Talk:Papua conflict
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Papua conflict article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
| Archives: 1 |
 | This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Political Advertising
This article is blatant political propaganda, political advertising and wholly original research. All cited resources are not peer-reviewed, nor do they amount to a fair and balanced article in line with NPOV. It is also factually inaccurate. Melanesians who hold Indonesian citizenship have been able to access any and all public office since 1945- whereas the Dutch imposed strict racial apartheid, which has been well documented elsewhere. I argue it should be deleted immediately.Starstylers (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 18:55, 29 July 2009 (UTC).
- You can't fight POV with POV. There were some facts about the situation of the native people in Papua that were out of context and were already deleted by another user. Other than that, the article itself is not a case for propaganda. Do you contest that there is no conflict in papua? How do you justify describing this conflict as "inter-tribal", namely from the point of view of someone who believes there is no conflict at all? Maziotis (talk) 18:21, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
- Nobody can deny there is a conflict, even without taking sides whether the Papuans have the right to protest against the inclusion of their land in the Republic of Indonesia or not. There is a long range of reports by Elsham, the Jayapura based human rights organisation, Justice and Peace, the human rights organisation based at the Catholic Diocese of Jayapura, Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, and the International Crisis Group. Several organizations have spoken with regard to the situation in West Papua about genocide, or in any case about serious and systematic human rights violations against the indigenous inhabitants of West Papua.
There, definitely, should come in wikipedia a balanced article about the conflict, since October 1962, mentioning the main players, like the OPM (The Papuan Freedom Organisation), the TNI (formerly ABRI), i.e. the Indonesian Army and Police, the Kopassus (Special Troops), the BIN (the internal security organization) and their leaders. Many of these organisations have been accused of serious human rights violations elsewehere in Indonesia, like in Aceh or East Timor. The BIN has been linked with the murder of the human rights activist Munir in 2004.
A fairly complete and objective story of the Papuan conflict is given by the Dutch journalist Dirk Vlasblom in his book Papoea. Een geschiedenis (Papua. A History), Amsterdam, 2004.
This article does seem poor and clearly biased in parts. It reproduces unreferenced assertions from the Celerier article about "official figures" of Papuans who have been killed in the conflict. If we read the article that is footnoted you see that no reference is given, so we don't know whose official figures we're talking about. It seems improbable that it would be those of the Indonesian government. Then who? The UN? Celerier also makes the claim that 52% of the population of West Papua is "Javanese", and an editor of this article uses this to support the assertion that more than half the population of Papua was born in Java. But again Celerier's article provides no source. Where could these figures have possibly come from? I think both these assertions should be removed or be provided with a proper referencing. Celerier's article, which is poorly referenced and largely seems to consist of partisan assertion, should be removed as a reference. Surely there are better sources available? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Slmiller6 (talk • contribs) 12:43, 2 May 2012 (UTC) (theoikos (talk) 14:04, 13 October 2009 (UTC))
Timeline
Either the ,,On" should be removed, or the colons replaced with commas. Sarcelles (talk) 16:05, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
- Why? which variant do you suggest?.Sentinel R (talk) 17:31, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
Template and external links.
I added the template to link an historical event to other articles on indigenous rights issues. That is what templates do. About the POV on the external links sections, please feel free to provide government views, or any others, on the subject. The link to the organization is the kind of source that is relevant to encyclopedias and news articles. It's perfectly in standard with what is used on these issues. Maziotis (talk) 01:39, 13 January 2011 (UTC)
"Papua conflict" or "West Papua conflict"
In 2002 Indonesia divided the western half of New Guinea into two provinces - Papua and West Papua. The entire western half of the island was previously known as West Papua, and this name continues to be used by West Papuans and by West Papua solidarity networks.
I notice that this article started out as "West Papua conflict" and the name was recently changed to "Papua conflict". I think it is worth considering the appropriateness of the current name. Strictly speaking, the current name refers to one of the two Indonesian provinces only, excluding the Indonesian province of West Papua. More importantly, the Indonesian nomenclature (Papua) implies support for Indonesia's position that West Papua is a legitimate part of the nation, and denies West Papuans' aspirations for independence.
By making it clear that the name "West Papua" is used in it's pre-2002 context, it will be clear that the article refers to the entire western half of New Guinea, encompassing the two provinces declared by Indonesia ("Papua" and "West Papua"). The name "West Papua" dates back to 1961, so there is a continuity that the more recent Indonesian designation lacks.
I propose that "West Papua" is a better choice as it reflects the common naming used by many West Papuans, academics and activists. I feel more comfortable using the designation used by the traditional inhabitants rather that the designation of the coloniser. I would be very interested to hear whether West Papuan contributors support a proposal to revert the article to "West Papua conflict."
“Western New Guinea is generally referred to as 'West Papua' internationally – especially among networks of international solidarity with the West Papuan independence.” Papua (province) --RussHawk (talk) 10:00, 28 October 2011 (UTC)
- I feel more comfortable using the designation used by the traditional inhabitants rather that the designation of the coloniser. Hmmmm, shouldn't we try and be a little more npov? --Merbabu (talk) 10:29, 28 October 2011 (UTC)
"I feel more comfortable using the designation used by the traditional inhabitants rather that the designation of the coloniser". I agree with Merbabu that this idea is problematic from a NPOV perspective, but it is also an assertion that is very difficult to verify. As far as I know, Papua/West Papua is ethnically and culturally extremely diverse, with a complex history, including the history of its relationship to the regions to its west. It seems pretty likely that there are a variety of attitudes to the terms. It's also worth noting that the key separatist organisation has been the OPM (Free Papua Organisation), not the OPBM (Free West Papua Organisation). That in itself suggests that there are people on both basic sides of the conflict who use the term. This controversy looks like something that has grown out of the concerns of solidarity activists outside P/WP, rather than with people on the ground. But regardless, a claim like this should be backed up with evidence if there is any chance that it is debatable, which it clearly is. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Slmiller6 (talk • contribs) 13:10, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
Noam Chomsky
The article linked only refers to Desmond Tutu (I'm not sure that an UNPO press release is the best source, but his views on the subject are fairly common knowledge), however I don't see anything to indicate the assertion that Noam Chomsky supports holding a referendum the way he did in East Timor. In the Nineties when he was an advocate for a referendum in East Timor, he explicitly denied that it could be a precedent for West Papua, on the grounds that West Papua had been an integral part of the Dutch East Indies. Though I always thought that this was an odd position for him to take, he doesn't seem the the sort of man who changes his mind easily. Googling for "Noam Chomsky West Papua" the closest I can find is in an appeal for donations on a report on the ETAN website, and even that quote only indicates that he opposes the systematic human rights abuses for West Papua, not that he supports a referendum.
I'm going to remove the reference to Chomsky. If someone can provide a source that he supports a referendum you can feel to reinstate it. You can also add a sentence including him among the critics of the Indonesian government's behavior. (I don't think that's nearly as notable, since everybody who knows about the conflict seems to condemn it, though far fewer seem inclined to support a vote of self-determination.) In the mean time shouldn't be putting words into his mouth. —Quintucket (talk) 23:00, 15 May 2013 (UTC)
I don't know why Noam's opinion is pivotal but his name is at top of a open letter by academics. Daeron (talk) 16:50, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
America
http://dissidentvoice.org/2010/03/expected-obama-administration-backing-for-indonesian-state-terror/
http://www2.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB128/index.htm
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Southeast_Asia/FG13Ae03.html
http://www2.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/indonesia/index.html
Sources
http://www.unpo.org/article/6196
Support from Libya under Gaddafi to Free Papua Movement
Colonel Gaddafi supported the Free Papua Movement.
http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Libyan+terrorism:+the+case+against+Gaddafi.-a014151801
the time, the Libyan government was reportedly providing military or other support to the East Timor Liberation Movement, the Kanak Socialist National Liberation Front (New Caledonia), and the Free Papua Movement (Irian Jaya) as well as to Muslim guerrillas in the Philippines.
Page 18
COLONEL GADDAFI'S shadowy international revolutionary organisation Mathaba, established in the Libyan capital of ...Hassan di Tiro himself makes the crucial decisions, and runs a personal network of contacts with the liberation movement leaders Libya supports, among them Jacob Prai of the OPM (Free Papua Movement) of West Papua and Yann Ce- tene Uregei of New Caledonia's Kanak radical faction,
Page 120
In the past year Gaddafi's agents have offered arms and cash to rebels in Papua New Guinea, encouraged an aboriginal separatist movement in Australia, shipped weapons to dissidents in New Caledonia and tried to open an office in the
more sources
http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Libyan+terrorism:+the+case+against+Gaddafi.-a014151801
the time, the Libyan government was reportedly providing military or other support to the East Timor Liberation Movement, the Kanak Socialist National Liberation Front (New Caledonia), and the Free Papua Movement (Irian Jaya) as well as to Muslim guerrillas in the Philippines.
Title Pacific Islands Monthly, Volume 59 Publisher Pacific Publications., 1988 Original from the University of Michigan Digitized Sep 15, 2008
Page 18
COLONEL GADDAFI'S shadowy international revolutionary organisation Mathaba, established in the Libyan capital of Tripoli and dispensing funds to liberation movements around the world, is run by a most unlikely radical. Tunku Mohammed Hassan di Tiro, a Sumatran prince, fervent Muslim and bitter opponent of Indonesia, is the chairman of Mathaba's political committee.... Hassan di Tiro himself makes the crucial decisions, and runs a personal network of contacts with the liberation movement leaders Libya supports, among them Jacob Prai of the OPM (Free Papua Movement) of West Papua and Yann Ce- tene Uregei of New Caledonia's Kanak radical faction,
In an exclusive interview with Pacific Islands Monthly, at his headquarters in Tripoli, he outlined Mathaba's organisation and aims for the Asia Pacific region. The Mathaba Against Imperialism, Racism, Zionism and Fascism, to give the front its
the various independence movements active across the Indonesian Archipelago, including his own Aceh Sumatra Liberation Front. "We are making advances against Indonesia, both on the ground and diplomatically, with Fretilin (East Timor Liberation Front), the OPM, the Republic of the South Moluccas; we are all one.
Title Pacific Islands Monthly: PIM., Volume 59, Issues 1-10 Publisher Pacific Publications, 1988 Original from the University of Virginia Digitized Apr 8, 2009
http://content.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,964515,00.html
Page 120
In the past year Gaddafi's agents have offered arms and cash to rebels in Papua New Guinea, encouraged an aboriginal separatist movement in Australia, shipped weapons to dissidents in New Caledonia and tried to open an office in the
Rajmaan (talk) 20:36, 29 April 2014 (UTC)
Genocide
The article states: "Official estimates are that up to 450,000 Indigenous Papuans have been killed in the conflict. (Such numbers amount to Genocide under UN Constitution)."
This is incorrect on several counts. Firstly, there is no numerical requirement for genocide, rather genocide is based on intention, and in the case of the International Criminal Court, a pattern of similar attacks. Secondly, there is no such document as the "UN Constitution". I assume they are referring here to either the 1948 Genocide Convention or the UN Charter, neither of which mentions any numerical requirement for genocide. There is also an article missing between "under" and "UN Constitution."
I do not necessarily oppose arguing that the crimes in West Papua amount to genocide but the statement that I am highlighting is misleading and factually incorrect. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.47.245.251 (talk) 16:21, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
I think the article needs a scholarly citation source for the casualties figure, rather than the currently cited figure. Gfcan777 — Preceding undated comment added 17:43, 6 September 2014 (UTC)
United States as Belligerent
Under the list of combatant it lists the United States under the Indonesian side. However, there is only one other reference to the United States in the article, and the US has not provided ground troops or air strikes in support of Indonesia. Thus, it seems like it would be a mistake to have that listing although I am not knowledgable enough about the conflict to say for sure. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.196.254.40 (talk) 06:04, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Papua conflict. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
- Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20120322204845/http://journal.alternatives.ca/eng/our-organisation/our-publications/analysis-and-articles/article/natural-resources-and-conflict-in to http://journal.alternatives.ca/eng/our-organisation/our-publications/analysis-and-articles/article/natural-resources-and-conflict-in
- Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20130227004600/http://www.freewestpapua.com.au/message_from_melrose.php to http://www.freewestpapua.com.au/message_from_melrose.php
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 18:31, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
Vanuatu connection?
Vanuatu is listed as supporting the rebels, but no source is given and it's not mentioned in the rest of the article at all. Is this military, humanitarian, diplomatic, or political aid?
Suomi13 (talk) 01:50, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
Papua conflict -> Insurgency in Papua
Hey 43.249.140.89, could you try to gain consensus here before making major changes like [1] to an article? Thanks. Dat GuyTalkContribs 10:19, 20 July 2018 (UTC)
Australia
Australia has been supporting the Indonesian government in this conflict for decades with arms and training. Could someone please add them to Indonesia's "supported by" in the infobox? I'm not exactly technologically gifted and only know how to edit body text. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.20.160.37 (talk) 09:58, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
- Start-Class military history articles
- Start-Class Asian military history articles
- Asian military history task force articles
- Start-Class Southeast Asian military history articles
- Southeast Asian military history task force articles
- Start-Class Indonesia articles
- Mid-importance Indonesia articles
- WikiProject Indonesia articles