to those of Sweden and Portugal.
But even these shocking statistics fail to shed sufficient light on the deep connection between military violence and environmental violence. War and occupation’s impact on the climate is not merely a side effect or unfortunate consequence.
We must not reduce our analysis of what is going on in Gaza, for example, to a dualism of consequences: the killing of people on one side and the effect on “the environment” on the other.
Inseparable from impact on nature
In reality, the impact on the people is inseparable from the impact on nature. The genocide in Gaza is also an ecocide — as is almost always the case with military campaigns.
In the Vietnam War, the use of toxic chemicals, including Agent Orange, was part of a deliberate strategy to eliminate any capacity for agricultural production, and thus force the people off their land and into “strategic hamlets”.
Forests, used by the Vietcong as cover, were also cut by the US military to reduce the population’s capacity for resistance. The anti-war activist and international lawyer Richard Falk coined the phrase “ecocide” to describe this.
In different ways, this is what all military operations do: they tactically reduce or completely eliminate the capacity of the “enemy” population to live sustainably and to retain autonomy over its own water and food supplies.
Since 2014, the bulldozing of Palestinian homes and other essential infrastructure by the Israeli occupation forces has been complemented by chemical warfare, with herbicides aerially sprayed by the Israeli military destroying entire swaths of arable land in Gaza.
In other words, Gaza has been subjected to an “ecocide” strategy almost identical to the one used in Vietnam since long before October 7.
The occupying military force has been working to reduce, and eventually completely eliminate, the Palestinian population’s capacity to live sustainably in Gaza for many years. Since October 7, it has been waging a war to make Gaza completely unliveable.
50% of Gaza farms wiped out
As researchers at Forensic Architecture have concluded, at least 50 percent of farmland and orchards in Gaza are now completely wiped out. Many ancient olive groves have also been destroyed. Fields of crops have been uprooted using tanks, tractors and other vehicles.
Widespread aerial bombardment reduced the Gaza Strip’s greenhouse production facilities to rubble. All this was done not by mistake, but in a deliberate effort to leave the land unable to sustain life.
The wholesale destruction of the water supply and sanitation facilities and the ongoing threat of starvation across the Gaza Strip are also not unwanted consequences, but deliberate tactics of war. The Israeli military has weaponised food and water access in its unrelenting assault on the population of Gaza.
Of course, none of this is new to Palestinians there, or indeed in the West Bank. Israel has been using these same tactics to sustain its occupation, pressure Palestinians into leaving their lands, and expand its illegal settlement enterprise for many years.
Since October 7, it has merely intensified its efforts. It is now working with unprecedented urgency to eradicate the little capacity the occupied Palestinian territory has left in it to sustain Palestinian life.
Just as is the case with the occupation of Papua, environmental destruction is not an unintended side effect but a primary objective of the Israeli occupation of Palestine. The immediate damage military occupation inflicts on the affected population is never separate from the long-term damage it inflicts on the planet.
For this reason, it would be a mistake to try and separate the genocide from the ecocide in Gaza, or anywhere else for that matter.
Anyone interested in putting an end to human suffering now, and preventing climate catastrophe in the future, should oppose all wars of occupation, and all forms of militarism that help fuel them.
David Whyte is professor of climate justice at Queen Mary University of London and director of the Centre for Climate Crime and Climate Justice. Samira Homerang Saunders is research officer at the Centre for Climate Crime and Climate Justice, Queen Mary University.
Fiji’s Prime Minister, Sitiveni Rabuka, says he will “apologise” to fellow Melanesian leaders later this month after failing to secure agreement from Indonesia to visit its restive West Papua province.
At last year’s Pacific Islands Forum (PIF) leaders meeting in Cook Islands, the Melanesian Spearhead Group appointed Rabuka and PNG Prime Minister James Marape as the region’s “special envoys” on West Papua.
Several Pacific officials and advocacy groups have expressed anguish over alleged human rights abuses committed by Indonesian forces in West Papua, where an indigenous pro-independence struggle has simmered for decades.
Rabuka and Marape have been trying to organise a visit to West Papua for more than nine months now.
But in an exclusive interview with the ABC’s Pacific Beat, Rabuka said conversations on the trip were still “ongoing” and blamed Indonesia’s presidential elections in February for the delay.
“Unfortunately, we couldn’t go . . . Indonesia was going through elections. In two months’ time, they will have a new substantive president in place in the palace. Hopefully we can still move forward with that,” he said.
“But in the meantime, James Marape and I will have to apologise to our Melanesian counterparts on the side of the Forum Island leaders meeting in Tonga, and say we have not been able to go on that mission.”
Pacific pressing for independent visit
Pacific nations have been pressing Indonesia to allow representatives from the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights to conduct an independent visit to Papua.
A UN Human Rights committee report released in May found there were “systematic reports” of both torture and extrajudicial killings of indigenous Papuans in the province.
But Indonesia usually rejects any criticism of its human rights record in West Papua, saying events in the province are a purely internal affair.
West Papua Resistance Leader, Victor Weimo: I must thank the colonialists for continuously teaching us to aspire to true humanity by means of rebellion. pic.twitter.com/h9n4rN9yyN
Rabuka said he was “still committed” to the visit and would like to make the trip after incoming Indonesian president Prabowo Subianto takes power in October.
The Fiji prime minister made the comments ahead of a 10-day trip to China, with Rabuka saying he would travel to a number of Chinese provinces to see how the emerging great power had pulled millions of people out of poverty.
He praised Beijing’s development record, but also indicated Fiji would not turn to China for loans or budget support.
“As we take our governments and peoples forward, the people themselves must understand that we cannot borrow to become embroiled in debt servicing later on,” he said.
“People must understand that we can only live within our means, and our means are determined by our own productivity, our own GDP.”
Rabuka is expected to meet Chinese president Xi Jinping in Beijing towards the end of his trip, at the beginning of next week.
Delegation to visit New Caledonia After his trip to China, the prime minister will take part in a high level Pacific delegation to Kanaky New Caledonia, which was rocked by widespread rioting and violence earlier this year.
While several Pacific nations have been pressing France to make fresh commitments towards decolonisation in the wake of a contentious final vote on independence back in 2021, Rabuka said the Pacific wanted to help different political groups within the territory to find common ground.
“We will just have to convince the leaders, the local group leaders that rebuilding is very difficult after a spate of violent activities and events,” he said.
Rabuka gave strong backing to a plan to overhaul Pacific policing which Australia has been pushing hard ahead of the PIF leaders meeting in Tonga at the end of this month.
Senior Solomon Islands official Collin Beck took to social media last week to publicly criticise the initiative, suggesting that its backers were trying to “steamroll” any opposition at Pacific regional meetings.
Rabuka said the social media post was “unfortunate” and suggested that Solomon Islands or other Pacific nations could simply opt out of the initiative if they didn’t approve of it.
“When it comes to sovereignty, it is a sovereign state that makes the decision,” he said.
Republished with permission from ABC Pacific Beat.
This content originally appeared on Asia Pacific Report and was authored by APR editor.
The days of tactical vehicles being manufactured solely for the military are declining. Commercial off-the-shelf have been favoured by many nations, but do they really fit the brief? Light tactical vehicles are a staple of any military and, because of their relative simplicity to build, they are widely manufactured in the Asia-Pacific region. However, when […]
The chief of the Indonesian Air Force (TNI-AU) has asserted that the service will acquire Turkish-made Bayraktar TB2 medium altitude-long endurance unmanned aerial vehicles (MALE UAVs) to boost the Southeast Asian country’s air defence capabilities. Air Chief Marshal Mohammad Tonny Harjono told local media that the service will acquire an undisclosed number of TB2 UAVs […]
The West Papuan resistance movement OPM has blamed the tragic death of a New Zealand helicopter pilot in a remote part of the troubled Melanesian region on Indonesia’s security forces and “every nation supporting barbarity”.
In a statement today, the OPM (Free Papua Organisation) chairman-commander Jeffrey Bomanak claimed his movement had undertaken a “thorough investigation” and unilaterally rejected any implication of responsibility for the death of pilot Glen Conning.
He also expressed sincere apologies to the pilot’s family.
Bomanak said the OPM “respects civilians from Sorong to Merauke” and also from “other parts of the world”.
Commander Bayu Suseno holds a photo of the NZ pilot Glen Conning . . . describes the recovery operation. Image: AJ screenshot APR
The Jakarta Post reports that Glen Malcolm Conning, 50, a pilot for PT Intan Angkasa Air Service, was killed yesterday after landing in a remote part of Central Papua province with two Indonesian health workers and two children, all of whom survived.
The Cartenz Peace Taskforce, assembled to deal with Papuan independence fighters, retrieved his body from the remote area and transported it to Timika near the Freeport copper and gold mine, reported the newspaper citing a military statement.
“The body of the pilot has been evacuated from the Alama district to Timika and arrived at 12:50 pm local time. The body is currently at the Mimika General Hospital for an autopsy,” Cartenz spokesman Adjutant Senior Commander Bayu Suseno said.
Mimika police head Adjutant Senior Commander I Komang Budiartha told reporters yesterday that three helicopters had been dispatched for the search effort, according to The Post.
‘Heart-broken’ for loss RNZ Pacific reports that a statement by Natasha Conning on behalf of his family said he was truly loved by his family and friends, who he had cherished spending time with when he was not flying or being in the outdoors.
“Our hearts are broken from this devastating loss,” she said.
The OPM statement today from chairman-commander Jeffrey P. Bomanak. Image: APR
In the OPM statement today, Commander Bomanak said: “From the beginning of the brutal invasion and illegal annexation, our war of liberation is the very defence of our homeland, just as it would be for you, and as it was during WWII.”
The “barbarity” of the Indonesian military and police was well known and “illegally supported by a tyranny of vested interests — geopolitical and trade from every nation with armament exports and a resource industry that steals our natural resources”, Bomanak said.
He said the death of the New Zealand pilot was “another tragic chapter in six decades of international support for Indonesia’s crimes against humanity”.
Bomanak also criticised the New Zealand government for allowing citizens to be employed by the “rogue state”.
NZ hostage pilot
In February 2023, pro-independence fighters took another New Zealand pilot hostage. Phillip Mehrtens, 37, who was captured shortly after landing his plane in the remote mountainous area of Nduga to drop off passengers.
He has been held hostage ever since and has featured in several videos and photographs circulated by his captors.
A spokesperson for the West Papua Action Aotearoa (WPAA) group, former Green MP Catherine Delahunty, said in a statement that the killing of Conning was an “utter tragedy for his family and friends”, adding that her movement was concerned over the killing of any civilians in West Papua.
She also noted that the area of the tragedy was a “conflict zone” and that the Indonesian military had a responsibility for the safety of pilots flying there.
Delahunty said the New Zealand government needed to respond to the dangerous situation “affecting our pilots” by calling on Indonesia to allow the UN Human Rights Commissioner and foreign media into West Papua.
She said the government should stop “sitting on their hands and start negotiating with Indonesia for peace, human rights and self-determination in West Papua”.
Fincantieri is delighted to announce that, in a significant move to bolster maritime collaboration, Dario Deste, General Manager of the Naval Vessels Division from Fincantieri met with Admiral Ali Muhammad, Chief of Staff of the Indonesian Navy at the Indonesian Navy Headquarters in Jakarta. This high-level discussion underscored the robust and growing partnership between the […]
Portugal’s EID, which specialises in military communications systems company, announced on 30 July that it has won a deal to supply two naval integrated communications systems (ICS) to Indonesian shipbuilder PT PAL. EID said its Integrated Communications Control System (ICCS) will be fitted to the two new Tarlac-class landing platform docks (LPDs) – which are […]
New Caledonia’s mothballed nickel plant in Koniambo (north of the main island of Grande Terre) has announced it has started mass sackings of some 1200 staff, despite efforts to identify a potential buyer.
Koniambo (KNS-Koniambo Nickel SAS) operations had already been mothballed after the announcement, in February, from its major financier, Anglo-Swiss giant Glencore, that it wanted out.
KNS is jointly owned by Glencore (49 percent) and New Caledonia’s Northern province (51 percent).
While making the announcement, Glencore signalled a 6-month delay in the implementation of its decision, including payment of salaries.
The same timeframe was also supposed to be used to find potential buyers for the shares owned by Glencore.
Glencore said in February that keeping its stake in KNS was no longer sustainable.
It also recalled that the plant, in more than 10 years of existence and operation, had never made a profit.
Staggering debt
Over the past decade, KNS had accumulated a staggering 13.5 billion euros (NZ$25 billion) in debt.
As the August 31 deadline looms at the end of the six-month respite, what had been the symbol of New Caledonia’s Northern province empowerment and wealth “re-balancing” of the French Pacific archipelago’s provinces is now faced with a bleak reality.
Koniambo’s wealth relies on the Tiébaghi nickel massif, believed to hold about one quarter of New Caledonia’s nickel reserves.
The Koniambo nickel operation . . . a symbol of New Caledonia’s Northern province empowerment and wealth “re-balancing” programme. Image: Glencore
Koniambo: a highly political symbol KNS was born from a political and financial deal, including France — the “Bercy Accord” signed in December 1997, just months before the political Nouméa autonomy Accord was signed in 1998.
The deal was de facto enacting the transfer of the Tiébaghi massif to New Caledonia’s Northern province and its financial arm, the Société Minière du Sud Pacifique (SMSP).
It was the financial translation of the will to restore some balance between the affluent Southern Province and the less favoured Northern Province of New Caledonia, mostly populated by the indigenous Kanak community.
Since the Koniambo project and its construction started, the new activity has had a stimulating effect on the whole region, especially in the small towns of Voh, Koné and Pouembout.
The number of local companies increased, as well as the population.
In announcing the official lay-offs on Friday, KNS still wanted to appear optimistic: “Even though we are pursuing the search process for a potential buyer, and that three groups continue to display an interest for our company, we do not have at this stage a finalised offer”, the company admitted.
“We are therefore compelled to go ahead with the collective lay-off process on economic grounds”.
‘Cold’ sleep process
Beyond August 31, only a group of about 50 workers will remain employed in maintenance work on what will then be described as “cold” sleep process.
“But the fact that three world-class groups are still in discussions show that Koniambo Nickel still represents a strong interest for potential takeovers”, an optimistic KNS vice-president Alexandre Rousseau, told public broadcaster NC la 1ère on Saturday.
On top of the wave of sackings announced by KNS, some 600 contractors relying on the plant’s activities have also lost their jobs since February.
Idle nickel transport trucks lined up on Koniambo mining site in New Caledonia. Image: RRB
Local unrest – world nickel crisis The announcement comes as New Caledonia’s economy is in a critical situation.
It has suffered a major blow, on top of an already grave financial situation.
Since May 13, violent unrest has been ongoing in New Caledonia, with a backdrop of protests against French-proposed modifications of voters’ eligibility for provincial elections, regarded by pro-independence movements as a bid to reduce the political voice of the indigenous Kanak community.
Since the riots, destruction, looting and arson began, more than 700 businesses have been destroyed, 10 people killed (eight civilians and two French gendarmes), and the overall cost of the unrest has topped 2.2 billion euros (NZ$4 billion).
During the riots and unrest, nickel mining sites have been specifically targeted several times.
Entire nickel sector in crisis New Caledonia’s nickel industry has also been in profound turmoil over past years.
Its other two plants — in the Southern province (Prony Resources) and historic operator Société le Nickel (SLN) in Doniambo near Nouméa — owned by French mining giant Eramet — are also on the verge of collapse.
The situation comes from a world nickel market now dominated by Indonesian units, which have started to produce nickel in mass quantities and at a much lower price.
The result was a collapse of the world nickel price — it slumped by 48 per cent in 2023.
New Caledonia’s production, in this context, was also regarded as too expensive, prompting efforts for a deep reform, especially on the cost structure such as electricity.
A French assistance plan proposed in 2023 by French Finance Minister Bruno Le Maire, including a 200 million euro (NZ$367 million) package, was declined by local authorities, who said too much was being asked by France in terms of strings attached to the massive funding loan.
The French-proposed reform also intended to diversify New Caledonia’s nickel buyers from an almost-entire reliance on Asian clients and instead turn to more European buyers, mostly car manufacturers for the purposes of production of batteries for electric cars.
Other plants on the verge of collapse As a result of the combined effects of the current situation (the ongoing riots and the pre-existing nickel crisis), Prony Resources’ operations are at a standstill.
Eramet, which in recent months had made no secret of its desire to disengage from SLN, earlier reported a net loss of some 72 million euros (NZ$133 million) for the first half of the financial year.
New Caledonia’s nickel industry is believed to employ about 25 percent of the French Pacific archipelago’s workforce.
This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.
Facebook has reportedly temporarily blocked posts published by an independent online news outlet in Solomon Islands after incorrectly labelling its content as “spam”.
In-Depth Solomons, a member centre of the non-profit OCCRP (Organised Crime and Corruption Reporting Project), was informed by the platform that more than 80 posts had been removed from its official page.
According to OCCRP, the outlet believes opponents of independent journalism in the country could behind the “coordinated campaign”.
“The reporters in Solomon Islands became aware of the problem on Thursday afternoon, when the platform informed them it had hidden at least 86 posts, including stories and photos,” OCCRP reported yesterday.
“Defining its posts as spam resulted in the removal for several hours of what appeared to be everything the news organisation had posted on Facebook since March last year.”
It said the platform also blocked its users from posting content from the outlet’s website, indepthsolomons.com.sb, saying that such links went against the platform’s “community standards”.
In-Depth Solomons has received criticism for its reporting by the Solomon Islands government and its supporters, both online and in local media, OCCRP said.
Expose on PM’s unexplained wealth
In April, it published an expose into the unexplained wealth of the nation’s former prime minister, Manasseh Sogavare.
In-depth Solomons editor Ofani Eremae said the content removal “may have been the result of a coordinated campaign by critics of his newsroom to file false complaints to Facebook en masse”.
“We firmly believe we’ve been targeted for the journalism we are doing here in Solomon Islands,” he was quoted as saying.
One of the Meta post removal alerts for Asia Pacific Report editor Dr David Robie over a human rights story on on 24 June 2024. Image: APR screenshot
“We don’t have any evidence at this stage on who did this to us, but we think people or organisations who do not want to see independent reporting in this country may be behind this.”
A spokesman for Meta, Ben Cheong, told OCCRP they needed more time to examine the issue.
This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ and permission from ABC.
Pacific Media Watch reports that in other cases of Facebook and Meta blocked posts, Asia Pacific Reports the removal of Kanaky, Palestine and West Papua decolonisation stories and human rights reports over claimed violation of “community standards”.
APR has challenged this removal of posts, including in the case of its editor Dr David Robie. Some have been restored while others have remained “blocked”.
Other journalists have also reported the removal of news posts.
By Stefan Armbruster, Harlyne Joku and Tria Dianti
No progress has been made in sending a UN human rights mission to Indonesia’s Papuan provinces despite the appointment of Fiji and Papua New Guinea’s prime ministers to negotiate the visit.
Pacific Island leaders have for more than a decade requested the UN’s involvement over reported abuses as the Indonesian military battles with the West Papua independence movement.
Fiji’s Sitiveni Rabuka and Papua New Guinea’s James Marape were appointed by the Melanesian Spearhead Group last year as special envoys to push for the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights’ visit directly with Indonesia’s president but so far to no avail.
Indonesian president-elect Prabowo Subianto (left) and Papua New Guinea’s Prime Minister James Marape chat during their meeting in Bogor, West Java, earlier this month. Image: Muchlis Jr/Biro Pers Sekertariat Presiden/BenarNews
“We have not been able to negotiate terms for an OHCHR visit to Papua,” Commissioner Volker Türk’s office in Geneva said in a statement to BenarNews.
“We remain very concerned about the situation in the region, with some reports indicating a significant increase in violent incidents and civilian casualties in 2023.
“We stress the importance of accountability for security forces and armed groups operating in Papua and the importance of addressing the underlying grievances and root causes of these conflicts.”
Formal invitation
Indonesia issued a formal invitation to the OHCHR in 2018 after Pacific leaders from Vanuatu, Solomon Islands, Tuvalu, Tonga and Marshall Islands for years repeatedly called out the human rights abuses at the UN General Assembly and other international fora.
The Pacific Islands Forum — the regional intergovernmental organisation of 18 nations — has called on Indonesia since 2019 to allow the mission to go ahead.
West Papuan leader Benny Wenda (left) and Fiji Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka in Suva in February 2023 . . . “We will support them [ULMWP] because they are Melanesians,” Rabuka said at the time. Image: Fiji govt/RNZ Pacific“We continue establishing a constructive engagement with the UN on the progress of human rights improvement in Indonesia,” Siti Ruhaini, senior advisor to the Indonesian Office of the President told BenarNews, including in “cases of the gross violation of human rights in the past that earned the appreciation from UN Human Rights Council”.
Indonesia’s military offered a rare apology in March after video emerged of soldiers repeatedly slashing a Papuan man with a bayonet while he was forced to stand in a water-filled drum.
The latest UN report highlights “systematic reports about the use of torture and other forms of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or ill-treatment in places of detention, in particular on Indigenous Papuans” and limited access to information about investigations conducted, individuals prosecuted and sentences.
In recent months there have been several deadly clashes in the region with many thousands reportedly left displaced after fleeing the fighting.
In June Indonesia was accused of exploiting a visit to Papua by the MSG director general to portray the region as “stable and conducive”, undermining efforts to secure Türk’s visit.
Invitation ‘still standing’
Siti told BenarNews the invitation to the UN “is still standing” while attempts are made to find the “best time (to) suit both sides.”
After years of delays the Melanesian Spearhead Group (MSG) — whose members are Fiji, Vanuatu, Papua New Guinea, Solomon Islands and New Caledonia’s Kanak independence movement — appointed the two prime ministers last November to negotiate directly.
A state visit by Marape to Indonesia last week left confusion over what discussions there were over human rights in the Papuan provinces or if the UN visit was raised.
PNG’s prime minister said last Friday that, on behalf of the MSG and his Fijian counterpart, he spoke with incumbent Indonesian President Joko Widodo and president-elect Parbowo Subianto and they were “very much sensitive to the issues of West Papua”.
“Basically we told him we’re concerned on human rights issues and (to) respect their culture, respect the people, respect their land rights,” Marape told a press conference on his return to Port Moresby in response to questions from BenarNews.
He said Prabowo indicated he would continue Jokowi’s policies towards the Papuan provinces and had hinted at “a moratorium or there will be an amnesty call out to those who still carry guns in West Papua”.
During Marape’s Indonesian visit, the neighbours acknowledged their respective sovereignty, celebrated the signing of several cross-border agreements and that the “relationship is standing in the right space”.
Human rights ‘not on agenda’
Siti from the Office of the President afterwards told BenarNews there were no discussions regarding the UN visit during the meeting between Marape and Jokowi and “human rights issues in Papua were not on the agenda.”
Further BenarNews enquiries with the President’s office about the conflicting accounts went unanswered.
Indonesia is an associate member of the MSG and the ULMWP has observer status. Neither have voting rights.
“That is part of the mandate from the leaders, that is the moral obligation to raise whether it is publicly or face-to-face because there are Papuans dying under the eyes of the Pacific leaders over the past 60 years,” president of the pro-independence United Liberation Movement of West Papua (ULMWP), Benny Wenda, told BenarNews.
“We are demanding full membership of the MSG so we can engage with Indonesia as equals and find solutions for peace.”
Decolonisation in the Pacific has been placed very firmly back on the international agenda after protests in the French territory of Kanaky New Caledonia in May turned violent leaving 10 people dead.
Kanaky New Caledonia riots
Riots erupted after indigenous Kanaks accused France of trying to dilute their voting bloc in New Caledonia after a disputed independence referendum process ended in 2021 leaving them in French hands.
Meeting in Japan late last week, MSG leaders called for a new referendum and the PIF secured agreement from France for a fact-finding mission to New Caledonia.
While in Tokyo for the meeting, Rabuka was reported by Islands Business as saying he would also visit Indonesia’s president with Marape “to discuss further actions regarding the people of West Papua”.
An independence struggle has simmered in Papua since the early 1960s when Indonesian forces invaded the region, which had remained under separate Dutch administration after Indonesia’s 1945 declaration of independence.
Indonesia argues it incorporated the comparatively sparsely populated and mineral rich territory under international law, as it was part of the Dutch East Indies empire that forms the basis for its modern borders.
Indonesian control was formalised in 1969 with a UN-supervised referendum in which little more than 1,000 Papuans were allowed to vote. Papuans say they were denied the right to decide their own future and are now marginalised in their own land.
Indonesia steps up ‘neutralising’ efforts
Indonesia in recent years has stepped up its efforts to neutralise Pacific support for the West Papuan independence movement, particularly among Melanesian nations that have ethnic and cultural links.
“Indonesia is increasingly engaging with the Pacific neighboring countries in a constructive way while respecting the sovereignty of each member,” Theofransus Litaay, senior advisor of the Executive Office of the President told BenarNews.
“Papua is always the priority and programme for Indonesia in the attempt to strengthen its position as the Pacific ‘veranda’ of Indonesia.”
The Fiji and PNG leaders previously met Jokowi, whose second five-year term finishes in October, on the sidelines of a global summit in San Francisco in November.
President Jokoki Widodo (center) in a trilateral meeting with Prime Minister of Papua New Guinea James Marape (left) and Prime Minister of Fiji Sitiveni Rabuka in San Francisco in November 2023. Image: Biro Pers Sekertariat Presiden/BenarNews
The two are due to report back on their progress at the annual MSG meeting scheduled for next month.
“If time permits, where we both can go back and see him on these issues, then we will go but I have many issues to attend to here,” Marape said in Port Moresby on Friday.
By Stefan Armbruster, Harlyne Joku and Tria Dianti
No progress has been made in sending a UN human rights mission to Indonesia’s Papuan provinces despite the appointment of Fiji and Papua New Guinea’s prime ministers to negotiate the visit.
Pacific Island leaders have for more than a decade requested the UN’s involvement over reported abuses as the Indonesian military battles with the West Papua independence movement.
Fiji’s Sitiveni Rabuka and Papua New Guinea’s James Marape were appointed by the Melanesian Spearhead Group last year as special envoys to push for the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights’ visit directly with Indonesia’s president but so far to no avail.
Indonesian president-elect Prabowo Subianto (left) and Papua New Guinea’s Prime Minister James Marape chat during their meeting in Bogor, West Java, earlier this month. Image: Muchlis Jr/Biro Pers Sekertariat Presiden/BenarNews
“We have not been able to negotiate terms for an OHCHR visit to Papua,” Commissioner Volker Türk’s office in Geneva said in a statement to BenarNews.
“We remain very concerned about the situation in the region, with some reports indicating a significant increase in violent incidents and civilian casualties in 2023.
“We stress the importance of accountability for security forces and armed groups operating in Papua and the importance of addressing the underlying grievances and root causes of these conflicts.”
Formal invitation
Indonesia issued a formal invitation to the OHCHR in 2018 after Pacific leaders from Vanuatu, Solomon Islands, Tuvalu, Tonga and Marshall Islands for years repeatedly called out the human rights abuses at the UN General Assembly and other international fora.
The Pacific Islands Forum — the regional intergovernmental organisation of 18 nations — has called on Indonesia since 2019 to allow the mission to go ahead.
West Papuan leader Benny Wenda (left) and Fiji Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka in Suva in February 2023 . . . “We will support them [ULMWP] because they are Melanesians,” Rabuka said at the time. Image: Fiji govt/RNZ Pacific“We continue establishing a constructive engagement with the UN on the progress of human rights improvement in Indonesia,” Siti Ruhaini, senior advisor to the Indonesian Office of the President told BenarNews, including in “cases of the gross violation of human rights in the past that earned the appreciation from UN Human Rights Council”.
Indonesia’s military offered a rare apology in March after video emerged of soldiers repeatedly slashing a Papuan man with a bayonet while he was forced to stand in a water-filled drum.
The latest UN report highlights “systematic reports about the use of torture and other forms of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or ill-treatment in places of detention, in particular on Indigenous Papuans” and limited access to information about investigations conducted, individuals prosecuted and sentences.
In recent months there have been several deadly clashes in the region with many thousands reportedly left displaced after fleeing the fighting.
In June Indonesia was accused of exploiting a visit to Papua by the MSG director general to portray the region as “stable and conducive”, undermining efforts to secure Türk’s visit.
Invitation ‘still standing’
Siti told BenarNews the invitation to the UN “is still standing” while attempts are made to find the “best time (to) suit both sides.”
After years of delays the Melanesian Spearhead Group (MSG) — whose members are Fiji, Vanuatu, Papua New Guinea, Solomon Islands and New Caledonia’s Kanak independence movement — appointed the two prime ministers last November to negotiate directly.
A state visit by Marape to Indonesia last week left confusion over what discussions there were over human rights in the Papuan provinces or if the UN visit was raised.
PNG’s prime minister said last Friday that, on behalf of the MSG and his Fijian counterpart, he spoke with incumbent Indonesian President Joko Widodo and president-elect Parbowo Subianto and they were “very much sensitive to the issues of West Papua”.
“Basically we told him we’re concerned on human rights issues and (to) respect their culture, respect the people, respect their land rights,” Marape told a press conference on his return to Port Moresby in response to questions from BenarNews.
He said Prabowo indicated he would continue Jokowi’s policies towards the Papuan provinces and had hinted at “a moratorium or there will be an amnesty call out to those who still carry guns in West Papua”.
During Marape’s Indonesian visit, the neighbours acknowledged their respective sovereignty, celebrated the signing of several cross-border agreements and that the “relationship is standing in the right space”.
Human rights ‘not on agenda’
Siti from the Office of the President afterwards told BenarNews there were no discussions regarding the UN visit during the meeting between Marape and Jokowi and “human rights issues in Papua were not on the agenda.”
Further BenarNews enquiries with the President’s office about the conflicting accounts went unanswered.
Indonesia is an associate member of the MSG and the ULMWP has observer status. Neither have voting rights.
“That is part of the mandate from the leaders, that is the moral obligation to raise whether it is publicly or face-to-face because there are Papuans dying under the eyes of the Pacific leaders over the past 60 years,” president of the pro-independence United Liberation Movement of West Papua (ULMWP), Benny Wenda, told BenarNews.
“We are demanding full membership of the MSG so we can engage with Indonesia as equals and find solutions for peace.”
Decolonisation in the Pacific has been placed very firmly back on the international agenda after protests in the French territory of Kanaky New Caledonia in May turned violent leaving 10 people dead.
Kanaky New Caledonia riots
Riots erupted after indigenous Kanaks accused France of trying to dilute their voting bloc in New Caledonia after a disputed independence referendum process ended in 2021 leaving them in French hands.
Meeting in Japan late last week, MSG leaders called for a new referendum and the PIF secured agreement from France for a fact-finding mission to New Caledonia.
While in Tokyo for the meeting, Rabuka was reported by Islands Business as saying he would also visit Indonesia’s president with Marape “to discuss further actions regarding the people of West Papua”.
An independence struggle has simmered in Papua since the early 1960s when Indonesian forces invaded the region, which had remained under separate Dutch administration after Indonesia’s 1945 declaration of independence.
Indonesia argues it incorporated the comparatively sparsely populated and mineral rich territory under international law, as it was part of the Dutch East Indies empire that forms the basis for its modern borders.
Indonesian control was formalised in 1969 with a UN-supervised referendum in which little more than 1,000 Papuans were allowed to vote. Papuans say they were denied the right to decide their own future and are now marginalised in their own land.
Indonesia steps up ‘neutralising’ efforts
Indonesia in recent years has stepped up its efforts to neutralise Pacific support for the West Papuan independence movement, particularly among Melanesian nations that have ethnic and cultural links.
“Indonesia is increasingly engaging with the Pacific neighboring countries in a constructive way while respecting the sovereignty of each member,” Theofransus Litaay, senior advisor of the Executive Office of the President told BenarNews.
“Papua is always the priority and programme for Indonesia in the attempt to strengthen its position as the Pacific ‘veranda’ of Indonesia.”
The Fiji and PNG leaders previously met Jokowi, whose second five-year term finishes in October, on the sidelines of a global summit in San Francisco in November.
President Jokoki Widodo (center) in a trilateral meeting with Prime Minister of Papua New Guinea James Marape (left) and Prime Minister of Fiji Sitiveni Rabuka in San Francisco in November 2023. Image: Biro Pers Sekertariat Presiden/BenarNews
The two are due to report back on their progress at the annual MSG meeting scheduled for next month.
“If time permits, where we both can go back and see him on these issues, then we will go but I have many issues to attend to here,” Marape said in Port Moresby on Friday.
When Melbourne-born Helen Hill, an outstanding social activist, scholar and academic, died on 7 May 2024 at the age of 79, the Timorese government sent its Education Minister, Dulce de Jesus Soares, to deliver a moving eulogy at the funeral service at Church of All Nations in Carlton.
Helen will be remembered for many things, but above all for her 50 years of dedication to friendship with the people of Timor-Leste and solidarity in their struggle for independence.
At the funeral, Steve Bracks, chancellor of Victoria University and former premier of Victoria, also paid tribute to Helen’s lifetime commitment to social justice and to the independence and flourishing of Timor-Leste in particular.
Further testimonies were presented by Jean McLean (formerly a member of the Victorian Legislative Council), the Australia-East Timor Association, representatives of local Timorese groups and Helen’s family. Helen’s long-time friend, the Reverend Barbara Gayler, preached on the theme of solidarity.
Helen was born on 22 February 1945, the eldest of four children of Robert Hill and Jessie Scovell. Her sister Alison predeceased her, and she is survived by her sister Margaret and her brother Ian and their children and grandchildren.
Her father fought with the Australian army in New Guinea before working for the Commonwealth Bank and becoming a branch manager. Her mother was a social worker at the repatriation hospital.
The family were members of the Presbyterian Church in Blackburn, which fostered an attitude of caring for others.
Studied political science
Helen’s secondary schooling was at Presbyterian Ladies College, where she enjoyed communal activities such as choir. She began a science course at the University of Melbourne but transferred to Monash University to study sociology and political science, graduating with a BA (Hons) in 1970.
At Monash, Helen was an enthusiastic member of the Labor Club and the Student Christian Movement (SCM), where issues of social justice were regularly debated.
Opposition to the war in Vietnam was the main focus of concern during her time at Monash. In 1970, Helen was a member of the organising committee for the first moratorium demonstration in Melbourne and also a member of the executive committee of the Australian SCM (ASCM, the national body) which was based in Melbourne.
She edited Political Concern, an alternative information service, for ASCM. In 1971, Helen was a founding member of International Development Action. Helen was a great networker, always ready to see what she could learn from others.
Perhaps the most formative moment in Helen’s career was her appointment as a frontier intern, to work on the Southern Africa section of the Europe/Africa Project of the World Student Christian Federation, based in London (1971-1973). This project aimed to document how colonial powers had exploited the resources of their colonies, as well as the impact of apartheid in South Africa.
In those years, she also studied at the Institute d’Action Culturelle in Geneva, which was established by Paulo Freire, arguably her most significant teacher. The insights and contacts from this time of engagement with global issues of justice and education provided a strong foundation for Helen’s subsequent career.
In 1974, Helen embarked on a Master of Arts course supervised by the late Professor Herb Feith. Helen had met student leaders from the Portuguese colonies of Mozambique and Angola in the Europe/Africa project, who asked her about East Timor (“so close to Australia”).
East Timor thesis topic
Recognising that she, along with most Australians, knew very little about East Timor, Helen proposed East Timor as the focus of her master’s thesis. She began to learn Portuguese for this purpose.
Following the overthrow of the authoritarian regime in Portugal in April 1974 and the consequent opportunities for independence in the Portuguese colonies, she visited East Timor for three months in early 1975, where she was impressed by the programme and leadership of Fretilin, the main independence party.
Her plans were thwarted by the Indonesian invasion of East Timor in December 1975, and she was unable to revisit East Timor until after the achievement of independence in 2000. Her 1978 Master of Arts thesis included an account of the Fretilin plans rather than the Fretilin achievements.
Her 1976 book, The Timor Story, was a significant document of the desire of East Timorese people for independence and influenced the keeping of East Timor on the UN decolonisation list. She was a co-founder of the Australia-East Timor Association, which was founded in the initial days of the Indonesian invasion.
Helen was a founding member of the organisation Campaign Against Racial Exploitation in 1975. She was prolific in writing and speaking for these causes, not simply as an advocate, but also as a capable analyst of many situations of decolonisation. She was published regularly in Nation Review and also appeared in many other publications concerned with international affairs and development.
Helen was awarded a rare diploma of education (tertiary education method) from the University of Melbourne in 1980. From 1980 to 1983, she was a full-time doctoral student at Australian National University, culminating in a thesis about non-formal education and development in Fiji, New Caledonia and the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands (the islands of the north Pacific).
Helen participated in significant international conferences on education and development in these years and was involved in occasional teaching in the nations and territories of her thesis.
Teaching development studies
In 1991, she was appointed lecturer at Victoria University to teach development studies, which, among other things, attracted a steady stream of students from Timor-Leste. In 2000, she was able to return to Timor-Leste as part of her work for Victoria University.
An immediate fruit of her work in 2001 was a memorandum of understanding between Victoria University and the Dili Institute of Technology, followed in 2005 with another between Victoria University and the National University of Timor-Leste.
One outcome of this latter relationship has been biennial conferences on development, held in Dili. Also in 2005, she was a co-founder of the Timor-Leste Studies Association.
Helen stood for quality education and for high academic standards that can empower all students. In 2014, Helen was honoured by the government of Timor-Leste with the award of the Order of Timor-Leste (OT-L).
Retiring from Victoria University in 2014, Helen chose to live in Timor-Leste, while returning to Melbourne regularly. She continued to teach in Dili and was employed by the Timor-Leste Ministry of Education in 2014 and from 2018 until her death.
Helen came to Melbourne in late 2023, planning to return to Timor-Leste early in 2024, where further work awaited her.
A routine medical check-up unexpectedly found significant but symptom-free cancer, which developed rapidly, though it did not prevent her from attending public events days before her death on May 7. Friends and family are fulsome in their praise of Helen’s brother Ian, who took time off work to give her daily care during her last weeks.
Helen had a distinguished academic career, with significant teaching and research focusing on the links between development and education, particularly in the Pacific context, though with a fully global perspective.
Helen had an ever-expanding network of contacts and friends around the world, on whom she relied for critical enlightenment on issues of concern.
From Blackburn to Dili, inspired by sharp intelligence, compassion, Christian faith and a careful reading of the signs of the times, Helen lived by a vision of the common good and strove mightily to build a world of peace and justice.
Sandy Yule was general secretary of the Australian Student Christian Movement from 1970-75, where he first met Helen Hill, and is a minister of the Uniting Church in Australia. He wrote this tribute with help from Helen Hill’s family and friends. It was first published by The Age newspaper and is republished from the DevPolicy Blog at Australian National University.
(@uriohau) 
