Date: 22 May 1998 20:15:40
From:
Subject: Showdown between Wiranto and Prabowo
The reports we are getting of the situation tonight in Jakarta vary in
important respects from the report received by Joyo. I will set them down as
conveyed to me or seen on CNN this evening:
1. In addition to the four high-ranking generals sacked today as reported
in an earlier posting, several other senior officers have been or are about
to be sacked, including the national chief of police, the Jakarta police of
chief and the head of the intelligence agency, BAKIN. This is being seen as
a thorough purge of Prabowo's allies.
2. Prabowo is using the time between the announcement of his replacement as
KOSTRAD commander and the handing-over ceremony tomorrow to stage a huge
show of force or possibly a coup attempt. In other words, the clash between
Wiranto and Prabowo now seems to be coming to a head and could go one way or
the other in the next few hours, though it would appear that Wiranto has the
upper hand.
3. First with regard to the events at the Parliament building: The students
have now been removed from the area and driven in trucks to several
university campuses near each other, Atma Jaya, Trisakti, Tarumanegara and
others. Hundreds of troops were deployed in this operation which appears to
have been aimed at protecting the students from likely attacks expected to
be launched against them early Saturday morning. From one source, I heard
earlier this evening that pro-Habibie thugs were expected to arrive at the
DPR early Saturday morning to provoke more scuffles with the students, thus
precipitating intervention by the army against the anti-Habibie students.
This now appears to have been averted.
4. The troops involved in this operation were mainly from the Marines and
KOSTRAD. The KOSTRAD troops being deployed are not (yet) loyal to Prabowo
who has only been in command of the force for a couple of months.
5. According to the BBC's Jonathan Head tonight, and from what we saw on
CNN, hundreds of students occupying Parliament made strenuous attempts to
resist their eviction but were eventually driven away in buses made ready
for them. Local residents watched the operation from the sielines, jeering
the troops and cheering on the students. The troops were armed with
automatic machine guns, M16 rifles, electric cattle prods, truncheons and
other weapons. The students eventually left singing patriotic songs and
shouting anti-Habibie slogans. There have been no reports of injuries
although ambulances were stationed nearby.
6. The presidential palace located in central Jakarta, some distance from
the Parliament, is ringed by troops apparently loyal to Wiranto, held at
some distance from the palace. All streets into the area are now blocked.
7. There are also a number of troops - from the Marines and KOSTRAD - in
Jalan Sudirman where Atma Jaya and the other universities are located,
keeping guard outside the campuses.
8. Our contact who is on the scene says that he can see a large number of
trucks loaded with 'cargoes' covered with tarpaulin. He thinks that these
'cargoes' are in fact soldiers. He says that a massive show of force between
the two rival factions in ABRI is now underway and suggests that Prabowo,
infuriated at his ousting, intends some time tonight to stage a coup.
According to several reports, Prabowo tore off his insignia when he heard
about his sacking. He thought that a deal had been struck for him to be
appointed army chief of staff with a seat in Habibie's cabinet. We are
witnesses to a major conflict within the military elite. It is thought to be
the intention of the Prabowo faction to launch an assault on the palace
which is now ringed by Wiranto troops. The main forces behind Prabowo are
from Kopassus and some Kostrad troops.
9. Our contact says that troop deployments on both sides have been beefed
up by reinforcements brought into the capital from far afield.
10. The struggle will possibly come to ahead in the next few hours and we
can expect to know the outcome tomorrow.
************************************
From: "Perdana Alamsyah" <>
To:
Subject: NO COUP!
Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 10:59:14 +0700
NO COUP IN JAKARTA. IT HAS BEEN CONFIRMED.
Sources says that pro-Wiranto army troops has been in command, in and
around the presidential palace. All the high ranking officers that belong
to the elite corps of Kopasus has been removed from their position: The
Army Chief of Staff General Subagyo, the Jakarta Military Commander General
Syafrie Sjamsudin, and the Commander of the elite corps Kopasus General
Muchdi. Along with Prabowo the last two mentioned are well-known as the
trio of terror. Meanwhile the students is now well guarded by the
sympathetic Marine Corps inside the compound of Atmajaya University.
BUT PLEASE REMEMBER, IF YOU HEARD AND CONFIRMED THAT ANY COUP D'ETAT IS
GOING TO HAPPEN, ALL THE PEOPLE SHOULD ASSEMBLE IN NEARBY CAMPUSES, CONTACT
THE STUDENT LEADERS, AND GATHER IN A MASS FORCE. HOUSEWIVES COLLECTS ALL
THE FOOD SUPPLY THEY CAN GET FOR THE NEARBY UNIVERSITIES, ARRANGE PLACES
WHERE THEY CAN ENTRUSTED THE
CHILDREN. EVERYBODY WHO OWNS A COMPUTER SHOULD SEND NEWS ABOUT WHAT IS
GOING ON TO EVERY E-MAIL ADDRESS THEY KNOW.
Thank you for your time. The student and the people of Indonesia need your
sympathy.
********************************
Date: Wed, 20 May 1998 07:36:47 -0700 (PDT)
From: ki ageng <>
Subject: Hati-hati Terhadap Makhluk Bermuka Dua
To:
Salam Reformasi
Dengan makin gencarnya tekanan terhadap pihak penguasa yang dilakukan
oleh masyarakat, maka terlihat banyak pembelotan dari antek-antek
$uharto belakangan ini. Yang paling menyolok adalah ucapan Harmoko
yang selama ini kita selalu kenal sebagai anjing penjaga keluarga
$uharto. Dengan gagahnya dia pada tanggal 18 Mei menyatakan bahwa MPR
dan DPR akan "meminta" $uharto untuk turun dari jabatan presiden
sesuai dengan aspirasi rakyat. Cuman sayangnya pada malam harinya
Wiranto muncul dan menyatakan ABRI tetap mendukung $uharto. Ini adalah
salah satu contoh kejadian bahwa Harmoko lebih rendah daripada seekor
anjing; karena seekor anjingpun masih mempunyai kesetiaan yang tak
terbatas terhadap majikannya. Entah dimana akhlak orang yang mengaku
sebagai HAJI tetapi tingkahnya tidak lebih baik daripada seorang
pelacur yang menjual diri daripada siapa saja yang lebih menguntungkan
dirinya.
Abdul Latief yang sudah terkenal diseluruh Indonesia karena memeras
hasil jerih payah buruh Indonesia melalui Jamsostek (Jaminan Sok Sial
Tenaga Kerja) tiba-tiba saja merasa bahwa dia perlu mendekatkan diri
lebih banyak pada keluarganya. Mungkin dia lupa, bahwa dua bulan yang
lalu dia sempat melakukan selamatan karena terpilih sebagai Menteri
Pariwisata dan pada waktu itu tidak pernah terpikir bahwa waktunya
harus disisakan untuk keluarga juga. Kita semua sudah tahu bahwa
makhluk yang satu ini juga seorang HAJI dan juga mempunyai anak yang
mempunyai perusahaan yang memberangkatkan para calon Haji dan kemudian
menelantarkan mereka di Saudi Arabia karena merasa bahwa dia rugi.
Memang dia perlu mendekatkan diri pada keluarganya, sehingga dia dapat
memberikan pendidikan atau mendapatkan pendidikan yang lebih baik
lagi, terutama dalam pendidikan mentalnya sebagai seorang HAJI.
Probosutejo adalah contoh lain yang perlu diwaspadai. Makhluk yang
satu ini ceritanya punya pendidikan sebagai seorang HAJI dan guru
madrasyah dia seharusnya memberikan contoh yang baik. Tetapi kita
lihat mental dan tingkah lakunya. Dalam waktu kurang dari 20 tahun,
seorang guru yang hanya punya sepeda saja tiba-tiba saja bisa menjadi
seorang konglomerat. Seorang dengan nama William Gates berhasil
mencapai posisi konglomerat di Amerika dalam kurun waktu yang sama,
tetapi semua itu dilakukan dalam lingkungan yang jujur dan dia memang
mempunyai otak yang sangat cerdas.. Bagaimana dengan makhluk yang satu
ini ? Otak saja hanya pas-pasan; itupun kalau dia punya. Pendidikan
hanya terbatas pada pendidikan guru sekolah madrasah, modal hanya
sepeda. Lucunya, dengan gigih dia sekarang ini menerbitkan buku segala
dan mengkritik $uharto karena tidak mendengarkan nasihatnya dalam hal
nepotisme. Memangnya harta yang sekarang dipunyai oleh Probo$utejo
sekarang ini diperoleh bukan karena nepotisme ? Apakah dia memang
punya kemampuan yang sedemikian hebatnya sehingga apa yang dicapai
sekarang ini memang hasil jerih payahnya selama bertahun-tahun ? Semua
orang juga tahu, apa yang diperolehnya sebagai saudara tiri $uharto.
Beberapa contoh diatas adalah contoh daripada anjing-anjing geladak
yang siap menggigit majikannya untuk menyelamatkan diri sendiri.
Apapun dapat dilakukan oleh makhluk-makhluk (sebutan orang saya kira
terlalu tinggi untuk mereka) untuk melindungi dirinya dari ancaman
reformasi yang sekarang ini sedang bergaung di Indonesia. Hal ini
perlu diwaspadai dan dicatat bahwa harta yang mereka peroleh dan pasti
sudah diamankan diluar negeri adalah hasil jarahan daripada rakyat
Indonesia selama 35 tahun terakhir ini. Harta yang dikumpulkan oleh
makhluk-makhluk ini harus dikembalikan pada negara bila kita mau agar
pembangunan Indonesia yang telah dijalankan selama hampir 35 tahun
terakhir ini tidak sia-sia. Hampir sebagian besar; kalaupun tidak mau
dikatakan semuanya; manusia-manusia yang pernah menjabat suatu posisi
di pemerintahan di Indonesia adalah merupakan bagian dari suatu
jaringan mafia penjarahan kekayaan Indonesia. Mereka ini dengan
menggunakan kekuatan senjata yang tidak dipunyai oleh rakyat telah
dengan semena-mena merampas, menjarah, merampok dan menipu milik
rakyat dan negara Indonesia guna kepentingan diri pribadi mereka. Kita
semua tahu, berapa besar gaji seorang pejabat pemerintahan dari
tingkatan tertentu. Kalau makhluk seperti Fuad Bawasir bisa mempunyai
vila mewah di Amerika, maka kita bisa menghitung sendiri bagaimana
rumah tersebut dapat dibeli. Apalagi hal itu dilakukan sebelum dia
menjadi Menteri Keuangan, tentunya dapat kita bayangkan berapa banyak
harta rakyat yang dijarahnya selama dia bekerja sebagai pejabat
pemerintah.
Reformasi yang dicanangkan bukan dengan maksud untuk balas dendam,
tetapi harus diingat, bahwa kekayaan Indonesia yang dicuri oleh
makhluk-makhluk ini adalah dalam jumlah yang sangat besar sekali.
Kekayaan ini akan sangat berguna bagi pembangunan kembali ekonomi
Indonesia setelah reformasi berhasil dilaksanakan dengan sempurna.
Sikap daripada para makhluk bermuka dua ini harus diwaspadai karena
dengan mudah kita dapat terjebak oleh mulut manis dan sikap mereka
yang membebankan semua dosa pada $uharto nantinya. Memang benar bahwa
yang terbanyak menikmati harta jarahan tersebut adalah $uharto, tetapi
bukan berarti harta daripada rakyat Indonesia yang dicuri oleh para
makhluk ini kecil jumlahnya. Laporan dari GJA telah memberikan detail
tentang apa saja yang dipunyai oleh siapa di Indonesia. Data ini
mungkin tidak 100% benar, tetapi tidak ada salahnya bila data tersebut
dipergunakan sebagai basis untuk mengusut kekayaan dan mengejar
kekayaan bangsa Indonesia yang sudah dijarah dan dilarikan diluar
negeri. Saya kira tidak akan terlalu sulit untuk melacak
makhluk-makhluk ini diluar negeri karena kebiasaan mereka yang rasanya
sulit dirubah.
_________________________________________________________
DO YOU YAHOO!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
************************************
Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 12:01:51 +1000 (EST)
From: Gerry Van Klinken <>
To:
Subject: DIGEST - Suharto's crimes against humanity
X-URL: http://insideindonesia.org/digest/dig60.htm
DIGEST No.60
Suharto's crimes against humanity
23 May, 1998
[For The Weekend Australian, 23 May, 1998]
Young Indonesian demonstrators danced in the fountains of parliament
when they heard of Suharto's resignation. Among them were the children
of some of the tens or hundreds of thousands who died in
army-sponsored massacres when he came to power in 1965-66. Among them
too were the children of the hundreds of thousands who died after his
army invaded East Timor in December 1975.
These were the worst. Thousands more died in numerous other massacres
perpetrated by the harsh regime General Suharto put in place over
three decades ago. The angry bereaved in Indonesia number in their
many millions. They want to know - will Suharto now face trial for
crimes against humanity?
It seemed an unattainable goal a mere six months ago. Even now, the
New Order may not be over. Wednesday's army-backed transfer of power
to vice-president Habibie was an elite affair that does not satisfy
wide-ranging demands for a new political order. But the opposition is
unlikely to accept the Habibie appointment. Even with army backing, he
may not survive. If Habibie falls as well, and the opposition
impresses itself strongly on a new government, it will want to close
the books on the many wrongs of the New Order.
Many Indonesians may not realise that the international legal
machinery is available to do exactly that. It has developed
considerably since the Nuremberg and Tokyo trials at the close of
World War II, which were somewhat tainted with the flavour of
'victor's justice'.
In 1993, the United Nations Security Council empowered an
International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) to
'prosecute persons responsible for serious violations of international
humanitarian law'. These could include genocide, crimes against
humanity, grave breaches of the Geneva conventions of 1949, and
violations of the laws of war, all specified in various conventions.
A similar tribunal was established for Rwanda in 1994. Last May 1,
Jean Kambanda, former Prime Minister of Rwanda, pleaded guilty to
charges of genocide and crimes against humanity. Kambanda will
probably be sentenced to a maximum of life imprisonment.
On April 30, the United States announced its intention to request that
the Security Council establish an International Criminal Tribunal to
try Cambodian former Khmer Rouge leaders on charges of genocide and
crimes against humanity.
A case could be made that under international law former president
Suharto committed crimes against humanity. He directed the Indonesian
armed forces that murdered tens of thousands or hundreds of thousands
of overwhelmingly unarmed civilians in 1965 and 1966.
It is not known whether Suharto personally killed Indonesian Communist
Party members, or simply left that to colleagues, subordinates and
civilian allies. But he exercised both direct and command
responsibility for the planning and execution of what amounted to a
massive crime against humanity in those years.
Professor Richard Tanter, an Australian teaching at Kyoto Seika
University in Japan, says in a paper about to be published that such a
tribunal would serve three purposes. First, to punish the guilty. By
ordinary human standards, Suharto and his colleagues committed - and
then benefitted greatly from - crimes on a horrific scale. Second, to
deter such acts in the future, by establishing the possibility that
such leaders may have to take responsibility for their actions. Third,
to establish a basis for national reconciliation and the overcoming of
deep collective trauma.
Foreign governments, including Australia, should recognise the
political importance of righting the wrongs of the past. They should
place the issue of an International Criminal Tribunal for Indonesia on
the agenda of the Security Council.
Gerry van Klinken, editor, 'Inside Indonesia' magazine.
*************************************
Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 12:03:10 +1000 (EST)
From: Gerry Van Klinken <>
To:
Subject: DIGEST - Has the New Order ended?
X-URL: http://insideindonesia.org/digest/dig59.htm
DIGEST No.59
Has the New Order ended?
22 May, 1998
[An earlier version of this appeared in the Melbourne Age, 22 May
1998]
It is still hard to believe. Suharto implanted his conservative, wily
personality on Indonesian politics for over three decades. Now he is
gone. Citizen Suharto. President Habibie. Indonesian politics are so
personalised it is easy to assume that Suharto's resignation means the
end of the now entirely anachronistic 'New Order'. But is it?
On Tuesday Suharto announced what was evidently 'Plan A'. He would
continue as president, but would oversee a comprehensive reform
process. It didn't wash with the Indonesian people. Nor, more
importantly, with the elite around him. On Thursday 21 May he
announced 'Plan B'. He stepped down to make way for his vice-
president, but made no further mention of a reform process.
After announcing his resignation he said Habibie would continue as
president until 2003. That suggests he did not have in mind a special
session of the super-parliament (MPR) before then, at which another
president could be chosen. Nor were elections mentioned. An outgoing
president of course cannot set the agenda for his successor, but the
suggestion seemed clear.
Behind the scenes, it appears armed forces commander General Wiranto
played an important role. After intially encouraging the student
protests, on Monday he warned that demonstrations should stop. He said
the armed forces fully supported President Suharto. Early on Wednesday
morning he ordered a massive display of military force in Jakarta to
stop a planned popular protest. The turnaround suggests Wiranto was
happy to use protesters to back up his own pressure on Suharto, but
would not let them set his agenda.
The suppression of Wednesday's protest underlines once more that
Indonesian politics are elitist - an affair for a tiny club. With army
support, Plan B apparently intends to keep the succession issue within
that tight little Jakarta club.
Yes, Suharto is out. But the military has guaranteed his 'safety'.
That means he will not be prosecuted for human rights or economic
crimes if the military can help it. Yes, the armed forces may have
their differences with Habibie, who is not an army man. But these
things can be resolved quietly.
Moreover, Thursday's historic transfer was perfectly constitutional.
Of course Plan B may be unravel as well. As it is, the pace of
developments has far exceeded the planning of anybody within the
elite. Only three weeks ago, amidst growing student protests, Suharto
thought he could get away with offering reform 'but not till 2003'.
Last Tuesday he offered to move things forward to a vague 'as soon as
possible within the constitution'. On Thursday, years earlier than he
had perhaps planned, he put in place his hand-picked successor.
Habibie is the constitutionally correct choice, but politically he may
not have what it takes to keep politics confined within the club.
Almost nobody believes Habibie will serve until 2003. He is an
enthusiastic engineer rather than a professional politician.
Within Indonesia, these things matter less, and he may even be a
popular president in some quarters. He heads ICMI, a
government-sponsored Islamic association, whose many members will now
hope he can offer greater influence for Islam. His high-tech
industries, in the good days, made Indonesians feel proud.
But his close personal association with Suharto, and his own
well-known nepotism, will make it difficult for him to embrace many in
the opposition.
The army, now the power behind the throne, will try to handle the
aftermath of Plan B by keeping politics inside the club. To them at
least, Habibie does not represent the end of the New Order. He
represents its extension into a second presidency.
The first test for Habibie will be whether he can form a credible
cabinet. Just before the transfer of power, eleven of its most
important members tendered their resignation. Almost certainly among
the eleven was Coordinating Minister for Economy and Finance Ginanjar
Kartasasmita. With more political savvy than Habibie, Ginanjar must
represent a challenge to him. To avoid becoming a lame duck president
from day one, Habibie will need to work hard to bring Ginanjar and the
others under his leadership.
The opposition focused all its energies on forcing Suharto to resign.
Once the initial euphoria of their success has passed, they may find
they will have to work that much harder to gain a hearing.
A new opposition agenda will begin with the release of all the
prisoners taken from opposition ranks and now languishing in jail. It
will demand that ill-gotten loot be returned. More importantly, that
past human rights abuses be prosecuted. It will demand new, freer and
fairer laws in every area of national life - from politics, the
courts, the media, and the environment, to the economy.
If the opposition can regroup and assert a new and more fundamental
agenda, then Plan B will also fail. Then the New Order will have
really ended.
Gerry van Klinken, editor, 'Inside Indonesia' magazine.
**************************************
From: "Kris Puspo" <>
To:
Subject: Massa Bayaran Pro-Habibie Serang Mahasiswa di Gedung DPR/MPR
Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 07:08:43 PDT
Kericuhan kelompok pro-kontra Habibie di DPR/MPR
Jumat (22/5) siang, ribuan mahasiswa yang sejak beberapa hari menduduki
gedung DPR/MPR Senayan mendadak dikejutkan datangnya massa yang
menamakan dirinya Komite Aksi Umat Islam Indonesia, yang terdiri dari
beberapa ormas, diantaranya Gerakan Pemuda Islam (GPI) asal Banten dan
Serikat Pelajar Islam Indonesia (SPMI). Mereka datang berbondong-bondong
sambil meneriakkan yel-yel mendukung Habibie sebagai presiden pengganti
Soeharto.
Kedatangan yang mengejutkan ini segera mendapat reaksi defensif dari
mahasiswa, oleh karena mereka tampak sangat kasar dalam memasuki arena
demonstrasi. Bahkan pada saat mahasiswa berusaha menahan laju mereka di
dekat tangga utama dengan barikade manusia, beberapa orang dari
pendukung Habibie ini melakukan pemukulan, ada yang menggunakan
pentungan, kepada mahasiswa, sehingga seorang mahasiswa terluka kena
pentungan. Dalam waktu sekitar 30 menit, beberapa kali barikade
mahasiswa bobol, hingga terobosan ke tiga pertahanan terakhir mahasiswa
di tangga gedung utama bobol. Massa pendukung Habibie akhirnya berhasil
menduduki tangga dan bertahan beberapa waktu di sana.
Kontak fisik segera dapat dihentikan. Mahasiswa yang menuntut reformasi
total termasuk menolak naiknya Habibie ke kursi presiden segera menahan
diri, bahkan melarang beberapa dari mereka yang meneriakkan yel-yel anti
Habibie, untuk menghindarkan kekerasan.
Mereka menaikkan spanduk-spanduk bertuliskan dukungan kepada habibie,
antara lain berbunyi: "Siapa yang menolak Habibie akan berhadapan dengan
ABRI dan Islam".
Setelah itu, situasi menjadi berangsur-angsur tenang kembali.
Yang menarik, massa datang serempak dalam jumlah besar (rombongan
pertama mencapai 2.000 orang), memakai ikat kepala seragam dan membawa
spanduk dukungan Habibie yang ditulis rapi. Tampak sekali mereka telah
dipersiapkan secara matang. Seorang juru bicara (ketua komite?)
menyatakan mendukung reformasi konstitusional, apapun yang direformasi
harus konstitusional. Maka, mereka mendukung Habibie sebagai presiden
karena dianggap konstitusional. Selain itu, ia menyatakan telah
mensinyalir adanya kepentingan kelompok-kelompok tertentu yang
menunggangi gerakan reformasi di gedung DPR/MPR itu, dan itu harus
dihilangkan.
Menurut keterangan seorang pejabat Bapepam yang berkantor di Jl.
Sudirman, Senayan, ia mengamati dari atas gedung Bapepam bahwa massa
pendukung Habibie sebelumnya berkumpul di sisi Timur Stadion Utama
Senayan sebelum bergerak ke gedung DPR/MPR, tempat yang sama digunakan
persiapan Pemuda Pancasila sebelum menuju gedung DPR/MPR tgl. 19 Mei
1998 lalu.
Selain itu, seorang anggota massa pendukung Habibie sempat diwawancarai
oleh sebuah radio swasta di Jakarta mengatakan, dirinya tidak tahu
menahu tentang aksi mendukung Habibie itu. Ia hanya dibayar Rp.
20.000,00 untuk ikut serta dalam gerakan pembersihan puing-puing di
gedung DPR/MPR pagi itu.
Menurut pengamatan seorang aktivis di dalam halaman gedung DPR/MPR,
beberapa anggota pendukung Habibie tampak bengong dan kebingungan tak
tahu apa yang harus dikerjakan. Kemudian mereka semakin mendekati pintu
gerbang dan keluar dari halaman DPR/MPR, entah ke mana. Beberapa dari
mereka terdapat bapak-bapak (orang tua). Melihat bahwa aksi mereka
menjurus kekerasan, bapak-bapak itu mengundurkan diri. Mereka dikabarkan
merasa dibohongi.
Sedangkan menurut keterangan seorang sumber dari sebuah organisasi di
Jl. Kramat, Jakarta, massa yang mendukung Habibie itu berasal dari
kelompok Kisdi dan massa beberapa pondok pesantren. Mereka datang ke
sana sebenarnya ingin melaksanakan sholat Jumat.
Seorang aktivis mahasiswa IPB berhasil mencari keterangan dari seorang
Dandim, yang mengatakan bahwa kalau situasi di dalam DPR/MPR rusuh, maka
pasukan Kostrad akan membereskan.
Keterangan terakhir dari tim relawan, situasi gedung DPR/MPR sudah
berhasil dikuasai mahasiswa. Massa pendukung Habibie bertahan di sana
hingga sore, dan pada sekitar pk. 17.00 mereka keluar dari gedung
DPR/MPR.
mabuhay
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
*************************************
Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 11:34:30 +1000 (EST)
From: Gerry Van Klinken <>
To: John MacDougall <>
Subject: Richard Tanter: Suharto's crimes against humanity
Note: This paper was written just before Suharto's resignation.
It could form an important part of opposition demands from now
on. Gerry van Klinken <>
----
Suharto's Crimes Against Humanity:
The Case for an International Criminal Tribunal
By Richard Tanter
Introduction
------------
Two unexpected events in recent months give hope that President
Suharto may some day be brought to trial for genocide and crimes
against humanity for his part in the anticommunist holocaust in
1965 and for the hundreds of thousands who died after the
Indonesian invasion of East Timor.
On May 1, Jean Kambanda, former Prime Minister of Rwanda, pleaded
guilty to charges of genocide and crimes against humanity before
the United Nations International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda.
Kambanda will probably be sentenced to a maximum of life
imprisonment.
On April 30, the United States announced its intention to request
that the Security Council establish an International Criminal
Tribunal to try Cambodian former Khmer Rouge leaders on charges
of genocide and crimes against humanity
In the Indonesian case, my own belief is that the United Nations
Security Council should appoint a Special Rapporteur or a
Committee of Experts to assess prima facie evidence against
President Suharto and other senior or retired ABRI leaders. The
Security Council should then establish an International Criminal
Tribunal for Indonesia with a view to trying President Suharto
and others for the following crimes under existing international
legal conventions and international customary law:
Crimes against humanity
Genocide Grave
breaches of the Geneva Conventions
Violations of the laws of war
Crimes against peace
Three questions need to be answered in the Indonesian case:
Is it true that President Suharto and other senior Indonesian
military commanders have committed acts that amount to 'crimes
against humanity' and 'genocide'?
If this is so, is there any way that President Suharto could be
brought before an international tribunal on such charges?
Is it desirable to call for such an international criminal
tribunal?
The crimes
----------
In the thirty years of President Suharto's control, at least two
sets of events amount to crimes against humanity and/or genocide
in an ordinary meaning of the terms.
Firstly, President Suharto's rule was founded when he led the
holocaust that destroyed the Indonesian Communist Party. Between
mid-October 1965 and the end of the following year, the
Indonesian armed forces, planned, orchestrated and in part
carried out the murder of between 200,000 and one million
Indonesian citizens. Virtually all were unarmed. Most victims
were alleged members of the Indonesian Communist Party or its
allied community organizations. Some were targets of anti-Chinese
hatred fostered by army propaganda. Hundreds of thousands were
shot by the military; comparable numbers clubbed and hacked to
death by their neighbours, directed, equipped and incited by the
armed forces.
Much about the anti-communist killings remains unknown even
today, since the subject is almost literally unspeakable in
Indonesia. Yet, no serious historian doubts that hundreds of
thousands of Indonesians were killed. One of the first tasks a
United Nations Special Rapporteur or Committee of Experts faces
is to examine the existing evidence as to the scale of the
crimes.
The next task is to plumb the details - to date virtually unknown
- of the armed forces' planning of the holocaust.
Secondly, on the periphery of Indonesia, the state's repression
of self-determination gave rise to another set of massive crimes,
of which the war against the East Timorese is only the best
known. After coercing the leaders of several groups of
conservative and anti-independence East Timorese to sign an
Indonesian-dictated 'request' for assistance, Indonesian armed
forces invaded the former Portuguese colony on December 5th,
1975.
In the following four years, the population of East Timor
decreased by 200,000 people, as a result of direct Indonesian
army killings and bombings, forced re-locations, and the
starvation and disease following the invasion. Torture has
effectively been a standard operating procedure for Indonesian
forces.
The international law
---------------------
How then does international law relate to Indonesia? On what
grounds could an international criminal tribunal bring charges
against President Suharto? Though there are some important legal
matters for debate and interpretation, a case against President
Suharto for crimes against humanity is quite possible under
existing international convention and international customary
law.
A prosecution against President Suharto for the Crime of
Genocide, though more difficult, would be quite possible. Until
the Security Council established the International Criminal
Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia [ICTY] in 1993, and the
International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda [ICTR] in 1994, no-one
had been charged with crimes against humanity or genocide in the
since the Nuremberg and Tokyo tribunals at the close of World War
2.
While both those trials were tainted with the flavour of
'victor's justice', the international law dealing with such grave
crimes in fact developed considerably over that time. The
Security Council empowered the ICTY to 'prosecute persons
responsible for serious violations of international humanitarian
law', including genocide, crimes against humanity, grave breaches
of the Geneva conventions of 1949, and violations of the laws of
war.
War Crimes and Crimes against Humanity
In 1946, the U.N. General Assembly affirmed the principles of
international law as recognized in the Nuremberg Tribunal and the
Judgement of the Tribunal.
Subsequently the International Law Commission reported to the
United Nations General Assembly on its codification of Principles
of Law Recognized in the Charter of the Nuremberg Tribunal and
in the Judgement of the Tribunal. Principle 6 includes amongst
the crimes punishable as crimes under international law:
'(c) Crimes against humanity: Murder, extermination, enslavement,
deportation and other inhuman acts against any civilian
population, or persecutions on political, racial or religious
grounds, when such acts are done or such persecutions are carried
on in execution of or in connexion with any crimes against peace
or any war crimes.'
The affirmation of the Nuremberg Tribunal's Charter and Judgement
by the General Assembly, and their codification of by the ILC
provides a solid foundation for the law on crimes against
humanity as an accepted part of international customary law. This
was the basis for Security Council [Resolution 827 (1993)] that
established the ICTY.
Clearly, a case could be made that under international law
President Suharto has committed crimes against humanity in that
he directed the Indonesian armed forces that murdered tens of
thousands or hundreds of thousands of overwhelmingly unarmed
civilians in 1965 - 1966.
It is not known whether President Suharto personally killed PKI
members, or simply left that to colleagues, subordinates and
civilian allies. But President Suharto, mainly in his role as
KOPKAMTIB [Operational Command for the Restoration of Security
and Order] commander, exercised both direct responsibility and
command responsibility for the planning and execution of what
amounted to a massive crime against humanity in those years.
The Crime of Genocide
A prosecution against President Suharto for the crime of genocide
will be more difficult, though not impossible.The difficulties
are two-fold. Firstly, under international law the crime of
genocide has a limited legal definition. Secondly, Indonesia,
almost alone amongst important countries of the world, has not
signed and ratified the Convention on the Prevention and
Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. Neither of these
difficulties is, however, conclusive. Under the Convention,
genocide is defined as meaning:
Any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in
whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group
as such:
'killing members of the group; causing serious mental harm to
members of the group; deliberately inflicting on the group
conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical
destruction in whole or in part; imposing methods intended to
prevent births within the group; forcibly transferring children
of the group to another group.'
In the case of Indonesia, the category of genocide is relevant
in at least two cases: the mass anti-communist killings of
1965-1966, and the killings following the invasion of East Timor.
However, in 1965-66, Indonesian victims were (as in Cambodia),
for the most part, not killed because of their ethnicity or
nationality or racial identity: they were killed because of their
alleged political beliefs.
This would, in a strict sense, mean that their murders do not
amount to genocide under the terms of the Convention. In fact,
however, the presumed religious beliefs of PKI members (or
rather, the lack of such beliefs) were very relevant to many of
their persecutors.
The fact that the PKI positively affirmed atheism was often held
as a reason why they could never be trusted, and why they lost
full status as human beings. In this limited sense, most of the
1965-66 killings had a religious aspect under the terms of the
Genocide Convention.
Another, smaller, target of the 1965-1966 killings in some parts
of Indonesia were Chinese Indonesians. To the extent that they
were killed because of their Chinese identity, their murders
would plausibly amount to genocide under the Genocide Convention.
Certain aspects of the Indonesian invasion and occupation of East
Timor, especially during the years 1975-1979, could also be
construed as genocidal under the terms of the Genocide
Convention.
The most important difficulty with the genocide case against
President Suharto is that Indonesia, almost alone amongst
substantial nations in the world, has not signed and ratified the
Convention.
Unlike Indonesia, Yugoslavia, Cambodia and Rwanda are parties to
the Genocide Convention. Consequently, there was no difficulty
in law in trying former Rwandan government officials before a UN
criminal tribunal. Nor is any difficulty anticipated on that
ground in the Cambodian case. Are the provisions of the Genocide
Convention therefore not applicable in any way to acts of
genocide committed within the territory of Indonesia?
Most likely not, at least in a direct sense. Yet, some
international legal experts maintain that the law of genocide has
developed an overriding and peremptory applicability. Not only
is the Convention a development of the established 1946 Nuremberg
principles, they argue, but it gains added force simply by having
been signed and ratified by the great majority of states.
In other words, the general law of genocide is likely to be
applicable to some degree within the territory of Indonesia. The
assumption must surely be made that in law, the categories of
crimes against humanity and the crime of genocide are not closed.
If the US proposal for establishment of an International Criminal
Tribunal for Cambodia is accepted by the Security Council, then
the global applicability of the law of genocide will be very
closely examined.
The politics of the law
-----------------------
Why is it desirable at this point in history to mount charges of
genocide and crimes against humanity against President Suharto?
Some would take the view that even if President Suharto and his
colleagues are responsible for such acts, it is all now a matter
of history, and they are now old men. Surely, some would argue,
this is at most a matter of revenge rather than justice. To rake
up the past will do more harm than good, at a time when Indonesia
needs stability.
Others would say that international law is irrelevant in the real
world of politics. As a head of state, President Suharto is most
unlikely to offer himself up for trial. It is impossible, it is
argued, to imagine that President Suharto's foreign allies would
ever allow him to come to trial.
There is something to be said for all these objections, but
finally all are wrong. An international criminal tribunal has
three purposes. The first is to bring those individuals
responsible for horrific crimes to justice, and to punish the
guilty. By ordinary human standards, President Suharto and his
colleagues committed - and then benefitted greatly from - crimes
on a horrific scale.
In Indonesia, the dead are many, but so are the scarred
survivors. How long must they wait in fear and silence? The
second purpose is to deter such acts in the future: by
establishing the possibility that those leaders of states may
have to take responsibility for their actions.
A Rwandan prime minister is in gaol for genocide, Serbian
war-lords slink in hiding, and two Korean presidents ended their
careers with gaol sentences and national disgrace. Small comfort
in a world of pain and hypocrisy , but possibly the beginnings
of assignation of global responsibility.
The third purpose of an international tribunal is to establish
a reasonable basis for national reconciliation and the overcoming
of deep collective trauma.
Despite thirty years of repression of open discussion of the
Indonesian holocaust, the wounds amongst the living are surely
deep: 500,000 victims left behind millions of bereaved. Fantasies
and fears of revenge are to be expected, but the understandable
desire for revenge is best met by facing the events of the past
openly, and establishing individual responsibility in open
courts, properly conducted.
Crimes against humanity and genocide are recognized as the
concern of all humanity, not only the peoples who suffer
directly. Security Council Resolution 827 (1993) requires all
states to cooperate fully with the ICTY. Under principles
Principles of International Co-operation in the Detection,
arrest, Extradition, and Punishment of Persons Guilty of War
Crimes and Crimes against Humanity adopted by the UN in 1973
member states 'shall not grant asylum to any person with respect
to whom there are serious reasons for considering that he has
committed a crime against peace, a war crime, or a crime against
humanity'.
In the time of the fall of Suharto, this will be an important
obligation to recall. In the world of realpolitik, especially
during the Cold War, international law and ordinary principles
of justice have counted for little against the interests of the
major states. Why is there any reason to hope that the cry for
justice will be heard this time?
Yet, President Suharto's time is over. In the face of widespread
calls from abroad and inside Indonesia for the former president
to be tried for crimes against humanity, an Indonesian successor
regime, as in Rwanda, may well be prepared to acknowledge the
jurisdiction of an International Criminal Tribunal.
Justice may be slow visiting President Suharto, but by
establishing that he is, prima facie, guilty of crimes against
humanity, a great deal is achieved. By focussing the minds of the
international legal community on solving the practical and
technical problems, we normalize the idea that this respected
international figure came to power through genocide.
By putting leaders like President Clinton in the position of
explaining just why he is prepared to act on Cambodian, but not
Indonesia, the double standard is rendered visible. Cynicism is
understandable in the face of the deceits of power. But the
cynical response it is not always quite as realistic as it may
seem at first sight.
The leader of the Rwandan genocide has been tried before a United
Nations court. In the broken remains of Yugoslavia, U.N. warrants
for the arrest of warlords keeps them in hiding, lest they be
arrested. Even, finally, in Cambodia, the dirty hands of world
politics have moved enough to allow for the establishment of a
tribunal. As the face of capitalist fortune has turned away from
President Suharto, the outside world is starting to see him as
a dictator. With a little more effort, he may be seen for what
he truly is - a criminal on a massive scale.
Richard Tanter is Professor of International Relations at Kyoto
Seika University http://www.kyoto-seika.ac.jp
