COMMENTARY: By Eugene Doyle

30 April 1975. Saigon Fell, Vietnam Rose. The story of Vietnam after the US fled the country is not a fairy tale, it is not a one-dimensional parable of resurrection, of liberation from oppression, of joy for all — but there is a great deal to celebrate.

After over a century of brutal colonial oppression by the French, the Japanese, and the Americans and their various minions, the people of Vietnam won victory in one of the great liberation struggles of history.

It became a source of inspiration and of hope for millions of people oppressed by imperial powers in Central & South America, Asia, Africa, the Middle East and Eastern Europe.

• READ MORE: Part 1: The fall of Saigon 1975: Fifty years of repeating what was forgotten
• The fall of Saigon 1975: Part 2: The Quiet mutiny and the US army falls apart

Civil war – a war among several
The civil war in Vietnam, coterminous with the war against the Western powers, pitted communists and anti-communists in a long and pitiless struggle.

Within that were various strands — North versus South, southern communists and nationalists against pro-Western forces, and so on. As various political economists have pointed out, all wars are in some way class wars too — pitting the elites against ordinary people.

As has happened repeatedly throughout history, once one or more great power becomes involved in a civil war it is subsumed within that colonial war. The South’s President Ngô Đình Diệm, for example, was assassinated on orders of the Americans.

By 1969, US aid accounted for 80 percent of South Vietnam’s government budget; they effectively owned the South and literally called the shots.

US punishes its victims
This month, 50 years after the Vietnamese achieved independence from their colonial overlords, US President Donald Trump declared April 2 “Liberation Day” and imposed some of the heaviest tariffs on Vietnam because they didn’t buy enough US goods!

As economist Joseph Stiglitz pointed out, they don’t yet have enough aggregate demand for the kind of goods the US produces. That might have something to do with the decades it has taken to rebuild their lives and economy from the Armageddon inflicted on them by the US, Australia, New Zealand and other unindicted war criminals.

Straight after they fled, the US declared themselves the victims of the Vietnamese and imposed punitive sanctions on liberated Vietnam for decades — punishing their victims.

Under Gerald Ford (1974–1977), Jimmy Carter (1977–1981), Ronald Reagan (1981–1989), George H.W. Bush (1989–1993) right up to Bill Clinton (1993–2001), the US enforced the Trading with the Enemy Act (TWEA) of 1917.

The US froze the assets of Vietnam at the very time it was trying to recover from the wholesale devastation of the country.

Tens of millions of much-needed dollars were captured in US banks, enforced by the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). The US also took advantage of its muscle to veto IMF and World Bank loans to Vietnam.

Countries like Australia and New Zealand, to their eternal shame, took part in both the war, the war crimes, and imposing sanctions and other punitive measures subsequently.

The ‘Boat People’ refugee crisis
While millions celebrated the victory in 1975, millions of others were fearful. The period of national unification and economic recovery was painful, typically repressive — when one militarised regime replaces another.

This triggered flight: firstly among urban elites — military officers, government workers, and professionals who were most closely-linked to the US-run regime.

You can blame the Commies for the ensuing refugee crisis but by strangling the Vietnamese economy, refusing to return Vietnamese assets held in the US, imposing an effective blockade on the economy via sanctions, the US deepened the crisis, which saw over two million flee the country between 1975 and the 1980s.

More than 250,000 desperate people died at sea.

Đổi Mới: the move to a socialist-market economy
In 1986, to energise the economy, the government moved away from a command economy and launched the đổi mới reforms which created a hybrid socialist-market economy.

They had taken a leaf out of the Chinese playbook, which under the leadership of Deng Xiaoping (1978 –1989), had moved towards a market economy through its “Reform and Opening Up” policies.  Vietnam saw the “economic miracle” of its near neighbour and its leaders sought something similar.

Vietnam’s economy boomed and GDP grew from $18.1 billion in 1984 to $469 billion by 2024, with a per capita GDP at purchasing power parity (PPP) of $15,470 (up from about $300 per capita in the 1970s).

After a sluggish start, literacy rates soared to 96.1 percent by 2023, and life expectancy reached 73.7 years, only a few short of the USA.  GDP growth is around 7 percent, according to the OECD.

An unequal society
Persistent inequality suggests the socialist vision has partially faded. A rural-urban divide and a rich-poor divide underlines ongoing injustices around quality of life and access to services but Vietnam’s Gini coefficient — a measure of income inequality — puts it only slightly more “unequal” as a society than New Zealand or Germany.

Corruption is also an issue in the country.

Press controls and political repression
As in China, political power resides with the Party. Freedom of expression — highlighted by press repression — is severely limited in Vietnam and nothing to celebrate.

Reporters Without Borders (RSF) rates Vietnam as 174th out of 180 countries for press freedom and regularly excoriates its strongmen as press “predators”.  In its country profile, RSF says of Vietnam: “Independent reporters and bloggers are often jailed, making Vietnam the world’s third largest jailer of journalists”.

Vietnam is forging its own destiny
What is well worth celebrating, however, is that Vietnam successfully got the imperial powers off its back and out of its country. It is well-placed to play an increasingly prosperous and positive role in the emerging multipolar world.

It is part of the World Trade Organisation (WTO), and the ASEAN network, and borders China, giving Vietnam the opportunity to weather any storms coming from the continent of America.

Vietnam today is united and free and millions of ordinary people have achieved security, health, education and prosperity vastly better than their parents and grandparents’ generations were able to.

In the end the honour and glory go to the Vietnamese people.

I’ll give the last word to Ho Chi Minh, the great leader of the Vietnamese people who reached out to the United States, and sought alliance not conflict. He was rebuffed by the super-power which had a different agenda.

On September 2, 1945, Ho Chi Minh proclaimed the independent Democratic Republic of Vietnam in Hanoi’s Ba Dinh square:

“‘All men are created equal. They are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights, among them are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness.’

“This immortal statement was made in the Declaration of Independence of the United States of America in 1776. In a broader sense, this means: All the peoples on the earth are equal from birth, all the peoples have a right to live, to be happy and free.

“… A people who have courageously opposed French domination for more than eight years, a people who have fought side by side with the Allies against the Fascists during these last years, such a people must be free and independent.

“For these reasons, we, members of the Provisional Government of the Democratic Republic of Vietnam, solemnly declare to the world that Vietnam has the right to be a free and independent country — and in fact is so already. The entire Vietnamese people are determined to mobilise all their physical and mental strength, to sacrifice their lives and property in order to safeguard their independence and liberty.”

And, my god, they did.

To conclude, a short poem attributed to Ho Chi Minh:

“After the rain, good weather.

“In the wink of an eye,

the universe throws off its muddy clothes.”

Eugene Doyle is a community organiser and activist in Wellington, New Zealand. He received an Absolutely Positively Wellingtonian award in 2023 for community service. His first demonstration was at the age of 12 against the Vietnam War. This article was first published at his public policy website Solidarity and is republished here with permission.

By Laraswati Ariadne Anwar in Suva

The Pacific Island countries are Indonesia’s neighbours. However, so far they are not very familiar to the ears of the Indonesian people.

One example is Fiji, the largest country in the Pacific Islands. This country, which consists of 330 islands and a population of 924,000 people, has actually had relations with Indonesia for 50 years.

In the context of regional geopolitics, Fiji is the anchor of Indonesian diplomacy in the Pacific.

• READ MORE:  When media freedom as the ‘oxygen of democracy’ and hypocrisy share the same Pacific arena — Pacific Media Watch
• Other Pacific Media Conference reports

Fiji is known as a gateway to the Pacific. This status has been held for centuries because, as the largest country and with the largest port, practically all commodities entering the Pacific Islands must go through Fiji.

Along with Papua New Guinea, Vanuatu, and the Front de Libération Nationale Kanak et Socialiste (FLNKS) of New Caledonia, Fiji forms the Melanesian Spearhead Group (MSG).

Indonesia now has the status of a associate member of the MSG, or one level higher than an observer.

For Indonesia, this closeness to the MSG is important because it is related to affirming Indonesia’s sovereignty.

Human rights violations
The MSG is very critical in monitoring the handling of human rights violations that occur in Papua. In terms of sovereignty, the MSG acknowledges Indonesia’s sovereignty as recorded in the Charter of the United Nations.

The academic community in Fiji is also highlighting human rights violations in Papua. As a Melanesian nation, the Fijian people sympathise with the Papuan community.

In Fiji, some individuals hold anti-Indonesian sentiment and support pro-independence movements in Papua. In several civil society organisations in Suva, the capital of Fiji, the Morning Star flag of West Papuan independence is also raised in solidarity.

Even so, Fijian academics realise that they lack context in examining Indonesian problems. This emerged in a talanoa or focused discussion with representatives of universities and Fiji’s mainstream media with a media delegation from Indonesia. The event was organised by the Indonesian Embassy in Suva.

Academics say that reading sources about Indonesia generally come from 50 years ago, causing them to have a limited understanding of developments in Indonesia. When examined, Indonesian journalists also found that they themselves lacked material about the Pacific Islands.

Both the Fiji and Indonesian groups realise that the information they receive about each other mainly comes from Western media. In practice, there is scepticism about coverage crafted according to a Western perspective.

“There must be open and meaningful dialogue between the people of Fiji and Indonesia in order to break down prejudices and provide space for contextual critical review into diplomatic relations between the two countries,” said Associate Professor Shailendra Singh, a former journalist who is now head of the journalism programme at the University of the South Pacific (USP). He was also chair of the 2024 Pacific International Media Conference Committee which was attended by the Indonesian delegation.

‘Prejudice’ towards Indonesia
According to experts in Fiji, the prejudice of the people in that country towards Indonesia is viewed as both a challenge and an opportunity to develop a more quality and substantive relationship.

In that international conference, representatives of mainstream media in the Pacific Islands criticised and expressed their dissatisfaction with donors.

The Pacific Islands are one of the most foreign aid-receiving regions in the world. Fiji is among the top five Pacific countries supported by donors.

Based on the Lowy Institute’s records from Australia as of October 31, 2023, there are 82 donor countries in the Pacific with a total contribution value of US$44 billion. Australia is the number one donor, followed by China.

The United States and New Zealand are also major donors. This situation has an impact on geopolitical competition issues in the region.

Indonesia is on the list of 82 countries, although in terms of the amount of funding contributed, it lags behind countries with advanced economies. Indonesia itself does not take the position to compete in terms of the amount of funds disbursed.

Thus, the Indonesian Ambassador to Fiji, Nauru, Kiribati, and Tuvalu, Dupito Simamora, said that Indonesia was present to bring a new colour.

“We are present to focus on community empowerment and exchange of experiences,” he said.

An example is the empowerment of maritime, capture fisheries, coffee farming, and training for immigration officers. This is more sustainable compared to the continuous provision of funds.

Maintaining ‘consistency’
Along with that, efforts to introduce Indonesia continue to be made, including through arts and culture scholarships, Dharmasiswa (a one-year non-degree scholarship programme offered to foreigners), and visits by journalists to Indonesia. This is done so that the participating Fiji community can experience for themselves the value of Bhinneka Tunggal Ika — the official motto of Indonesia, “Unity in diversity”.

Indonesia has also offered itself to Fiji and the Pacific Islands as a “gateway” to Southeast Asia. Fiji has the world’s best-selling mineral water product, Fiji Water. They are indeed targeting expanding their market to Southeast Asia, which has a population of 500 million people.

The Indonesian Embassy in Suva analysed the working pattern of the BIMP-EAGA, or the East ASEAN economic cooperation involving Indonesia, Malaysia, Brunei Darussalam and the Philippines. From there, a model that can be adopted which will be communicated to the MSG and developed according to the needs of the Pacific region.

In the ASEAN High-Level Conference of 2023, Indonesia initiated a development and empowerment cooperation with the South Pacific that was laid out in a memorandum of understanding between ASEAN and the Pacific Islands Forum (PIF).

At the World Water Forum (WWF) 2024 and the Island States Forum (AIS), the South Pacific region is one of the areas highlighted for cooperation. Climate crisis mitigation is a sector that is being developed, one of which is the cultivation of mangrove plants to prevent coastal erosion.

For Indonesia, cooperation with the Pacific is not just diplomacy. Through ASEAN, Indonesia is pushing for the ASEAN Outlook on the Indo-Pacific (AOIP). Essentially, the Indo-Pacific region is not an extension of any superpower.

All geopolitical and geo-economic competition in this region must be managed well in order to avoid conflict.

Indigenous perspectives
In the Indo-Pacific region, PIF and the Indian Ocean Rim Association (IORA) are important partners for ASEAN. Both are original intergovernmental organisations in the Indo-Pacific, making them vital in promoting a perception of the Indo-Pacific that aligns with the framework and perspective of indigenous populations.

On the other hand, Indonesia’s commitment to the principle of non-alignment was tested. Indonesia, which has a free-active foreign policy policy, emphasises that it is not looking for enemies.

However, can Indonesia guarantee the Pacific Islands that the friendship offered is sincere and will not force them to form camps?

At the same time, the Pacific community is also observing Indonesia’s sincerity in resolving various cases of human rights violations, especially in Papua. An open dialogue on this issue could be evidence of Indonesia’s democratic maturity.

Republished from Kompas in partnership with The University of the South Pacific.

Transparency International says the latest Corruption Perception Index shows another year of “little to no meaningful progress” towards curbing corruption in the Asia-Pacific region.

Transparency International has released its 2023 report, based on a points system, and Denmark, Finland and New Zealand top the list.

Other than New Zealand and Australia, Fiji is the highest-ranked Pacific country, coming in 53rd.

• READ MORE: Other Transparency International reports

Fiji has 53 points out of a possible 100.

Vanuatu is 61st (48 points) and Solomon Islands 70th (43 points).

Then it is a drop to Papua New Guinea in 133rd with 29 points.

Transparency International said the Asia-Pacific region showed long-term stagnation, although some countries historically at the top were backsliding.

‘Steady influx of . . .  incentives’
“While there’s a steady influx of economic, military or financial incentives to support development and climate goals, many Pacific countries have weak governance systems — which some donors overlook, exposing these substantial investments to high risk of corruption,” the organisation reported.

Transparency International said a 2020 survey in Asia showed that nearly one in seven people had been offered bribes in exchange for votes in a national, regional or local election in the past five years.

Meanwhile, in the Pacific region in 2021, approximately a quarter of respondents reported being offered a bribe for their votes.

“These findings show the serious implications for the ability of elections to bring in governments that can be trusted to control and curb corruption effectively.”

But the organisation said at the regional level, Pacific leaders continued to demonstrate some commitment to the fight against corruption, with the gradual implementation of the Teieniwa Vision — a set of collective anti-corruption priorities.

These were endorsed by the Pacific Islands Forum leaders in 2021.

“Progress has been slow and there has been limited involvement of regional civil society organisations around this initiative.

“ASEAN leaders should also continue to find common mechanisms to review their anti-corruption commitments under the ASEAN Political-Security Community Blueprint 2025, a ten-year plan aimed at instilling a culture of integrity and anti-corruption in the region.”

They should also continue strengthening their national and regional anti-corruption frameworks, and increasing joint efforts to address grand corruption, Transparency International said.

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

Papua New Guinea Prime Minister James Marape has backtracked on his comments that PNG had “no right to comment” on human rights abuses in West Papua and has offered a clarification to “clear misconceptions and apprehension”.

Last week, Marape met Indonesian President Joko Widodo at the sidelines of the 43rd ASEAN summit in Jakarta.

According to a statement released by Marape’s office, he revealed that he “abstained” from supporting the West Papuan bid to join the Melanesian Spearhead Group Leaders’ Summit held in Port Vila, Vanuatu, last month because the United Liberation Movement for West Papua (ULMWP) “does not meet the requirements of a fully-fledged sovereign nation”.

• READ MORE: MSG throws away golden chance to reset peace and justice for West Papua
• Marape claims PNG has ‘no right’ to criticise abuses in West Papua
• Other West Papua reports

However, on Saturday, his office again released a statement, saying that the statement released two days earlier had been “released without consent” and that it “wrongfully” said that he had abstained on the West Papua issue.

“Papua New Guinea never abstained from West Papua matters at the MSG meeting,” he said.

He said PNG “offered solutions that affirmed Indonesian sovereignty over her territories”, adding that “at the same time [PNG] supported the collective MSG position to back the Pacific Islands Forum Resolution of 2019 on United Nations to assess if there are human right abuses in West Papua and Papua provinces of Indonesia.”

Marape said PNG stressed to President Widodo its respect for Indonesian sovereignty and their territorial rights.

Collective Melanesian, Pacific resolutions
“But on matters of human rights, I pointed out the collective Melanesian and Pacific resolutions for the United Nations to be allowed to ascertain [human rights] allegations.”

According to Marape the four MSG leaders have agreed to visit the Indonesian President “at his convenience to discuss this matter”.

“President Widodo responded that the MSG leaders are welcome to meet him and invited them to an October meeting subject on the availability of all leaders. He assured me that all is okay in the two Papuan provinces and invited other PNG leaders to visit these provinces.”

Pacific Media Watch reports that there are actually currently six provinces in the West Papua region, not two, under Indonesia’s divide-and-rule policies.

Since 30 June 2022, the region has been split into the following provinces – Papua (including the capital city of Jayapura), Central Papua, Highland Papua, South Papua, Southwest Papua and West Papua.

Marape has also said that his deputy John Rosso was also expected to lead a delegation to West Papua to “look into matters in respect to human rights”.

Meanwhile, he believes the presence of Indonesia on MSG as an associate member and ULMWP as observer at the MSG “is sufficient for the moment”.

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

Papua New Guinea Prime Minister James Marape has told Indonesia’s President Joko Widodo that PNG has no right to criticise Jakarta over what he calls alleged human rights abuses in West Papua.

The two leaders spoke on the sidelines of the ASEAN summit in Jakarta, reaffirming commitments to maintain dialogue to build stronger and trustful relations that had been made when they met in Port Moresby in July.

Marape told Widodo he had abstained from supporting the West Papuan bid to join the Melanesian Spearhead Group at last month’s meeting in Port Vila because the United Liberation Movement for West Papua (ULMWP) “does not meet the requirements of a fully-fledged sovereign nation”.

• READ MORE:  MSG throws away golden chance to reset peace and justice for West Papua
• Other West Papua human rights reports

“Indonesia’s associate membership status, also as a Melanesian country to the MSG suffices, which cancels out West Papua ULM’s bid,” Marape said, referring to the ULMWP.

He said about the allegations of human rights issues in West Papua, that since PNG had its own challenges, it had no moral grounds to comment on human rights issues outside of its own jurisdiction.

The Indonesian president said PNG deputy Prime Pinister John Rosso would be invited to assess developments taking place in West Papua.

Widodo said Indonesia’s was committed to building trustful and cooperative relations with all Pacific countries and would extend an invitation to their leaders to attend the Archipelagic Island States (AIS) Forum next month in Indonesia.

Meanwhile, on the planned electrification project in PNG’s western provinces, the two leaders pledged to ensure this project would go ahead smoothly and is completed on time.

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

Two days after being elected as Prime Minister again in Papua New Guinea, James Marape took his first official trip as the country’s leader while hitting the ground running in groundbreaking clean green energy projects he has been championing over the past two years.

He met with leaders of Fortescue Future Industries (FFI) in Singapore yesterday to progress the talks further.

After numerous questions on the trip to Singapore taken by Marape on Friday afternoon a statement was released about midnight through other social media platforms.

• READ MORE: Other reports on the PNG elections

In the morning, the PM’s Department released the statement at 7.30 am after the country became aware of Marape’s trip to Singapore.

The Prime Minister flew to Singapore to continue important trade and investment conversations, including those on Papua LNG, Pasca LNG, Pn’yang LNG and also to get Porgera and Wafi-Golpu sanctioned.

He said from Singapore that FFI had voiced its intention to partner with Papua New Guinea in a big way to harvest clean green energy from both hydro and geothermal sources and to move into solar and wind energy production.

Currently, FFI has identified and set up project sites in Gulf Province for hydro and West New Britain Province for geothermal work and has been working in these areas since the signing of two important agreements since 2021.

Clean green energy way of future
Marape said from Singapore: “With global consciousness of fossil fuel-induced global warming, clean green energy is the way to move into the future and this meeting follows on the head agreement PNG has signed with FFI to progress investment in this energy sector.”

The Prime Minister also visited the PNG High Commission in Singapore with a view to strengthening it further as a trade and investment office while getting the PNG government to increase trade and investment with the ASEAN and APEC countries.

He said: “The Singapore office will be given more support in that context in partnership with Investment Promotion Authority, the Kumul companies, National Fisheries and Forestry authorities, and our Agriculture and Livestock departments so that it coordinates export and trade into the lucrative Asian market of over 2 billion people who need food and energy, and products PNG can mass produce into the future as we are planning under my government.”

Republished with permission.

Nobel laureates José Ramos-Horta and Maria Ressa have urged Southeast Asians to keep working toward a better region where democratic freedoms are protected in lecture leading into World Press Freedom Day on May 3.

Nobel laureates José Ramos-Horta and Maria Ressa have called on Southeast Asians to fight for democracy and continue demanding human rights amid growing threats to democratic freedoms in the region.

Ramos-Horta, a longtime politician and independence leader in Timor-Leste, along with Ressa, veteran journalist and co-founder of Rappler, made the statements in an online lecture titled “Freedom in Southeast Asia” last Tuesday.

The discussion centred on ethical issues and the future of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) in the areas of governing democracy, human rights, freedom of speech, freedom of the press, and social media.

• READ MORE: Other media freedom reports

“We have to keep fighting to improve democracy, perfect democracy as we have been fighting for decades, continue understanding that there will be setbacks, there will be triumphs for democracy again,” Ramos-Horta said.

Ramos-Horta recently won Timor-Leste’s presidential election, gaining 62 percent of votes after facing off with incumbent President Francisco “Lu Olo” Guterres, who secured 37 percent.

Ramos-Horta, one of East Timor’s best known political figures, was also president from 2007 to 2012, and prime minister and foreign minister before that.

Ramos-Horta said part of the reason he decided to run for public office again was inadequate government response to crises like the covid-19 pandemic. The president-elect said he would work to respond to global economic pressures, including supply chain issues stemming from the Russia-Ukraine war and covid-19 lockdowns in China.

‘Demand good governance’
“Don’t lose sight of what is important. Fight, but fight not with radicalism but fight with brains, wisdom, and a great deal of humility,” Ramos-Horta said.

Ressa, who covered Ramos-Horta as a journalist, echoed this call, saying that people in Southeast Asia “must continue demanding our rights and demanding good governance.”

“Our public officials need to realize that in the end, their struggle for power should not impede on the ability to deliver what their citizens need,” she said.

The full media freedom lecture. Video: Rappler

‘Enlightened self-interest’
Ressa, who has reported on democracy movements in Southeast Asia, said ASEAN has not been able to live up to its promises since it was founded in 1967. While advances have been made, the fight to protect democracy, she said, faces steeper challenges, including the use of social media platforms to spread lies and hate.

Ressa challenged leaders and the public to practice “enlightened self-interest” in an effort to foster a code of ethics that could push back against corruption and abuse.

“I can distill almost everything wrong into two words: power and money – and how do you put guardrails around the people who have that? Ethics, rules-based [order], and they themselves limit themselves because there is a greater good. This is not just ASEAN, it is universal,” she said.

In fighting for democracy in the region, the Rappler co-founder also urged young people to first think of what they consider important and what freedoms they are willing to fight for.

She said: “Because of social media, democracy now is a person-to-person battle for integrity. And so the question for you is, where do you draw the line?

“How well will you give up some of your power to others in order to have a better world? What kind of leader not only do you want, but what kind of leader do you want to be?”

Ramos-Horta reminded the public to “live up to the responsibility” the region has in Myanmar, where a military coup plunged the country into turmoil, derailing a decade of democratic reforms and economic gain.

Expected to join ASEAN
Ramos-Horta earlier said he expected Timor-Leste to become the 11th member of the ASEAN “within this year or next year at the latest.” It currently holds observer status in the bloc – and also observer status with the Pacific Islands Forum.

“The message to the young people: You want a better Southeast Asia? You want a better region, better community that is generous, embracing of everyone because Southeast Asia is extraordinarily rich in diversity – and that makes Southeast Asia unique – then fight for it,” he said.

“Do not abandon the people of Myanmar who feel completely abandoned. That is the absolute priority for us in Southeast Asia,” he added.

Sofia Tomacruz is a Rappler reporter. Republished with permission.

Independence leader and Nobel laureate José Ramos-Horta has declared victory in Timor-Leste’s presidential election, saying he had secured “overwhelming” support and would now work to foster dialogue and unity.

Data from the country’s election administration body (STAE) with all votes counted showed Ramos-Horta secured a decisive 62 percent win in Tuesday’s ballot, well ahead of his opponent, incumbent President Francisco “Lu Olo” Guterres with 37 percent.

“I have received this mandate from our people, from the nation in an overwhelming demonstration of our people’s commitment to democracy,” Ramos-Horta told reporters in Dili.

• READ MORE: Ramos-Horta declares victory in East Timor presidential election
• Other Timorese elections reports

The 72-year-old statesman is one of Timor-Leste’s best known political figures and was previously president from 2007-12, and prime minister and foreign minister before that.

Addressing concerns over political instability in the country, Ramos-Horta said he would work to heal divisions in Timor-Leste.

“I will do what I have always done throughout my life… I will always pursue dialogue, patiently, relentlessly, to find common ground to find solutions to the challenges this country faces,” he said.

Ramos-Horta said he had not spoken to his election rival Lu Olo, but had received an invitation from the President’s Office to discuss a handover of power.

Political instability, oil dependency
Home to 1.3 million people, the half-island and predominately Roman Catholic nation of Timor-Leste has for years grappled with bouts of political instability and the challenge of diversifying its economy, which is largely dependent on oil and gas.

Ramos-Horta said he expected Timor-Leste to become the 11th member of the regional bloc the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) “within this year or next year at the latest”.

Timor-Leste currently holds observer status in ASEAN.

The president-elect, who will be inaugurated on May 20, the 20th anniversary of the country’s restoration of independence, said he would work with the government to respond to global economic pressures, including the impact on supply chains from the war in Ukraine and covid-19 lockdowns in China.

“Of course, we start feeling it here in Timor Leste. Oil prices went up, rice went up, that is a reality of what has happened in the world. It requires wise leadership.”

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

The United States insists it is a Pacific nation and has unveiled a raft of new strategies to better engage with other nations in the Region.

US Secretary of State Antony Blinken is the first Secretary of State to visit Fiji in nearly 37 years.

During his historic visit, Blinken announced that the US was pursuing deeper engagement plans with Pacific nations.

• READ MORE: US to reopen Solomon Islands embassy amid moves to counter China
• Transparency watchdog seeks US help to tackle Pacific corruption

A key element and motivation for those plans is the strengthening of the US presence to match the growing influence of China in the Pacific.

In its engagement strategy, he said that China had combined its economic, diplomatic, military, and technological might to pursue “a sphere of influence in the Indo-Pacific and seeks to become the world’s most influential power”.

During an eight-hour visit to Fiji, while returning from a Quadrilateral Security Dialogue (QUAD) meeting in Australia, Blinken announced climate change financing, military and other exchange initiatives and plans for a new embassy in the Solomon Islands among other foreign diplomacy engagements.

Blinken has been on a world tour for the past several months to discuss two main issues: covid-19 and China, with his counterparts including Australian Foreign Affairs Minister Marise Payne, Indian Minister of External Affairs Dr S. Jaishankar and Japanese Minister for Foreign Affairs Hayashi Yoshimasa.

New Indo-Pacific engagement strategy
While in Fiji, Blinken met with acting Prime Minister Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum and 18 Pacific Island leaders virtually, during which he announced the US government’s brand new Indo-Pacific engagement strategy, calling the region “vital to our own prosperity, our own progress”.

Blinken said that the new strategy was the result of a year of extensive engagement in the Asia Pacific region and would reflect US determination to strengthen its long-term position in the region.

“We will focus on every corner of the region, from Northeast Asia and Southeast Asia, to South Asia and Oceania, including the Pacific Islands,” he said.

“We do so at a time when many of our allies and partners, including in Europe, are increasingly turning their own attention to the region; and when there is broad, bipartisan agreement in the U.S. Congress that the United States must, too.”

This American refocus is a direct response to the increasing influence of China in the Pacific.

Since 2006, Chinese trade and foreign aid to the Pacific has significantly increased. Beijing is now the third largest donor to the region.

Although Chinese aid still represents only 8 percent of all foreign aid between 2011 and 2017 (according to The Lowy Institute), many Pacific island governments have favoured concessional loans from China, to finance large infrastructure developments.

Chinese ‘coercion and aggression’
In Solomon Islands, where Blinken announced the latest US Embassy would be opened, almost half of all two-way trade is with China.

In describing China’s actions toward expanding its influence, Blinken stated:

“The PRC’s coercion and aggression spans the globe, but it is most acute in the Indo-Pacific. From the economic coercion of Australia to the conflict along the Line of Actual Control with India to the growing pressure on Taiwan and bullying of neighbours in the East and South China Seas, our allies and partners in the region bear much of the cost of the PRC’s harmful behaviour.

“In the process, the PRC is also undermining human rights and international law, including freedom of navigation, as well as other principles that have brought stability and prosperity to the Indo-Pacific.”

When questioned by reporters about US intentions for “authentic engagement that speaks to the real needs of the islanders”, Blinken replied that the US sees the Pacific as the region for the future, and that their intentions were beyond mere security concerns.

“It’s much more fundamental than that. When we are looking at this region that we share, we see it as the region for the future, vital to our own prosperity, our own progress.

“Sixty per cent of global GDP is here, 50 percent of the world’s population is here. For all the challenges that we have, at the moment we’re working on together, it’s also a source of tremendous opportunity.”

Democracy and transparency
Blinken insisted that Washington’s new strategy was about using democracy and transparency to build a free and open Indo-Pacific which was committed to a “rules based order”.

Moving onto economics, the Secretary of State stated that the US intends to forge partnerships and alliances within the region, which will include more work with ASEAN, APEC and the Pacific Islands Forum.

Despite being headquartered in Fiji, the Forum was not invited to be part of Blinken’s visit.

At the Pacific Leaders meeting, Blinken announced a commitment to deeper economic integration including measures to open market access for agricultural commodities from the islands.

“It’s about connecting our countries together, deepening and stitching together different partnerships and alliances. It’s about building shared prosperity, with new approaches to economic integration, some of which we talked about today with high standards.”

Washington’s new Indo Pacific engagement strategy also includes commitments to develop new approaches to trade, which meet high labour and environmental standards as well as to create more resilient and secure supply chains which are “diverse, open, and predictable.”

Climate change strategy
Regarding climate change, Blinken announced plans to divert substantial portions of the US$150 billion announced at COP26 last year to the Pacific and also plans to make shared investments in decarbonisation and clean energy.

The Indo Pacific strategy announced commitments to “working with allies and partners to develop 2030 and 2050 targets, strategies, plans, and policies consistent with limiting global temperature increase to 1.5 degrees Celsius”.

Blinken stated that the US was committed to reducing regional vulnerability to the impacts of climate change and environmental degradation.

On security matters, Blinken said the Pacific could expect power derived from US alliances in other parts of the world to come to the islands.

“The United States is increasingly speaking with one voice with our NATO allies and our G7 partners, when it comes to Indo Pacific matters, you can see the strength of that commitment to the Indo Pacific throughout the past year.”

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

Commission for Missing Persons and Victims of Violence (Kontras) coordinator Fatia Maulidiyanti has condemned the invitation to Myanmar coup leader General Min Aung Hlaing to attend the ASEAN ministerial conference in Jakarta at the weekend as revealing Indonesia’s true colours — that it is accepting of human rights violators.

“Min Aung Hlaing’s arrival actually shows that Indonesia is indeed very apologetic towards human rights violators not just domestically but internationally,” said Maulidiyanti.

Maulidiyanti said that Indonesia had acted the same way when it received Sudan President Omar Al-Bashir at the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) extraordinary leadership conference in 2016.

• READ MORE: Police scuffle with protesters against Myanmar junta leader at ASEAN

Yet, according to Maulidiyanti, Al-Bashir was a dictator and a fugitive of the International Criminal Court (ICC).

“Indonesia once did the same thing during the OIC Conference in 2016 when Indonesia also invited Omar Al-Bashir,” she said.

Based on the reception of these two human rights violators, Maulidiyanti questioned Indonesia’s position — which is actually reflected through President Joko “Jokowi” Widodo — with regard to protecting human rights.

The arrival of the Myanmar military junta leader is regrettable because it was as if Indonesia was paying no heed to the violence taking place in Myanmar.

Jakarta not heeding violence
“So here there is actually a question, what face is Indonesia presenting through President Joko Widodo and government officials by not heeding the violence occurring in Myanmar. The aim, rather than inviting the leader of the military junta, is to open dialogue,” she said.

Maulidiyanti questioned what the real aim was in inviting the lead of the Myanmar military junta to Jakarta.

Maulidiyanti emphasised that Indonesia should have invited the Myanmar National Unity Government (NUG) to the ASEAN meeting on Saturday afternoon.

“The government should have instead invited the NUG who are the elected representatives of the Myanmar people,” she said.

On the other hand, Maulidiyanti said that ASEAN had a very important role to play in resolving the problems in Myanmar. ASEAN should immediately take firm measures over the violence being committed by the Myanmar government.

The invitation of Min Aung Hlaing to the ASEAN conference proves that ASEAN was not a safe place for the protection of human rights.

“It can be seen from the cooperation where they don’t want to heed the situation or the importance of acting immediately against the Myanmar government today, meaning ASIAN is not a safe place for protecting human rights”, she said.

Widodo’s response
President Widodo said that the violence in Myanmar must stop. This was one of the points he stressed during the meeting with the eight leaders of ASEAN countries at the ASEAN Leaders Meeting in Jakarta.

“At the meeting earlier I conveyed several things. First, the situation developing in Myanmar is something which is unacceptable and cannot be allowed to continue,” said Widodo during a virtual press conference on the Presidential Secretariat YouTube channel.

“The violence must stop. Democracy and stability as well as peace in Myanmar must be restored immediately. The interests of the Myanmar people must always be the priority,” he said.

Second, Widodo emphasised the importance of General Min Aung Hlaing making two commitments.

An end to the use of violence by the Myanmar military and that all parties must restrain themselves so that tensions can be eased so that a process of dialogue can be begun.

“Political prisoners must be released immediately and an ASEAN special envoy needs to be established, namely the ASEAN secretary general and chairperson to promote dialogue between all parties in Myanmar,” said Widodo.

Third, he asked that access be given for humanitarian aid from ASEAN which would be coordinated by the ASEAN secretary general and the ASEAN Coordinating Center for Humanitarian Assistance (AHA Center).

Widodo also asserted that Indonesia wass committed to overseeing the above three commitments so that the crisis in Myanmar could be resolved.

“We thank God that what has been conveyed by Indonesia will turn out to be in accord with what has been conveyed by ASEAN leaders so it can be said that ASEAN leaders have reached a consensus,” said Widodo.

“The ASEAN secretary general has conveyed five points of concusses which will be conveyed by the ASEAN secretary general or chairperson. The contents are more or less the same as those that I conveyed earlier in the national statement which I conveyed earlier,” added the president.

The ASEAN leaders meeting which was held today in Jakarta was attended by the leaders of the nine countries in Southeast Asia: President Joko Widodo, Vietnam Prime Minister Pham Minh Chính, Brunei Darussalam Sultan Hassanal Bolkiah, Cambodian Prime Minister Hun Sen, Myanmar military chief General Min Aung Hlaing, Malaysian Prime Minister Muhyiddin Hassin, Laos Foreign Affairs Minister Laos Saleumxay Kommasith, Thai Foreign Affairs Minister Don Pramudwinai and Singapore Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong.

Translated by James Balowski for IndoLeft News. The original title of the article was “Soroti Kehadiran Min Aung Hlaing, Kontras: Indonesia Apologetik kepada Pelanggar HAM”.

Police have forced protesters demonstrating at the weekend against the attendance of Myanmar military commander General Min Aung Hlaing at the ASEAN Ministerial Level Conference (KTT) in Jakarta away from the meeting into the nearby Agung Al-Azhar Mosque area, reports CNN Indonesia.

The peaceful action was organised by the Leaders and Organisers of Community Organisation in Asia (LOCOA) in front of the ASEAN secretariat building in South Jakarta on Saturday.

The police then asked the protesters to move back from the ASEAN secretariat building.

• READ MORE: Criticism over Myanmar ASEAN deal with military coup leader

A scuffle broke out when police began forcing demonstrators away from the meeting venue. Police eventually maneouvered the protesters into the Agung Al-Azhar Mosque area.

Metro Jaya regional police traffic director Sambodo Purnomo Yogo said that the police had intentionally forced the protesters away in order to “sterilise” Jalan Sisingamaraja or the area in front of the ASEAN secretariat building.

“State guests will be passing through the Sisingamaraja route, so we pushed them further inside so that it would not disrupt the passing guests,” he said.

Yogo emphasised that they did not prohibit the demonstrators from conveying their views. “Please go ahead (and demonstrate) but inside,” he said.

Legitimate government not invited
In a media release, LOCOA said it regretted that the ASEAN Ministerial Level Conference to discuss the Myanmar crisis did not invite the legitimate government of Myanmar.

“LOCOA strongly condemns ASEAN and its member states because they invited the military junta to the KTT ASEAN”, read Saturday’s official release.

LOCOA also slammed the military junta for its violent actions against peaceful protesters and for committing illegal killings, arrests, torture and imprisonment with total impunity.

They demanded that the military end the violence against peaceful demonstrators and civilians and urged the United Nations to immediately send a monitoring and humanitarian support mission to Myanmar.

Myanmar’s military commander General Min Aung Hlaing who launched the coup d’etat against the civilian government attended the meeting.

Translated by James Balowski for IndoLeft News. The original title of the article was “Polisi Sekat Pedemo Junta Myanmar di Kawasan Masjid Al-Azhar”.

Since the coup in Myanmar on February 1, the international community has struggled to agree on coherent action against the military (also known as the Tatmadaw).

Tough action by the UN Security Council has been stymied by China, Russia, India and Vietnam, who see the Myanmar crisis as an internal affair.

Outside the UN, a strong, coordinated response by Myanmar’s neighbours in the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) has also been lacking due to their reluctance to interfere in each other’s affairs. Thai political expert Thitinan Pongsudhirak called it an “existential crisis” for the bloc

• READ MORE: As killings, beatings and disappearances escalate, what’s the end game in Myanmar?
  
• Ethical minefields: the dirty business of doing deals with Myanmar’s military
  
• Resistance to military regime in Myanmar mounts as nurses, bankers join protests – despite bloody crackdown

This reluctance, which has now cost the lives of over 500 civilians, rules out the use of military force to stop the violence, peacekeeping operations or even a humanitarian intervention.

It has left the international community with one remaining option for a coordinated response that could change the military’s behaviour: the imposition of economic sanctions. But even this action has been subject to much debate.

Follow the money
General sanctions that try to change the behaviour of authoritarian regimes by damaging their economies have proven problematic in the past.

Many leaders have invariably found ways around the sanctions, meaning civilians have disproportionately borne the costs of isolation.

In contrast, targeted sanctions against the specific financial interests that sustain authoritarian regimes have been more effective. These can impose pressure on regimes without affecting the broader population.

This is where the international community has the greatest potential to punish the Tatmadaw.

Since the US and other countries pursued more general sanctions on Myanmar in the 1990s and 2000s — with mixed results — the international community has gained a greater understanding of the Tatmadaw’s transnational revenue streams.

In particular, in 2019, the UN Fact-Finding Mission (UNFFM) on Myanmar released a report detailing the diverse Tatmadaw-linked enterprises that funnel revenue from foreign business transactions to the military’s leaders and units.

More recently, this list of potential targets has been expanded by non-government organisations and investigative journalists.

Researchers have also outlined the Tatmadaw’s dealings in illegal trade in drugs, gemstones, timber, wildlife and human trafficking.

The extent of information on the Tatmadaw’s financial flows shows just how vulnerable the military’s leaders are to international pressure.

Tracking the military’s legal and illegal business dealings makes it possible to identify its business partners in other countries. Governments in those countries can then take legal action against these business partners and shut off the flow of money keeping the junta afloat.

To some degree, this is starting to happen with Myanmar. The US and UK recently decided, for instance, to freeze assets and halt corporate trading with two Tatmadaw conglomerates — Myanmar Economic Corporation and Myanma Economic Holdings Limited. Both of these oversee a range of holdings in businesses that divert revenues directly to the Tatmadaw.

Myanmar’s trading partners can do more
This is only a starting point, though. To tighten the pressure on the junta, targeted sanctions need to be imposed against the full suite of entities identified by the UNFFM. These include groups like Justice for Myanmar and journalists.

The sanctions need to be accompanied by broader investigations into the Tatmadaw’s revenues from illicit trade. To counter this, Human Rights Watch has urged governments to enforce anti-money laundering and anti-corruption measures, including the freezing of assets.

Singapore’s central bank has reportedly told financial institutions to be on the look-out for suspicious transactions or money flows between the city-state and Myanmar. Singapore is the largest foreign investor in the country.

Moreover, for maximum impact, targeted sanctions need to be imposed not just by the West, but by Myanmar’s largest trading partners in the region. This includes Singapore, along with China, India, Indonesia, Japan and Thailand.

Business leaders in these countries have historically had the closest ties with Myanmar’s military and business elites. But their participation in a multi-national targeted sanctions strategy is not out of the question. For one, this would not require direct intervention within Myanmar, something they are loath to do. Imposing targeted sanctions would merely entail enforcing their domestic laws regarding appropriate business practices.

International action is becoming more urgent. Beyond the concerns about the killings of unarmed civilians, there is a larger issue of the violence extending beyond Myanmar’s borders. There are growing fears the crisis could turn Myanmar into a failed state, driving refugee flows capable of destabilising the entire region.

In short, this is no longer an “internal” matter for Myanmar — it is becoming a transnational problem that will affect regional peace and security. The tools are there to stop the financial flows to the Tatmadaw and curtail their operations. It is critical to act before the Myanmar crisis grows into an international disaster.

Dr Jonathan Liljeblad is a senior lecturer at the Australian National University. This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons licence. Read the original article.

Human rights lawyer Veronica Koman has challenged the contrasting positions taken by the Indonesian government in response to calls to resolve the Papua problem and in its response to the military coup in Myanmar.

Koman said Indonesia’s position on the Myanmar coup had been very good, but not its attitude on the Papua issue.

“It’s funny, Indonesia pays no attention to international pressure to resolve the conflict in Papua, but has the courage to stand up to Myanmar, which is actually a very good move”, said Koman during a webinar held by the Milk Tea Alliance Indonesia last Sunday.

• READ MORE: Myanmar’s Bloody Sunday – security forces ‘live tracking’ media, protesters

Koman said the Indonesian public could not take a position of indifference in addressing the coup in Myanmar.

This is because, according to Koman, what has happened in Myanmar could well happen in Indonesia as well.

“I think that the problem of the coup d’etat in Myanmar is a mutual problem, it doesn’t mean that with the coup in Myanmar we as Indonesians can just be ambivalent, let alone our ASEAN neighbours, so it’s very important that Indonesia stands in solidarity [with the Burmese people],” she said.

“Because, what is happening in the region is actually very influential. Don’t consider it something inconsequential, because if we look at the Arab Spring it took place [across an entire] region.

Militarism ‘can spread too’
“Revolutions can spread, so why can’t militarism [too],” said Koman.

Koman noted that the Indonesian Legal Aid Foundation (YLBHI) and the Commission for Missing Persons and Victims of Violence (Kontras) had stated that the military in Indonesia were becoming more of a problem because they were now taking part in guarding demonstrations by civil society.

According to Koman, the thing that actually differentiates Indonesia from Myanmar is only the coup itself.

“Actually it’s the same, just in Indonesia there hasn’t been an obvious coup d’etat, yet the military in Indonesia is already involved in civil [affairs] through regulations which allow the TNI [Indonesian military] at civil demonstrations,” said Koman.

Leaving this aside, Koman is calling on the Indonesian public to speak out in order to pressure the government to take a firmer stand on the Myanmar coup d’etat.

Koman said that this represents a moment for the people of Southeast Asia to rise up against undemocratic tendencies in the region.

“Because there is something which is known in international circles as the ASEAN way, and this has been criticised by many people, it means just staying quiet as if they support each other’s non-democracies,” she said.

Translated by James Balowski for IndoLeft News. The original title of the article was “Veronica Koman Singgung Sikap RI di Isu Papua dan Myanmar”.

Incoming editor Philip Cass highlights the recent “covid-free” success of several Pacific countries while acknowledging the recent reversals in that impressive record.

He laments the appalling record of the United States under the failure of covid leadership by defeated US President Donald Trump, a situation that has been echoed in the American territories in the Pacific such as Guam.

• READ MORE: Pacific Journalism Review – the full archives

“Comparatively safe as we are in New Zealand, this is still the second edition of Pacific Journalism Review we have produced with covid-19 in the background and even when the pandemic is over, or at least brought under control, we will still be threatened by a host of challenges—not least that of climate change, which has already forced internal migration in Papua New Guinea and Fiji and threatens to do the same in the ASEAN region, with its incomparably larger population,” writes Dr Cass in the editorial.

He says it is significant that the first national leader to congratulate US president-elect Joe Biden was Fijian Prime Minister Voreqe Bainimarama, who has played a proactive climate change leadership role in the Pacific.

This 306-page edition was launched by the deputy dean of AUT’s Faculty of Design and Creative Technologies, Professor Fiona Peterson, at this week’s Pacific Media Centre symposium  with a theme of “2020 and Beyond: Highlights and New Horizons”.

Dr Cass spoke of the challenges facing PJR at the launch, including continuing its international trajectory and the need for a new “home base”, preferably a Pacific institution.

Being named editor was a “great honour and a fantastic opportunity”, he said.

“We have set  our standards very high. Our focus on the Pacific, our growing links with Asian academics and our openness to cross disciplinary approaches has created a truly unique journal.

“I am grateful to the board members and contributors who have offered some innovative ideas for developing PJR in the future.”

The latest issue has been published in partnership with Gadjah Mada University in Yogyakarta, Indonesia, with several climate and covid papers about ASEAN countries from UGM’s “Rethinking the Social World” symposium in August being published.

Other climate change papers
Other climate and coronavirus papers include an analysis of the role of the churches in the Pacific; public discourses about climate displacement in Oceania; and Malaysian newspaper coverage of environmental NGOs.

A strong Frontline section of four articles features a critique of the new fields of research classifications adopted in Australia and New Zealand, which the author, Dr Chris Nash, a former Monash journalism professor and author of What is Journalism? The Art and Politics of a Rupture, says “pose considerable opportunities and challenges” for the discipline.

Frontline also includes a profile by Vivien Altman and Wendy Bacon of Australian-Tongan journalist Jill Emberson, who made a significant contribution to journalism in the Pacific with “issues relevant to Indigenous Australians and to women” before she died of ovarian cancer in 2019; a case study of political documentary and alternative journalism based on the film Obrero about Filipino labour migrants in Christchurch after the 2011 earthquake; and a project analysis on a covid reportage initiative at an Auckland university to counter the virus “disinfodemic”.

Unthemed articles include deaths in custody journalism in Australia, Rotumans and the “coconut wireless” over the 2018 Fiji elections; and the media framing of attacks on West Papuan students in Indonesian online media.

Wewak-born Dr Cass succeeds founding editor Professor David Robie who started the journal at the University of Papua New Guinea, Port Moresby, in 1994 as a publication to speak truth to power through research.

Dr Robie recalled in this edition’s joint editorial what he had said at the 20th anniversary celebration of the journal in 2014, “we have achieved precisely what we set out to do, being a critical conscience of Asia-Pacific socio-political and development dilemmas”.

“Tenk yu tumas … lukim yu Philip, and good luck to you and your future crew for the media waka journey ahead,” he wrote.

The journal will be on sabbatical for some months and plans a seminar and book project next year in Australia on “Journalism, creative arts, and Indigenous studies”.

• The full edition
• PJR archives

Papua New Guinea’s freedoms of speech, expression and access to information were challenged yesterday when Chinese officials barred both local and non-Chinese media from attending meetings at three Asia-Pacific Economy Cooperation (APEC) venues.

It began in Parliament when Chinese President Xi Jinping was giving an address after being welcomed by a guard of honour. 

EMTV journalist Theckla Gunga, who was assigned to cover the Chinese President’s visit, reported that just after 11am, Chinese officials accompanying their president ordered the microphones to be removed from the speaker where they had been placed to record the speeches.

READ MORE Chinese President Xi’s early PNG arrival upstages APEC rivals

“Chinese officials who are organising the official opening of the Chinese-funded six lane road have refused to give audio feeds to media personnel,” she said in a WhatsApp message.

“Microphones belonging to both local and international media have been removed,” said Gunga.

The officials, however, allowed Chinese state-owned broadcaster CCTV to record President’s Xi speech.

Gunga and other journalists spent about 10 minutes arguing with the Chinese officials but were still refused.

‘No media, no media’
One hour later, EMTV Online reporter Merylyn Diau-Katam faced another group of Chinese officials at the gate of a Chinese government-funded school.

“Before the President arrived a bus full of Chinese media personnel were driven into the gate on a bus,” she said.

“And when we wanted to go in, we were told our names were not on the list even though we had APEC accreditation passes,” Diau-Katam.

“No media. No media, a Chinese official said,” she said.

Diau-Katam was not the only one refused entry. In the group was a photographer from Japanese public broadcaster, NHK and other media. A PNG government official also spent several minutes arguing with the Chinese security to let him in.

At 5pm yesterday, Chinese officials again booted out local and international media from a meeting between the Chinese President and Pacific Island country leaders.

EMTV anchor and senior journalist, Meriba Tulo, was among others told to “get out” of the meeting while Chinese media were allowed into the room.

The Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC) was also told to leave. They spoke to Post-Courier’s senior journalist, Gorethy Kenneth. She said Chinese officials from Beijing were initially angry with the presence of international media.

“I said: ‘We are here to cover the meeting, our names have been submitted.’ And they said: ‘No, all of you get out,'” Kenneth said.

Scott Waide’s blog columns are frequently published by Asia Pacific Report with permission. He is also EMTV deputy news editor based in Lae.

• PNG journalists boycott APEC leaders’ arrival
• ‘All of you get out” – China boots out media
• Other APEC stories

The agreement is the first of its kind that categorically prohibits nuclear weapons and hence focuses merely on disarmament. The treaty will only enter into force once 50 nations have ratified and acceded to it.

As a nation whose representative was among vice-presidents leading negotiations of the treaty and as a vocal opponent of nuclear weapons, it is crucial that Indonesia ratifies the Nuclear Weapon Ban Treaty immediately.

Here are the key reasons why:

• As a member of the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) and a coordinator of its working group on disarmament and nonproliferation since 1994, Indonesia was among co-sponsors of the resolution.
• Indonesia signed this UN Treaty on September 20, 2017, the day when it opened for signature at the UN headquarters in New York. Ironically, Indonesia is not among the ten nations that have ratified the treaty through national legislation.

It is of vital importance that Jakarta maintains its leadership role and show commitment to shared international security interests of developing countries, the majority of NAM member states. Jakarta and NAM have always been vocal about attempts to eliminate double standards in international security, particularly regarding nuclear security.

Excellent example
On top of being an excellent example to ASEAN countries regarding compliance with non-proliferation regimes, Jakarta continues to encourage ASEAN member states and beyond to improve the persistently slow progress of the nuclear disarmament.

In a joint effort with ASEAN member states to combat the threat of nuclear weapons, during its chairmanship of the Association Jakarta opened the door for consultations between member states and nuclear-weapon states (NWS), to encourage the latter to sign the Southeast Asian Nuclear Weapon Free Zone Treaty (SEANWFZ).

Jakarta was praised for its efforts in promoting the spirit of the treaty beyond the region.

By ratifying the new Treaty, ASEAN member states would prove their determination to disarmament and making the region free from all kind of nuclear threats. Currently, only Thailand and Vietnam have ratified the treaty.

Others, including Indonesia, were had signed the deal, while Singapore chose to abstain.

Indonesia should immediately follow the path of Thailand and Vietnam and together persuade Singapore to support the Nuclear Weapon Ban Treaty in the spirit of Southeast Asia’s nuclear weapons-free zone.

Once all ASEAN member states have ratified the Nuclear Weapon Ban Treaty, they can continue pressing wider acceptance of SEANWFZ to nuclear weapon states.

Previous failure
The previous 2015 Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) Review Conference was dubbed a failure due to absence of consensus on nuclear disarmament. Thus all parties including Indonesia must prepare themselves better for the next 2020 Conference and keep trying to achieve a shared vision on disarmament.

The 2015 conference manifested the non-nuclear-weapon states’ concerns over the scale and pace of disarmament.

These states believe there have been too many restrictions and demands for them regarding peaceful use of nuclear technology. They also think nuclear weapon states have been ignoring their obligation to disarm their nuclear arsenals.

The 2020 Conference will be an excellent platform to reaffirm Jakarta’s demand for nuclear disarmament and security as well as to pressure nuclear weapon states to manifest their commitment to nuclear disarmament.

Indonesian delegates should continue expressing concerns about international security, including the US administration’s decision to withdraw from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA).

According to the Foreign Ministry, Affairs, Indonesia regrets this decision as Jakarta believes that the JCPOA is an achievement of diplomacy and can maintain stability in the region and the world. Indonesia is still optimistic about the future of JCPOA and hence urges other JCPOA’s signatories to maintain support for the agreement.

Nuclear weapons present a real and imminent threat to humanity, thus Indonesia should not loosen efforts towards nuclear non-proliferation and disarmament. Ratifying the UN Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons means Jakarta is greatly concerned about the slow pace of disarmament.

Deandra Madeena Moerdaning earned her master’s degree from King’s College in London’s War Studies Department. She is interning at the International Atomic Energy Agency in Vienna.

Today, October 20, marks Jokowi’s third year in office.

“There used to be this perception that President Joko Widodo, in the early days of his administration, was not too concerned with foreign policy, but now we are seeing the opposite,” said Dino Patti Djalal, Indonesia’s former ambassador to the United States and founder of the Foreign Policy Community of Indonesia (FPCI).

Speaking at a press conference in Jakarta, Djalal highlighted the need to reflect on the past 50 years of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations and its future, for the sake of Indonesia’s presence on the international scene.

He said it was crucial if Indonesia “wants to be a leader recognised by the international community,” because Asean is the one domain where its leadership has been “naturally accepted”.

“Indonesia’s policy toward Asean is the backbone of our foreign policy, so we must continue to lead in the association,” Djalal added.

In the context of Asean, Indonesia’s leadership has been in the face of the ongoing crisis in Myanmar’s Rakhine State, in which more than half a million people have already fled to neighbouring Bangladesh.

Free, active policy needed
Djalal also noted the importance of free, active and creative foreign policy for Indonesia to be a key player in global peace and cooperation efforts.

According to the seasoned diplomat, one of the challenges for the country’s policy in the future will be “non-traditional issues” such as humanitarian crises.

FPCI is hosting its third Conference on Indonesian Foreign Policy (CIFP) in Jakarta tomorrow. The Jakarta Globe is one of the event’s media partners.

The conference’s 18 sessions will cover a range of topics, with Asean and globalisation as the main theme.

Participants will also discuss the South China Sea dispute and the regional influence of the world’s powerful leaders — United States President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping.

One of the sessions will be devoted to the potential Indonesia’s provincial and district leaders have to tap into international opportunities.

According to Dino, a survey conducted recently by FPCI revealed that so far only a few regions know how to capitalise on the country’s position as one of the founders of Asean.

More Indonesian stories

Today, we are watching history repeat itself in Southeast Asia in the worst possible way.

Once again, the Myanmar military has launched a brutal military campaign against the Rohingya minority, killing civilians and forcing hundreds of thousands to flee their homes.

And once again, the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (Asean) has failed to take a stand against horrors unfolding in one of its member states.

There is no question that what is taking place in Myanmar’s northern Rakhine State is ethnic cleansing. Since August 25, when a Rohingya armed group attacked security posts and killed at least 12 security officers, the Myanmar military has responded with vicious, unlawful and disproportionate violence targeting the Rohingya population as a whole.

Soldiers have torched entire villages and opened fire on people fleeing in panic in what amounts to a clear and deliberate campaign to drive the Rohingya people out of their country once and for all.

The Asean Charter, the treaty that binds Asean states together, declares a clear commitment to human rights, and Asean leaders have been paying lip service to this for years.

So the crisis in Rakhine State would have been – perhaps still is – an opportunity to prove that this was more than just talk. Instead, the regional bloc has so far, once again, proved that it is both unwilling and unable to address ongoing violations.

Bland statement
It took Asean almost a full month to even issue a statement on the situation, but the organisation might have been better off staying silent.

When it finally did materialise, on September 24, the statement by Asean foreign ministers, expressed “concern” over developments in Rakhine State, but completely failed to even mention the word “Rohingya” and atrocities so obviously inflicted on them by the security forces.

Instead, the foreign ministers labelled the crisis a “complex inter-communal issue” and only condemned the August 25 attacks on Myanmar security forces and “all acts of violence”.

The statement was so bland that at least one individual Asean member state felt a need to distance itself. The Malaysian Foreign Minister Anifah Aman called the statement a “misrepresentation of the reality of the situation”.

It is to Kuala Lumpur’s credit that it has taken a strong stance on the crimes of the Myanmar army, even though its treatment of Rohingya refugees inside its own borders leaves a lot to be desired.

Strong and urgent Asean action is all the more important as there is no sign of the violence in Rakhine State ending any time soon. Despite the claims by Aung San Suu Kyi – Myanmar’s de facto leader – that the fighting has stopped, Amnesty International was able to confirm fresh burnings in Myanmar as late as last week.

Fleeing in desperation
And people continue to flee in desperation into Bangladesh – more than half a million according to latest UN figures.

There is also a humanitarian catastrophe unfolding within Rakhine State, as the Myanmar government has cut off aid agencies’ access to affected areas and severely restricted their life-sustaining activities in other parts of the state.

Recently, we have received credible reports that Rohingya are not just fleeing violence but also face the very real risk of starvation, as food is running desperately short in many places.

The Rakhine State crisis could also have spill-over affects across Southeast Asia as a whole. Many of us will still remember the “boat crisis” in 2015, when thousands of Rohingya and Bangladeshis were stranded in the Bay of Bengal as governments in the region refused to let their boats in.

Asean countries must ensure that refugees are able to take safe routes to enter their countries, and that no one is forced to return to a country where they could face persecution or serious human rights violations, as the Rohingya most definitely will.

Asean should immediately hold an emergency summit to deal with the crisis in Rakhine State. Its members must also acknowledge and condemn the human rights violations being committed by the Myanmar military in strong and unequivocal terms.

Crimes against humanity
And make no mistake, what we are witnessing in Rakhine State are, under international law, crimes against humanity – surely a concern to Asean as well.

Asean states must also work to ensure that the ethnic cleansing of the Rohingya does not succeed, and that Myanmar ends all persecution, and discrimination against and segregation of the Rohingya.

All this would be well within the provisions of the Asean Charter, which allows its leaders to take action “in the case of a serious breach of the Charter” and to “address emergency situations affecting Asean by taking appropriate actions”.

It is time for Asean to bring to the fore these core values – of responding to emergencies and of respecting human rights – which are just as germane to Asean and part of its constitution as the over-flaunted principle of “non-intervention”.

This is a moment of truth for Asean, when the association has to decide which side of history it wants to be on. With ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity taking place on its doorstep, will it do everything it can to end and redress it or simply sit idly by?

Josef Benedict is the Amnesty International’s deputy campaigns director for Southeast Asia and the Pacific.

Pacific Media Centre newsdesk

Parliamentarians from across Southeast Asia have expressed concern over the sentencing of Jakarta’s Christian governor Basuki Tjahaja Purnama, known as “Ahok”, to two years in prison for blasphemy.

“The verdict is deeply disconcerting not only for Indonesia, but for the entire ASEAN region. Indonesia was thought to be a regional leader in terms of democracy and openness,” says Charles Santiago, a member of the Malaysian Parliament and chair of ASEAN Parliamentarians for Human Rights (APHR).

“This decision places that position in jeopardy and raises concerns about Indonesia’s future as an open, tolerant, diverse society.

“Ahok has become a victim of rising extremism and religious identity politics.

“But this decision has impacts beyond justice for one individual. It is a triumph for intolerance and an ominous sign for minority rights.

At a time when fundamental freedoms, including freedom of expression and freedom of religion, are under increasing threat region-wide, this verdict sends the wrong signal to Indonesia’s neighbors in the ASEAN community,” Santiago added.

Ahok, Jakarta’s first Christian governor in five decades, was convicted of blasphemy by an Indonesian court and sentenced to two years in prison yesterday, despite the prosecution in the case having recommended conviction on a lesser charge and no jail time.

Appeal pledged
He has vowed to appeal the decision.

The charges stemmed from a September campaign speech, in which he invoked a verse from the Quran in criticising the arguments of those who suggested that Muslims could not vote for a Christian leader.

Discussion of the charges and trial dominated coverage of his campaign for reelection, which he lost to rival Anies Baswedan on April 19.

APHR said the ruling could embolden religious hardliners in the country and called into further question Indonesia’s harsh blasphemy law, which permits jail sentences of up to five years for those found guilty.

“This case demonstrates the need for Indonesia to take steps to address rising religious intolerance and revise its legislation to ensure compliance with international human rights standards, including freedom of thought, expression, and belief,” Santiago said.

APHR vice-chair Eva Sundari, a member of the Indonesian House of Representatives, said: “These blasphemy accusations are often used by majority conservative groups to silence political opponents and minorities, and it’s causing Indonesian democracy to move backward.

“ASEAN must find ways to ensure that democracy will not be eroded by religious intolerance and groups that take advantage of religious divisions to pursue political agendas.

“This has already happened in countries like Myanmar, and now we’re seeing the same in Indonesia, which is a barometer of regional democracy.”

• Ahok guilty of blasphemy, jailed for two years

The expert 19-member group included researchers, media professionals and human rights defenders forming the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), namely Cambodia, Indonesia, Laos, Malaysia, Myanmar, Philippines, Thailand and Vietnam. Representatives from Timor Leste and Mongolia were also present.

‘Jakarta conclusions’

DW Akademie, an organisation that supports the development of international media, reported the experts agreed on a three-step action plan called the “Jakarta Conclusions” which is aimed to enhance the situation for media in Southeast Asia.

The plan will require the collective efforts of civil society, media organisations and governments.

Jakarta Conclusions Action Plan:

1. Take steps to develop a special regional mechanism to improve the media environment based on existing international and regional models.
2. Create a process to engage the large global Internet intermediaries to address issues of access, accountability, sustainability, and the impact these companies have on media and society.
3. Promote programs to expand media and information literacy at a sufficient scale to have impact at the societal level

1. Develop a regional mechanism for Southeast Asia

DW Akademie’s report stated that Southeast Asia does not have a special rapporteur for freedom of expression – whereas Latin America, Africa and Europe have active and independent representatives who advocate for information, expression and media rights.

Experts expressed that the ASEAN Intergovernmental Commission on Human Rights has not pushed for this issue.

Therefore representatives from civil society organisations suggested establishing an informal mechanism in the absence of government support.

But others advocated to continue to push for an official mechanism, pointing out that Southeast Asia could learn from the Arab world which is currently seeking to establish a freedom of expression special rapporteur.

2. Engage the large global Internet intermediaries

DW Akademie reported companies such as Google and Facebook take a large share of online advertising revenue in Southeast Asia but do little to counter the spread of online hate speech, propaganda and disinformation.

Therefore experts suggested encouraging these platforms to develop a pricing system which differentiates between general information and quality journalism.

Maria Ressa, the former CNN lead investigative reporter in Asia said members need to work collectively.

“We need to come together and confront these and other companies with the situation in our region.”

3. Promote programs to expand media and information literacy

The growing importance of media users emphasised the importance of media and information literacy.

Hugo Maria Fernades of the Press Council of Timor Leste  said such programs should enable the population to “actively and consciously” use media.

• Read the detailed report on DW Akademie.

Just 14 years into independence, Timor-Leste has secured membership of a number of international forums, declaring its intent to catch up with the rest of the developing world.

Now, through its shared history with Indonesia, the world’s second-youngest nation is eyeing full ASEAN membership, as it seeks to identify with a region poised to become “the powerhouse of the 21st century”, said Timor-Leste’s deputy foreign affairs and cooperation minister, Roberto Sarmento de Oliveira Soares.

“Timor-Leste […] has manifested its desire to be part of ASEAN since the very beginning of our inception in 2002. And that desire, the commitment of Timor Leste, has always been raised in numerous meetings, forums in the region and beyond, and at the bilateral level,” he said.

Timor-Leste officially submitted its application letter to be considered an ASEAN member in 2011, during Indonesia’s chairmanship.

“Our application was overwhelmingly welcomed and supported by Indonesia, and of course, through the Indonesian chairmanship, then president Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono successfully secured all the endorsements and acceptances from all ASEAN member countries to officially endorse Timor-Leste’s membership, by establishing two important mechanisms to assess [our] readiness.”

Soares said the mechanisms were the ASEAN Coordinating Council and the technical or working level, which were mandated to assess Timor-Leste’s readiness covering all three important pillars: the political and security, the economic and the sociocultural pillars.

“All three pillars [have undergone] assessment, […] so now we are basically waiting for the ASEAN side […] to make a final decision about our accession,” he said.

Foreign policy priority
With regard to President Joko “Jokowi” Widodo’s commitment, Soares said Timor-Leste was very much grateful.

“Indeed, during his visit to Timor-Leste, [the President] continued to reiterate the strong commitment of Indonesia and he will do whatever he can in his capacity […] to push for our accession to ASEAN.”

“ASEAN very much lies on Timor-Leste’s foreign policy priority; our desire to be part of ASEAN is indeed to further […] safeguard our own regional identity, because we are one of the only countries in Southeast Asia that does not yet belong to any regional organisation.”

Soares credited ASEAN as a unique and dynamic regional organisation.

“At the time when ASEAN established itself, it was mainly focused on political peace and stability. But a few decades later, ASEAN expanded on its concentration by looking beyond political stability, into what is the most important [aspect] in our globalised world today: economic integration and competitiveness,” he said.

“Being part of ASEAN will further safeguard Timor-Leste’s own independence and sovereignty, and of course, peace and stability in our region.”

On the other hand, Soares said Timor-Leste could also be a bridge between ASEAN and the Pacific.

“At the same time, Timor-Leste can also contribute beyond Asia Pacific through [its] own linkages and partners,” he emphasised.

Soares pointed to the fact that Timor-Leste could connect ASEAN with the community of Portuguese-speaking countries, the CPLP, which are located in Africa, Europe and Latin America.

• Timor-Leste joins Pacific Community

New Zealanders need to catch up with reality about the country’s trade partners in the South-East Asia region, says an ambassador.

Speaking to the Association of South-East Asian Nations (ASEAN) NZ Business Council today, New Zealand Ambassador to Viet Nam Haike Manning said it was important for ASEAN members to work together to change outdated perspectives of potential business in the region.

“What I find in general is that a lot of perceptions about Viet Nam in New Zealand lags behind the reality of the country,” he told council members.

New Zealand’s Heads of Mission from ASEAN country members met at an Auckland University of Technology breakfast to update each other on recent developments.

Listen to TJ Aumua’s podcast for Pacific Media Watch.

“Yesterday I took a screenshot of an article that said, ‘Could Viet Nam become the next Silicon Valley’, and I think it’s a really interesting and provocative proposition,” Manning said.

“What we are certainly seeing is the rapid emergence in Viet Nam of a knowledge economy, we are seeing a rapid emergence of Viet Nam has a high-tech place.”

‘Academic freedom’
In an interview with Pacific Media Watch, Manning said that as part of Viet Nam’s step towards a growing knowledge economy, the country is working on establishing its very first university to have academic freedom.

“I think in Viet Nam it’s pretty well understood that the public education system cannot properly deliver all the needs for its people and that’s why we see a lot of Vietnamese students coming to New Zealand,” Manning said.

“But something’s got to happen inside the country as well in terms of supplying the public education system.”

“It’s a brave step by the Vietnamese government to give this freedom.”

The New Zealand Ambassador to the Philippines, David Strachan, also spoke at the event, saying New Zealanders needed to understand the Philippines was a great business and trading hub.

His speech also highlighted the controversy around Philippines President-elect, Rodrigo Duterte, who has become known for his hate speech and approval of increased death squads to reduce crime.

But he noted that the Philippines had been the top performing south-east Asian economy in recent years and he expected Duterte’s decisive leadership would be good for New Zealanders doing business with the country.

• Could Viet Nam become the next Silicon Valley?