In middle of this month, two regencies in Papua again became epicentres of grief and national controversy.

Puncak Regency in Central Papua and Yahukimo in Mountainous Papua were struck by shooting incidents that claimed more than a dozen lives.

The tragedy reopened old wounds about how armed violence too often misses its target, making innocent people victims.

• READ MORE: Wenda calls on Indonesia to halt crackdown on peaceful Papua protests
• Stop selling arms to Indonesia, West Papuans urge Netherlands
• Other West papua reports

More than that, the events ignited a serious dispute between the official account of Indonesian state security forces and survivor testimonies, calling into question the credibility of the state’s response amid a genuine humanitarian emergency. The wounds and sorrow run so deep that no remedy seems capable of healing them.

The deadliest incident occurred in the Kembru sub-district of Puncak Regency. Initial reports spoke of an exchange of fire between the Indonesian military (TNI) and an “armed criminal group (KKB)” — as Indonesian authorities describe resistance groups — on April 14.

But the public was truly shaken days later when the Minister of Human Rights revealed that 15 civilians had been killed and seven wounded — overwhelmingly non combatants, including women and children.

What is striking is that the minister’s statement was delivered in the context of a “firefight” between the TNI and the armed resistance.

Meanwhile, the TNI, in a clarification on April 21, offered a different narrative. According to the TNI source, there were two separate incidents: first, a shootout that killed four members of the Free Papua Organisation (TPNPB/OPM), and second, a massacre of civilians carried out by the OPM itself.

With that statement, the TNI implicitly denied that its troops had fired on civilians. Sorrow splits between the official version and the cry for truth rising from the earth.

When survivors speak: ‘They were in uniform’
The contradiction peaked when the media interviewed survivors in hospitals. One survivor stated unequivocally that people in military uniforms shot him and other villagers. This is no mere rumour.

The National Commission on Human Rights (Komnas HAM), which conducted an initial investigation, found that several survivors consistently identified state security forces as the perpetrators.

Even more troubling, a report by the Papua People’s Assembly (MRP) for Central Papua stated that TNI soldiers from the Habema, Maleo, and Damai Carstenz units chased and attacked civilians in Makuma, Milome, and Kembru villages. The assault involved four helicopters, drones, firearms, and grenades.

One father, whose child was among the victims, told the Governor and Vice Governor at the hospital that villagers were attacked from the air around five or six in the morning, with grenades dropped from helicopters and drones. Some grenades, he said, were thrown directly into honai — traditional Papuan houses.

“They threw grenades by hand from above,” he said, cradling his wounded child.

Civil society reports indicate the military operation actually began on April 13, when the TNI attacked a TPNPB base in Pogoma District — previously acknowledged as a battlefield.

Two days later, the assault expanded to refugee camps in Kembru District, where thousands of civilians were sheltering. The result: innocent civilians became targets.

The MRP recorded at least nine civilian deaths, including a baby in the womb whose mother was also killed, plus 14 wounded. Komnas HAM reported 12 civilian deaths, while the Ministry of Human Rights said 15.

The discrepancy reveals a lack of coordination and verification at the central level, let alone the difficulty of accessing isolated locations.

More harrowing is the testimony of a woman seven months pregnant, treated at Dian Harapan Hospital in Jayapura. She was shot in the lower jaw.

In a soft but firm voice, she said the perpetrators were state security forces. She described troops attacking the village with helicopters and ground forces, using grenades and firearms. Even after the shooting, she said, uniformed soldiers posed for photos with the victims.

If true, this incident can no longer be called a mere “firefight” — it is a potential gross human rights violation. Physical wounds can be treated, but the trauma of being betrayed by those who were supposed to protect you lasts a lifetime.

Local government’s fast action amid the controversy
Amid the deadlock, the local government moved with noteworthy speed. The Governor of Central Papua, Meki Nawipa, together with Vice Governor Deinas Geley, visited Mulia Regional Hospital on April 17.

The governor declared that the provincial government would cover all medical costs and guarantee education for children who lost parents. An integrated emergency team, including the Indonesian Red Cross, was formed for data collection, evacuation, and psychosocial support.

The Regent/Mayor of Puncak Regency, Elvis Tabuni, unable to hold back tears, distributed aid and condolence payments. Yet challenges remain because access to the Kembru sub-district is difficult, isolated and prone to armed clashes.

The villagers’ sorrow was somewhat eased by the presence of local leaders, but the root wound — the uncertainty of justice — remains embedded.

Yahukimo, different pattern, same grief
Almost simultaneously, Yahukimo Regency was rocked by the shooting of a state civil servant, Yemis Yohame, head of the Housing Subdivision. He was found dead from gunshot wounds on April 21.

Unlike in Puncak, the response was relatively clearer. The Regent/Mayor of Yahukimo quickly stated that the shooting was a criminal act by an “armed criminal group (KKB)”, with no political agenda. The TNI and police launched an operation to hunt the perpetrators.

The contrast is stark. In Puncak, a large scale armed clash caused widespread civilian harm, with strong allegations of state human rights violations. In Yahukimo, the action was a targeted assassination.

For Yemis Yohame’s family, the grief is just as deep. The problem of violence in Papua is not homogeneous. But the most alarming case is Puncak, because it involves potential gross human rights violations by state forces.

If state troops shot civilians, that is not merely “imprecise fire” — it is a serious violation of the right to life and safety.

Komnas HAM stressed that any attack on civilians — by state or non state actors — violates international humanitarian law, and urged the TNI commander to evaluate operations by the Habema Task Force and pursue transparent legal action.

Without such steps, the wounds of Puncak will remain open.

Church leaders also condemned the violence. Father Yanuarius Yance Yogi criticised both sides for sacrificing innocent civilians.

“Both parties have sophisticated equipment. Yet why must civilian lives be sacrificed?” Reverend Dominggus Pigai said the situation in Papua is a military and humanitarian emergency zone. Reverend Benny Giay said the indiscriminate attack on civilians proves the state does not want Papuans to live on their own land.

Displaced grief: A humanitarian emergency
Reports indicate the military operation has triggered a massive wave of displacement. Of the twenty-five districts in Puncak Regency, only two have not seen their people flee.

Thousands of civilians are scattered in forests, neighbouring villages, and other regencies such as Timika, Nabire, and Jayapura. They live in fear, lacking food, clean water, and health services.

The Indonesian Red Cross has carried out cremations, but medical care on the ground remains extremely limited. The displaced endure an uncertain existence: driven from their own villages, stripped of shelter, and haunted by the trauma of grenade blasts and helicopter roars.

The hope of Papuans
The tragedy in Puncak presents the administration of President Prabowo Subianto with a profound test of the state’s commitment to protecting its citizens and upholding human rights. In addressing this complex situation, the government is respectfully encouraged to consider a series of measured and transparent steps that prioritise truth, justice, and the welfare of all Papuans.

First, the administration may wish to break from the pattern of contradictory official narratives by publicly acknowledging the credibility of survivor testimonies and the preliminary findings of Komnas HAM and the Papua People’s Assembly.

Rather than denial or ambiguity — which risk deepening perceptions of a legitimacy gap — the government could demonstrate leadership by establishing an independent, joint fact finding mission.

Such a mission would ideally include Komnas HAM, respected Papuan civil society leaders, church representatives, and, where appropriate, international observers, all operating with full access to affected villages and operational documents.

The objective would be to uncover the factual truth about what transpired, why civilians became victims, and who bears responsibility, without prejudging outcomes. Should evidence confirm gross human rights violations, the administration is respectfully urged to ensure that legal proceedings move forward genuinely.

Beyond the investigative track, the administration is encouraged to recognise that Puncak has already entered a humanitarian emergency. The displacement of thousands of civilians from nearly all districts demands a coordinated, large scale response that goes beyond the commendable but limited efforts of local authorities and the Indonesian Red Cross.

The government could consider declaring a temporary humanitarian corridor to enable the unhindered delivery of food, clean water, medical supplies, and psychosocial support to displaced populations hiding in forests and neighbouring regencies.

Evacuation plans, with special attention to pregnant women, children, the elderly, and the injured, would offer immediate relief. Working in partnership with the provincial government, the central administration might also commit to documenting every displaced family and restoring their basic rights to shelter, health, and education before any discussion of return.

Without such humanitarian action, broader peace and development efforts risk being seen as hollow.

Concerning the security sector, a diplomatic but firm reassessment may be timely. The administration could consider ordering a temporary suspension of offensive military operations in civilian populated areas of Puncak pending the outcome of the independent investigation.

The current approach — relying on aerial surveillance, drones, and ground manoeuvres — has, according to multiple testimonies, failed to consistently distinguish between armed group members and non-combatants, as illustrated by grenade attacks on honai homes and the wounding of a pregnant woman.

A review of rules of engagement, with specific prohibitions on the use of air delivered explosive weapons in or near civilian settlements, would align security practices with international humanitarian law.

Furthermore, the administration might explore a gradual shift from a military dominated posture toward a strengthened civilian led security framework that places the protection of civilians at its centre. Allegations that soldiers posed for photographs with victims, if substantiated, point to serious breaches of military ethics; in such a case, transparent court martial proceedings would help restore public trust.

Equally important is a broader political and developmental strategy that addresses the root causes of recurring violence. The administration is respectfully encouraged to initiate a genuine, inclusive dialogue process that brings together not only security forces and armed groups but also traditional leaders, church authorities, women’s organisations, and civil society representatives from across Papua.

Such a forum would be empowered to discuss not merely ceasefires and humanitarian access, but also longstanding grievances related to economic exploitation, land rights, political representation, and historical injustices.

In parallel, the government could reconsider the scale and nature of development spending in Papua, shifting from large scale extractive projects that often displace communities toward locally controlled economic initiatives that create tangible benefits for Papuan families.

Education, healthcare, and infrastructure built in genuine partnership with Papuan communities would likely build more trust than any number of military operations.

Finally, the administration may find value in engaging other stakeholders constructively. Komnas HAM deserves enhanced resources and political protection to conduct long term monitoring of both the investigation and the humanitarian response. Church leaders across Indonesia can be important moral partners in demanding accountability while accompanying Papuan communities in their grief.

International partners, while respecting Indonesia’s sovereignty, could be invited to offer technical assistance for independent investigations and humanitarian operations, and to continue diplomatic dialogue on civilian protection in Papua.

The media, too, has a role in connecting past and present violence to hold power accountable, rather than treating each tragedy as an isolated event.

Ultimately, what happened in Puncak and Yahukimo in April 2026 shows that the cycle of violence in Papua has never truly stopped. The discrepancy between survivor testimony and official statements cannot be left unresolved.

A purely security based approach has never been enough. A humane approach, dialogue, and equitable economic development must become mainstream. As the Regent of Puncak, Elvis Tabuni, said through his tears, they are citizens who should be protected — not turned into targets.

The wounds and sorrow left by this tragedy may never fully heal — at least, not as long as the truth remains hidden and justice is not upheld. Time will tell whether the state can uphold its constitutional mandate, or whether it will allow the land of Papua to remain soaked in the blood of its innocent children.

And for those who survived — who every night still hear the screams of their fallen friends — that wound will continue to sing in the silence: a sorrow that remains unhealed.

Laurens Ikinia is a Papuan lecturer and researcher at the Institute of Pacific Studies, Indonesian Christian University, Jakarta. He is also an honorary member of the Asia Pacific Media Network (APMN) in Aotearoa New Zealand, and an occasional contributor to Asia Pacific Report.

Vinzons is a quiet coastal town in the eastern Philippines province of Camarines Norte in Bicol. With a spread out population of about 45,000. it is known for its rice production, crabs and surfing beaches in the Calaguas Islands.

But the town is really famous for one of its sons — Wenceslao “Bintao” Vinzons, the youngest lawmaker in the Philippines before the Japanese invasion during the Second World War who then took up armed resistance.

He was captured and executed along with his family in 1942.

• READ MORE: Filipino radio storytelling and community empowerment — a Vinzons update
• Other Philippines reports

One of the most interesting assets of the municipality of Vinzons — named after the hero in 1946, the town previously being known as Indan — is his traditional family home, which has recently been refurbished as a local museum to tell his story of courage and inspiration.

“He is something of a forgotten hero, student leader, resistance fighter, former journalist — a true hero,” says acting curator Roniel Espina.

As well as a war hero, Vinzons is revered for his progressive politics and was known as the “father of student activism” in the Philippines. His political career began at the University of Philippines in the capital Manila where he co-founded the Young Philippines Party.

The Vinzons Hall at UP-Diliman was named after him to honour his student leadership exploits.

Student newspaper editor
He was the editor-in-chief of the Philippine Collegian, the student newspaper founded in 1922.

At 24, Vinzons became the youngest delegate to the 1935 Constitutional Convention and six years later at the age of 30 he was elected Governor of Camarine Norte in 1941 — the same year that Japan invaded.

In fact, the invasion of the Philippines began on 8 December 1941 just 10 hours after the bombing of Pearl Harbour in Hawai’i.

The invading forces tried to pressure Governor Vinzons in his provincial capital of Daet to collaborate. He absolutely refused. Instead, he took to the countryside and led one of the first Filipino guerilla resistance forces to rise up against the Japanese.

His initial resistance was successful with the guerrilla forces carrying out sudden raids before liberating Daet. He was eventually captured and executed by the Japanese.

The exact circumstances are still uncertain as his body was never recovered, but the museum does an incredible job in piecing together his life along with his family and their tragic sacrifice for the country.

One plaque shows an image of Vinzons along with his father Gabino, wife Liwayway, sister Milagros, daughter Aurora and son Alexander (no photo of him was actually recovered).

According to the legend on the plaque:

“Wenceslao Vinzons with his father disappeared mysteriously – and were never see again. The Japanese sent out posters in Camarines Norte expressing regret that on the way to Siain, Quezon, Vinzons was shot while attempting to escape. ‘So sorry please.’

“The remains of the body of Vinzons, his father, wife, two chidren and sister have never been found.”

The Japanese Empire as portrayed in the Vinzons Museum. Video: APR

Imperial Japan showcase
One room of the museum is dedicated as a showcase to Imperial Japan and its brutal invasion across a great swathe of Southeast Asia and the brave Filipino resistance in response.

A special feature of the museum is how well it portrays typical Filipino lifestyle and social mores in a home of the political class in the 1930s.

When I visited the museum and talked to staff and watched documentaries about “Bintao” Vinzons’ life, one question in particular intrigued me: “Why was he thought of as a ‘forgotten hero’?”

According to acting curator Espina, “It’s partly because Camarines Norte is not as popular and well known as some other provinces. So some of the notable achievements of Vinzons do not have a high profile around in other parts of the country.”

Based at the museum is the town’s principal Tourism Officer Florence G Mago. She is optimistic about how the Vinzons Museum can attract more visitors to the town.

“We have put a lot of effort into developing this museum and we are proud of it. It is a jewel in the town.”

Nobody has a bad word to say about the French Resistance in the Second World War, right?  Who would criticise a group confronting fascism, right?

Yet this month the UK group Palestine Action has been proscribed as a “terrorist” organisation by their government for their non-violent direct action against UK-based industries supplying technology to fuel Israel’s destruction of the Palestinian people.

Are they terrorists or the very best of us in the West?

• READ MORE: Palestine Action: What has the group done, as it faces a ban?
• Other Israel’s Gaza genocide reports

Stéphane Hessel, a leading member of the French Resistance, survived time in Nazi concentration camps, including Buchenwald. After the war he was one of the co-authors of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948), a pillar of international law to this day.

The Declaration affirms the inherent dignity and equal rights of all humans. In later years Hessel (d. 2013), who was Jewish, saw the treatment of the Palestinians as an affront to this and repeatedly called Israel out for crimes against humanity.

Hessel argued people needed to be outraged just as he and his fellow fighters had been during the war.

In 2010, he said: “Today, my strongest feeling of indignation is over Palestine, both the Gaza Strip and the West Bank. The starting point of my outrage was the appeal launched by courageous Israelis to the Diaspora: you, our older siblings, come and see where our leaders are taking this country and how they are forgetting the fundamental human values of Judaism.”

In his book Indignez-vous (Time for Outrage!) he called for a “peaceful insurrection” and pointed to some of the non-violent forms of protests Palestinians had used over the years.

“The Israeli authorities have described these marches as ‘nonviolent terrorism’. Not bad . . .  One would have to be Israeli to describe nonviolence as terrorism.”

How wrong Stéphane Hessel was on this point. The British Parliament has just proscribed Palestine Action as “terrorists” despite them having never attacked anyone, never used weapons, but only undertaken destruction of property linked to the arms industry.

ANALYSIS: By Abdulwahab al-Mursi

On May 5, 2024, nearly seven months into Israel’s ongoing genocidal war on Gaza, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu declared that the main goal of the war was to destroy Hamas and prevent it from controlling Gaza.

However, over 250 days since this statement, and 470 days into the Israeli aggression, it has become clear that Netanyahu’s promises have faded into illusions.

In the early hours of the first phase of the ceasefire on Sunday, Israeli military radio reported that Hamas forces were reasserting their control over Gaza, stating that Hamas, which had never lost control of any part of the territory during the war, was using the ceasefire to strengthen its grip.

• READ MORE: Palestinian prisoners to be freed after 3 captives held in Gaza released
• Delay in Gaza ceasefire as Israel kills 19 fails to daunt people celebrating
• Ceasefire in Gaza – so much excitement
• Gaza genocide protesters in NZ welcome ceasefire but will fight on for justice
• Other Israeli war on Gaza reports

This development highlights the gap between Israel’s strategic objectives and the reality on the ground, as images from Gaza continue to reveal widespread devastation and loss of life, yet Hamas remains firmly in control.

Popular Support: The backbone of Hamas
Military literature highlights the concept of “Center of Gravity” (COG) for military organisations, a concept that can vary depending on the organisation and context.

In the case of Hamas and Palestinian Resistance, the central element of their strength lies in the support of the local population.

This grassroots support provides Hamas with invaluable social depth, a continuous supply of human resources, and strong strategic backing.

The popular support and belief in the resistance’s strategic choices and leadership have allowed Hamas to maintain its popular mandate to achieve Palestinian national goals.

Recognising this, Israel has targeted Gaza’s civilian infrastructure both militarily and psychologically, aiming to raise the costs of supporting the resistance and weaken Hamas’s popular base.

Israel has treated Gaza’s entire civilian infrastructure as military targets, believing that expanding the death toll among civilians and inflicting maximum suffering would force the population to turn against Hamas.

Yet, despite these efforts, images of celebrations in Gaza, even in areas heavily targeted by Israel, underscore the exceptional nature of the Gaza situation, where resistance culture is deeply rooted and unyielding.

The strategic consciousness of Gaza’s people
There appears to be a collective strategic awareness among Gaza’s people to maintain a victorious image at all costs, even in the midst of devastating humanitarian crises.

This desire to project an image of resistance and triumph, despite the overwhelming tragedy, has led to spontaneous public displays of support for Hamas and resistance forces, reinforcing their resolve against the Israeli onslaught.

Failure of forced displacement plans
In the initial weeks of the war, Israel revealed its plan to forcibly relocate Gaza’s population.

Israeli media outlets reported in October 2023 that Netanyahu had proposed relocating Gaza’s residents to other countries.

However, after months of war, Gaza’s residents have shown an unshakable determination to remain, with displaced individuals in refugee camps celebrating their return to their homes, despite the widespread destruction they have suffered.

In northern Gaza, particularly in Beit Lahiya, Beit Hanoun, Jabaliya, and Shuja’iyya, Israel’s attempts to prevent the return of displaced residents became a significant obstacle to a ceasefire agreement, delaying it for months.

Israel’s plan, known as the “Generals’ Plan” by former Israeli military advisor Giora Eiland, aimed to create a buffer zone in northern Gaza by applying immense military and living pressures on the population.

However, as evident from the ongoing images from the region, the displaced population continues to resist and return, undermining Israel’s relocation goals.

Hamas’s military structure endures
One of Netanyahu’s primary goals was to dismantle Hamas’s military wing, the Al-Qassam Brigades.

However, in the early hours of the first phase of the ceasefire, images showed Hamas fighters organising military parades in southern Gaza, signalling the resilience of Hamas’s military structure even before the ceasefire officially began.

Despite Israeli claims of killing thousands of Hamas fighters and destroying significant portions of Gaza’s tunnel network, the rapid and organized emergence of Al-Qassam forces on the ground suggests that these Israeli claims may have been aimed more at reassuring the Israeli public about the progress of the war, rather than reflecting the true situation on the ground.

Failure of post-war plans
In December 2023, Netanyahu rejected Palestinian proposals that Hamas be included in Gaza’s post-war governance, insisting, “There will be no Hamas in the post-war period; we will eliminate them.”

Throughout the war, Israel attempted various unilateral methods to manage Gaza, including direct military administration and creating a new technocratic authority with local leaders, but all efforts failed.

Israeli military attempts to distribute humanitarian aid in Gaza also proved ineffective, as the army struggled to manage these operations.

As the conflict nears what is supposed to be its final phase, the governance structure in Gaza has not changed.

Hamas’s leadership, especially the Al-Qassam Brigades, continues to operate effectively, and the ceasefire agreement has allowed for the resumption of local security forces.

Even after Israel’s targeted assassinations of 723 members of Gaza’s police and security apparatus, the resilience of Gaza’s security forces has remained evident.

This failure of Israel’s post-war vision was highlighted by a comment from a political analyst on Israeli i24 News, who questioned the results of the prolonged military operation: “What have we achieved in a year and five months?

“We destroyed many homes, lost many of our best soldiers, and in the end, the result is the same: Hamas rules, aid enters, and the Qassam Brigades return.”

Republished from The Palestinian Chronicle with permission.

An Australian solidarity group for West Papua today warned of a fresh “heavy handed” Indonesian crackdown on Papuan villagers with more “arrests and torture”.

Joe Collins of the Australia West Papua Association (AWPA) gave the warning in the wake of the deployment of 30 elite rangers last week at the Ndeotadi 99 police post in Paniai district, Central Papua, following a deadly assault there by Papuan pro-independence resistance fighters.

Two Indonesian police officers were killed in the attack.

• READ MORE:  ‘Committed to human rights’, claims Indonesia over West Papua torture
• West Papuan wounds of suffering – diplomatic pressure on Indonesia needed urgently – Ronny Kareni
• Wenda condemns ‘sadistic brutality’ of Indonesian torture of Papuan – calls for UN action
• Other West Papua human rights reports

The AWPA warning also follows mounting outrage over a brutal video of an Indonesian Papuan man being tortured in a fuel drum that has gone viral.

Collins called on the federal government to “immediately condemn” the torture of West Papuans by the Australian-trained Indonesian security forces.

“If a security force sweep occurs in the region, we can expect the usual heavy-handed approach by the security forces,” Collins said in a statement.

“It’s not unusual for houses and food gardens to be destroyed during these operations, including the arrest and torture of Papuans.

“Local people usually flee their villages creating more IDP [internally displaced people]”.

60,000 plus IDPs
Human rights reports indicate there are more than 60,000 IDP in West Papua.

“The recent brutal torture of an indigenous Papuan man shows what can happen to West Papuans who fall foul of the Indonesian security forces,” Collins said.

“Anyone seeing this video which has gone viral must be shocked by the brutality of the military personal involved. 

The video clip was shot on 3 February 2024 during a security force raid in Puncak regency.

“The Australian government should immediately condemn the torture of West Papuans by the Indonesian security forces [which] Australia trains and holds exercises with.

“Do we have to remind the government of Article 7of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights? It states:

No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. In particular, no one shall be subjected without his free consent to medical or scientific experimentation.

“As more Papuans become aware of the horrific video, they may respond by holding rallies and protests leading to more crackdowns on peaceful demonstrators,” Collins said.

“Hopefully Jakarta will realise the video is being watched by civil society, the media and government officials around the world and will control its military in the territory.”

Hamas has responded to Israel’s escalating violence with an unprecedented attack. This is not a new tragedy; it is an extension of the same old cycle.

We grieve all the losses of this calamity, and we call on our government not to speak the same old words but to finally act.

To call today’s act “unprovoked” is wilful blindness. Choose your timeframe; choose your provocation.

• READ MORE: Gaza-Israel war: Death toll rises as Israeli attacks continue to pound Gaza – live updates
• What is Hamas? A simple guide to the armed Palestinian group
• John Minto: Systemic NZ misreporting on Israeli occupation of Palestine and Palestinian resistance
• Al Jazeera coverage of the war
• Other Palestine reports

Israel is carrying out the longest, now-illegal, now-apartheid occupation in modern history. Gaza has been illegally blockaded for 17 years, confining more than two million mostly civilian human beings in deteriorating conditions, subjecting them to repeated bombardments and ceaseless deprivation.

More than 200 Palestinians have been killed in 2023 so far, including four the other day. The latest of Israel’s settler-state pogroms in the West Bank took place in Huwara one day before Hamas’s action.

Hamas’s attack is a response to longterm and escalating, immediate violence.

The blockade wall that was breached is an illegal structure. A million children have been born behind that wall; did you expect them to sit quietly?

Wall deserves to fall
That wall deserves to fall — but we, here in Aotearoa and throughout the world, should have brought it down with diplomatic and economic and legal sanctions long before it came to this.

Now Hamas’s violent resistance has broken through the wall.

Palestinians have a legal right to armed resistance, but no one has a right to unlimited violence. There is no honour in attacking civilians in their homes or bombing Gazan apartment buildings.

It is a core principle of international humanitarian law that the violations of one armed group do not release another armed group from its constant obligation to uphold the rights of civilians. Armed groups are responsible to the law, to the idea of minimising the harm done in this world.

We who demand the protection of Palestinian civilians can best do that by calling for the protection of all civilians: human rights are either everyone’s rights or they are nothing.

If we lose sight of that, the world becomes even more dangerous — and Palestinians have always borne the brunt of that danger.

No military solution
There is no military solution. Solutions call for political will here, outside Israel/Palestine.

The rage and despair accumulated through generations and decades of brutality will not reset. Do not call for the return to the status quo ante because it was intolerable, unjust and illegal.

We, here in Aotearoa New Zealand, need to act on the basis of law and the equal rights of human beings to protection, to justice, to self-determination.

We call on our government to initiate, to pick up the phone and lead in mustering international action.

For anyone to be safe, Palestinians must be free and civilians must be protected.

The Indonesian government has officially labelled the OPM (Organisasi Papua Merdeka) Free Papuan Movement and its military wing, the TPNPB (West Papua National Liberation Army) as a terrorist group.

This came about at the height of a string of shootings and killings – which have been taking place in recent months in Papua’s highlands – that led to the killing of a senior Indonesian intelligence officer, General I Gusti Putu Danny Karya Nugraha, last week.

In response, Indonesian President Joko Widodo has ordered a crackdown on the armed resistance group OPM – TPNPB.

• READ MORE: Branding armed Papuan resistance as ‘terrorists’ angers rights groups, sparks media warning
• Papua rebels declared terrorists following clashes
• Internet cut in Papua as military operations intensify

A few days later, Mohammad Mahfud MD, the coordinating Minister for Political, Legal and Security Affairs, declared that those in Papua (presumably the OPM – TPNPB) who commit crimes would be classified as “terrorists”.

The People’s Consultative Assembly (MPR) Speaker in Jakarta, Bambang Soesatyo, stressed this issue by saying, “I demand that the government deploy their security forces at full force to exterminate the armed criminal groups (KKP) in Papua which have taken lives.

“Just eradicate them. Let’s talk about human rights later.”

This announcement and such statements have caused a reaction among Indonesian leaders and civil society groups.

Opportunity for resistance
Police observer Irjen Pol Purn Sisno Adiwinoto warned that labelling Papuan independence groups as “terrorists” would not solve problems in West Papua.

“If anything, this might just be the opportunity for resistance groups to get the United States involved,” said Adiwinoto.

Philip Situmorang, public relations officer from the Fellowship of Churches in Indonesia (PGI), asked the government to be careful of their decision to label the armed criminal group (KKB) as a terrorist group.

The church groups have warned that Jakarta should choose a different approach to Papua.

Labelling Papua as a terrorist will psychologically impact on the Papuan community, which might instil fear, distrust, and hatred among communities in the land of Papua.

West Papua is a region known for the international media blackout. This makes it challenging to allow independent media or human rights agencies to investigate the killings.

The country’s justice system often fails to provide fair, transparent justice for the alleged perpetrators.

Governor Enembe concerned
The governor of Papua province, Lukas Enembe, also expressed his concern about the central government announcement.

The statement released from the governor’s office stated that this labelling would affect the Papuan population, not just OPM – TPNPB. Papuans in West Papua and abroad will be stigmatised through the lens of the word terrorist.

Hence, the governor asked for the central government to review its decision comprehensively.

One of the seven points he made was that he strongly suggested the central government check with the United Nations about the decision.

Benny Wenda, the leader of the United Liberation Movement for West Papua, also condemned Jokowi’s announcement.

“My questions to the president of Indonesia are: Who invaded our country in the first place? Who has killed over 500,000 men, women, and children? Who has displaced over 50,000 civilians since December 2018, leading to the deaths of hundreds of more people?

An illegal invasion and occupation is a criminal act. Genocide is a terrorist act. Resistance to these are legitimate and necessary,” Benny Wenda said.

Harmful policy for Papuans
These concerns are expressed in recognition that, after 60 years, Jakarta insists on introducing a policy that will harm the Papuan people.

Fifty-eight years ago, in May 1963, was the landing of Indonesian troops after the Western power gave them the green light during the controversial “New York Agreement” – the agreement in which Papuans were not invited.

The real terror in Papua began from that day.

Jakarta invents words and phrases and decides their definitions to control Papuan people.

The Indonesian government has used many names and phrases to legitimise their military operations in the land of Papua.

Between 1964–1966, leading up to the Act of Free Choice in 1969 (which Papuans consider a sham, or an “Act of No Choice”), army general Kartidjo Sastrodinoto led an operation called “Operasi Wisnurmurti III and IV”.

The years between 1977-1982, a general named Imam Munandar led another operation named “Operasi Kikis”, followed by “Operasi Sapu Bersih”.

The “Operasi Penyisiran” was another name given for 2002-2004 operations in Wamena, Papua’s highland town.

Many military operations
These are just a few of many, both visible and invisible, military operations in West Papua.

These terminologies carry specific energy and command and manifest different state behaviours that target Papuan lives; they mean something like “wipe-out, clean, straighten, remove, taming the wild forest, restoring order” etc.

They are not the languages of healing and reconciliation but of war and elimination.

Elites in Jakarta have convinced themselves to believe that there is a monster in the land of Papua and that the beast needs to be eliminated. This paranoid way of thinking is akin to saying all non-black immigrants in the land of Papua are scary, so we should label them as demons and kill them or labelling all Muslims as terrorists because they are following the religion of Islam.

The Papua governor and civil society groups are concerned that every Papuan will be stigmatised as a terrorist, regardless of whether they are a member of OPM – TPNPB or not.
This labelling is not just to harm OPM – TPNPB but is a direct assault on Papuan history, language, livelihood, and aspirations for a better world, pushed by Papuan resistance groups.

One of the main concerns that have been raised within the resistance movements is that the Indonesian government is labelling West Papua national liberation as a terrorist to criminalise the movement and depict them as radical extremists in the eyes of international communities.

This is an old colonial game, where blaming the victims makes it difficult for them to report the crimes, allowing the perpetrators to avoid being held accountable for their actions.

Metro TV interview
In the media interview by Metrotvnews on April 30, Mohammad Mahfud MD stated they must contain the situation in West Papua before controlling the situation outside of Papua, inferring that influencing public opinion in the international community must begin by creating a terrorist of West Papua.

The central government in Jakarta will use the word “terrorist” to convince the international community not to support these activist groups in West Papua. It intends to damage the integrity and reputation of the West Papua liberation movement, which has been gaining a lot of sympathy from international communities and institutions such as ACP (Africa Caribbean Pacific group of states), MSG (Melanesian Spearhead Group), PIF (Pacific Islands Forum) and Human Rights Council in Geneva.

Many described the announcement as a desperate attempt to halt the region’s independence movement. David Robie wrote that this is Jakarta’s “worst ever” policy on West Papua, as reported by Asia Pacific Report last week on April 30.

President Jokowi’s welfare approach and his 12 visits to Papua turned out to be a mere trojan horse. He and his government are not delivering welfare to Papuan people at all – they are creating terrorists in West Papua to justify war against the Papuan people.

How will they distinguish and catch this monster, which they have called “terrorist” in Papua? Or are they going to create one that looks like a terrorist?

Is OPM a terrorist group or a legendary saviour in Papuan’s independence imagination?

In the 1980s, when I was growing up in my highland village of Papua from the ages of 8-12, I often heard the name OPM. At the time, the name sounded like it had magical power. I still associate the name OPM with that story.

OPM ‘has secret power’
At that time, I was told that OPM has a secret power that controls weather patterns. My family said that if you see heavy rain or thick clouds covering the mountains, then it is a sign that OPM is near or OPM created the bad weather to confuse their enemies.

This kind of story made me very curious about the name OPM.

I then asked my elders, who were OPM’s enemy and whether OPM were human or forest spirits? They would say to me that OPM were not forest spirits. They were human beings just like us, but they couldn’t divulge their identities to keep their family members safe from interrogation if their true identities were revealed to Indonesian soldiers.

According to the village story, OPM have the power of nature, and they can obscure the sight of the Indonesian soldiers and make them crazy. At the time, I was astonished by these stories.

With these fascinations, I continued to ask if the OPM was something that I should fear.

They would tell me, “child, you should not be afraid of the OPM, because the OPM will protect you, and they will expel the Indonesian soldiers who were roaming around here, killing and raping women”.

I grew up with these types of stories, and I am sure that many Papuans have similar stories to tell about what the name of OPM means to them.

Hope for a better world
OPM carries the spirit that keeps the hope of a better world (free from Indonesia) alive. That’s how I understand it. That hope, in Papuans’ imagination, is political independence from Indonesia.

To be OPM is to be a proud Papuan, and to be Papuan is to be proud to be OPM because, in the minds of Papuans, OPM represents hope, freedom, salvation, healing, and reconciliation.

As legend has it in the island of Biak, during the early 1940s, before Indonesia got their Independence from the Dutch, it was the spirit of the Morning Star that healed the legends Manarmakeri and Angganitha.

Papuan people in the Biak island were already dreaming of a new world – a world free from terror, with the spirit of the Morning Star before Indonesia gained its independence in 1945.

OPM stands to manifest that utopian dream of a Papuan free state as sovereign people. This fear of manifesting Papuan statehood drives Jakarta’s reckless policies toward West Papua.

If Papuans were asked, without any intimidation or bribery, which spirit do they trust and believe in, the OPM or Indonesia security forces, I am confident that they would choose the spirit and the legend of OPM because that spirit stands for freedom and salvation.

The word “terrorist” is the deadliest weapon that Indonesia has invented to kill Papuan people

Labelling is dangerous
This reckless labelling is dangerous, as already expressed by Governor Lukas and other civil society groups, because all Papuan people will suffer, not just OPM. Papuan people are already suffering in every aspect of their lives, this labelling will add more under the Indonesian rule and western capitalist world order.

It is unfortunate that Indonesia is one of the most religious places, and yet unable to uphold its own religious morals and ethical teachings, as inscribed in their constitutional pillars: Ketuhanan Yang Maha Esa (Belief in the Almighty God) and Kemanusiaan Yang Adil dan Beradab (Just and Civilised Humanity). Do the Indonesian ruling elites still believe in these words?

With all the human and material resources being spent on securing West Papua, the question we need to be asking is, ‘why is Jakarta still unable to catch all the perpetrators and bring them to face justice?’

If the elites in Jakarta believe with sincerity in promoting the slogan “wonderful Indonesia” on the world’s stage, then the way they approach Papua needs to change.

Papua will always be like a pebble in Indonesia’s shoe – it must be resolved in a humane manner if the “wonderful Indonesia dream” is to be fully realised. Turning West Papua into a terrorist and justifying it to wage war against the Papuan people is not the way to achieve peace in the land of Papua.

• Yamin Kogoya is a West Papuan academic who has a Master of Applied Anthropology and Participatory Development from the Australian National University who contributes to Asia Pacific Report. From the Lani tribe in the Papuan Highlands, he is currently living in the Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia.
  
• Other Yamin Kogoya articles