|
Apr - Jun 2003
Civilians demand a part in Aceh's peace process
Kautsar
On 9 December 2002, representatives of the Indonesian
government and the Free Aceh Movement (Gerakan Aceh
Merdeka or GAM) signed an agreement for a 'Cessation
of Hostilities' (CoH) at a meeting in Geneva,
Switzerland. The agreement was reached after a long
series of negotiations between the two sides which
began in early 2000 during the presidency of
Abdurrahman Wahid. This has been a long and exhausting
process which has produced both great hope and
shattering disappointment in the past. In mid-2000 the
two sides agreed to a 'humanitarian pause,' leading to
a dramatic decrease in violence. Within weeks,
however, the agreement began to break down and before
long violence had reached an unparalleled intensity.
Between January and November last year alone,
according to the Aceh Commission for Disappearances
and Victims of Violence (KontraS), over 1,300 people
were killed.
In conflicts like that in Aceh, it is frequently only
the views of the armed parties which are heard. This
article presents one viewpoint from Acehnese civil
society.
In addition to agreeing to a ceasefire, in very
general terms, the recent peace negotiations on Aceh
made three hopeful steps toward finding lasting peace
in the territory. Firstly, the two sides recognised
that it is crucial to build trust in order to stop
conflict. Secondly, they recognised the need for
freedom of political expression in civil society.
Thirdly, they established a Joint Security Committee,
consisting of Indonesian military (TNI), GAM, and
foreign (Thai and Filipino) military representatives
which will take responsibility for monitoring and
decision-making in the technical matters related to
the ceasefire. During the 'humanitarian pause' in
2000, there was no international involvement in the
monitoring process. Moreover, the Henry Dunant Centre
(HDC), the Swiss-based non-government organisation
which has facilitated the talks has been upgraded to a
'mediator' role, and now has the authority to sanction
violations of the agreement.
There were other positive signs, compared to previous
negotiations. For the first time, prior to their
commencement, the talks were widely publicised on the
internet and in the mass media, both in Indonesia and
overseas. In particular, the talks attracted more
international interest than ever. A number of Western
diplomats were present at the signing of the
Agreement, and on 3 December 2002, even before the
talks commenced, potential international donors
gathered in Japan to start planning financial support
for Aceh's reconstruction. Delegates to the conference
recognised that if the peace process is to work,
Aceh's civilian population must be at the centre of
plans for Aceh's future.
Also for the first time, both GAM and the TNI
consulted with civilian organisations prior
negotiating with each other, and used issues raised at
these consultations as reference material for the
talks.
The agreement also provides means for victims of
violence which takes place during the CoH to complain
to the JSC (which is headed by a Thai military
officer), which is then empowered to investigate. This
means that the public has direct access to the
structures responsible for maintaining peace, without
being hampered by complex bureaucracies. Previously,
complainants had to appeal to either GAM or the TNI,
which were then responsible for reporting complaints
to the JSC, although they rarely did so.
In spite of these positive steps, some sections of
Acehnese civil society remain critical of the
Agreement. A meeting facilitated by the Acehnese Civil
Society Task Force in Banda Aceh on 16 December 2002,
aimed to provide a forum for civilians to express
their views on how peace should be implemented.
Participants in the meeting wanted the international
community to understand that the agreement only
represents a first stage, not a final stage, in the
resolution of conflict in Aceh. Civilian institutions
are also eager for the UN to send a team to
investigate human rights violations in Aceh. Most
importantly, however, they are anxious to ensure their
integral involvement in the implementation of any
long-term peace plan.
Resolving human rights violations
Over the past 25 years, the majority of the 10,000
victims of the conflict have been civilians. Countless
other civilians have been victims of human rights
violations, all of which are yet to be properly
investigated. Investigation of human rights
violations, and a just resolution for victims (for
instance, trials of human rights perpetrators) will
engender public trust and optimism about the present
peace process, and will help avoid future impunity.
Release of political prisoners
The detention of political prisoners and prisoners of
war in Aceh is also an ongoing problem. Many people
are still detained for their political beliefs, and
many prisoners of war are still held at military
posts. The Indonesian government and GAM therefore
need to free all such persons, both to ensure civil
and political liberties and to engender trust between
the two parties.
Public participation in efforts to maintain a
ceasefire
Like previous peace plans, the current agreement is
laid out in very general terms. This means that the
Joint Security Committee needs to specify more clearly
how the ceasefire is going to be maintained, and how
the peace process will move forward. This will require
the two parties entering into further discussions in
order to flesh out and agree upon the technical
aspects of the peace plan. Civil institutions need to
be able to participate in such discussions in order to
ensure the plan's success.
The Indonesian government's attempts to interpret the
Peace Agreement in accordance with its own political
interests could also prove to be a significant
obstacle. For example, a day after the signing of the
agreement, Coordinating Minister for Security and
Political Affairs, Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono, announced
that GAM had accepted 'special autonomy' (a formula
set down in a law passed for the province by the
national parliament in 2001), and that the war would
soon end. By this he meant that GAM had effectively
given up on its long-held aim of Acehnese
independence, something the movement's leaders
vehemently deny. The Indonesian government also
publicised its own version of the Agreement (which
vastly different from the actual agreement). Such
misinformation only serves to exacerbate tension.
What is even worse, also a day after the signing of
the agreement, the Indonesian military increased the
number of its posts in civilian residential areas.
This has caused great unease among civilians. In East
and North Aceh, people have fled their homes for fear
of military reprisals. Clearly, the military's actions
are quite at odds with the spirit of the peace
agreement, which requires both parties to start
building an atmosphere of trust, conducive to longer
term resolution of the conflict.

Kautsar (redsky767@yahoo.com) is a spokesperson for a
group of representatives of Acehnese civil society
organisations who attended the negotiations in
Switzerland in December 2002. They intend to monitor
the implementation of the peace deal on the ground. |