fPcN interCultural:

friends of Peoples close to Nature

TO A FREE WEST PAPUA

It is meaningful for a person to spend time writing and publishing reliable articles in order to raise and debate important issues. It is inappropriate, however, for a person to publish articles (whether it be in books, journals or on the internet) when the topic and the publication is not researched properly, providing inaccurate, misplaced or solely speculative data. This creates unsuitable grounds for interesting debates, rather forcing other parties concerned to correct mistakes and obviously wrong believes made by those who initiated the topic.

In this context the article by Mr. Lee Jones “Is West Papua being Eco-Colonised?” is a good example and makes it unfortunately necessary to rectify the lack of research and understanding by Mr Lee Jones regarding several aspects of his article. His original publication can be found at http://www.spiked-online.com/index.php?/site/article/4944/.

Mr Jones’ opinions are based on his interpretations from an interview with an exile from West Papua who is currently residing in Oxford, as well as second-hand literary information.

In his opening paragraph, Mr Jones criticises independent movements in general for not “demanding our respect as self determining peoples”, but rather “depict[ing] themselves as victims”. After this sweeping statement he focuses on West Papua and their struggle for freedom against grave Indonesian military rule, recognising that the Organisation for a Free Papua (OPM), “armed with bows and arrows was no match for Indonesian troops.” Yet from the latter sentence it seems clear that Papuans did in fact demonstrate self-determination but were up against the Indonesian military – clearly an unfair disposition for local tribes –, and therefore sought international assistance. His first two paragraphs thus stand in contradiction to each other.

Rather than criticising international organisations which extend a helping hand during West Papua’s struggle, it would be purposeful to recommend ways in which Papuans could be mobilised in order to gain their freedom, without the occurrence of genocide. Papuans are currently living as foreigners on their own land under Indonesian rule. A mining company, Freeport-McMoRan Copper & Gold, is also operating PT Freeport Indonesia in the heart of West Papua. This mine is one of the reasons why Indonesia continues to refuse freedom to Papuans’ because of the economic benefits and wealth it provides for the Indonesian president and his government. Papuans have been unable to protect their natural resources from the kind of exploitation, which “promises few – if any – direct and sustained benefits for these indigenous populations” (Albertson, 2008). Local residents in the vicinity of the mine are further confronted with displacement problems as well as an over-dependency on the mine (Muller, 1996).

Author and journalist Robert Bryce (1996) accurately remarked that “Freeport CEO Jim Bob Moffett has little patience with anyone who doesn't see the world exactly as he does.” Mr Jones obviously exhibits a similar attitude towards human rights organisations and environmentalists, criticising these parties for supporting tribal people’s way of life rather than following in the footsteps of “destructive Westerners.” It is well-known that industrialisation has caused an increase in population as well as in per capita consumption rates, therefore placing tremendous pressures on natural resources (Bodley, 1975). Still, Mr Jones advocates the idea that “to dominate nature through rapid industrial development ­ [is] the only way any people has successfully overcome poverty.” Ethnocentric beliefs persist that tribal people are ‘backward’ and need to ‘catch up’ with western ways, even though there are many people (tribal and modern) who prefer a better quality of life in terms of respect for values and ways of life, close family ties, intimacy with nature, good integrity and leisure time, rather than a high standard of living in terms of GNP/per capita income, increased consumption of manufactured goods, and an increase in labour time (Johnson, 1978; Bodley, 1975).

Mr Jones further criticises environmentalists who “attack development projects in poor countries…” It should be noted that these “attacks” aren’t necessarily aimed at “holding back development”, but rather at the manner in which these so called development projects are being implemented, since most are often doomed to fail. Mr. Jones fails to demonstrate even a single example where development projects have actually helped and are seen as beneficial by the local community in medium or long term.

Although Mr Jones might seem concerned with overcoming the impoverished lives of tribal people, he does so without understanding their lifestyles and their connection to the natural environment. Papuans were actually unaware of the fact that they might have been poor until they were introduced to the western monetary system and manufactured goods. This is evident when visiting the area. Development has brought prosperity for some, but for others it has brought poverty and a decline in quality of life (refer to research by Bodley; Arce and Long, 2000; Chambers, 1997). It is difficult to imagine West Papua without economic development after independence, as they have had prolonged exposure to it through missionaries, the Freeport mine, the Indonesian government and tourism. But for Mr Jones to state the following shows once again his indifference towards the people involved themselves:

“…it's far from obvious that tribal people really reject the massive benefits of economic development and just want to live as they always have done.”

It might be “far from obvious” in literature and other second-hand sources, but with direct experience it becomes very obvious that there are tribal people who want to avoid so-called progress. In cases where tribal people desire future economic development, it is crucial that they are made aware of all the necessary facts and figures regarding the developing world in order for them to make their own prior informed decision as a community and be prepared. The colonial approach to single out a few "leaders" and to compromise and corrupt them with personal gains for pushing their own people into the direction desired by the "developers" is the daily reality worldwide and apparently also fostered by Mr. Jones, since he speaks out against organizations which fight such practises. False propaganda as published by Mr. Jones is a major causal factor for members of many tribal communities to go against each other, as has been documented widely (see: www.survival-international.org, www.fpcn-global.org, www.ogiek.org, www.akha.org, www.vanishingrites.com, etc.).

“Outsiders who come here always claim they are bringing progress. But all they bring are empty promises. What we’re really struggling for is our land. Above all else this is what we need.” (Arau, Penan Man, Sarawak, Malaysia, 2007, in a Survival International publication, 2008)

Mr Jones concludes his article by saying:

“But they [tribal people] also surely deserve the right to achieve a better standard of living than one limited, if indigenists get their way, to the import of bush knives and shovels.”

Thinkers like Mr Jones should adopt a cultural relativistic approach when discussing different cultures. Cultures should thus be viewed within their own history and context, without being judged according to others’ standards. When dealing with humanitarian issues like the above, it is important to liberate oneself from strict academic thinking, and add a compassionate element to the problem at hand. Unfortunately Mr Jones demonstrates a premature misunderstanding of human rights organisations, environmentalists and the tribal people of West Papua, choosing to argue over issues he has no direct experience with.

“Is West Papua being eco-colonised?” Is it really worth attacking NGO’s and environmentalists when the principal negative impact on West Papua emanates from Freeport Indonesia and the Indonesian government and its military?

The very person who was interviewed and for whom Mr. Lee Jones from Nuffield
College, Oxford allegedly speaks, is appalled by this article. One has to ask what the real reason for this unscientific propaganda is.

References:

Albertson, A. 2008. One response to “Is West Papua being eco-colonised?” Available: http://westpapuafree.wordpress.com/2008/04/07/is-west-papua-being-eco-co... [Accessed 30 May 2008]

Arau, Penan Man, Sarawak, Malaysia, 2007. Progress can kill: how imposed development destroys the health of tribal peoples in a Survival International publication, 2008.

Arce, A. and Long, N. 2000. Anthropology, development and modernities: exploring discourses, counter-tendencies and violence. London: Routledge.

Bodley, J.H. 1975. Victims of progress. California: Cummings Publishing Company.

Bodley, J.H. 1988. Tribal peoples and development issues: a global overview. California: Mayfield Publishing Company.

Bodley, J.H. 1997. Cultural anthropology: tribes, states and the global system. California: Mayfield Publishing Company.

Bryce, R. 1996. Spinning gold. Mother Jones Magazine. September/October.

Chambers, E. (ed). 1997. Tourism and culture: an applied perspective. Albany: State University of New York Press.

Johnson, A. 1978. In search of the affluent society. Human Nature Magazine. September. Human Nature, Inc.

Muller, K. 1996. Irian Jaya, Indonesian New Guinea: Periplus Adventure Guide. Periplus editions: Eric Oey.

End.

Anyone wishing to complain further to Lee Jones is invited to on these E-Mails: leejones_san@hotmail.com, lee.jones@politics.ox.ac.uk

Region

• West Papua

Tribe

• West Papuan