Redesign Papua Conflict Resolution

Redesign Papua Conflict Resolution
By David Raja Marpaung

Understanding the roots of conflict in Papua• Papua problem has become tangled konfik cycle for few decades in Indonesia, therefore there is no cheap and easy way , except for the hard work of the 'sweating' and a higher risk of all parties.

 • Based on the results of studies that have been made TIM LIPI in Papua Road Map can be concluded that the sources of Papua konfik can be grouped into four main issues, namely, first, marginalization and discrimination experienced by indigenous Papuans as a result of economic development, cultural policy and the mass migration in Papua since 1970 until today. The second problem is the failure of development and it is necessary for such a new paradigm of development in Papua. The third problem is the contradiction of understanding the history of integration and the construction of political identities between Papua and Jakarta. The fourth problem is the experience of a long history of political violence in Papua, especially those committed by state actors against Indonesian citizens in Papua.Reflecting on the mapping of the root causes of conflict in Papua, then at least there is some conflict mitigation solutions that can be offered to the 

A. Short-Term SolutionIn the short term period, there are two things to get attention of the stakeholders in the conflict in Papua.

Phase 1. Desecuritization Papua Conflict• It should be noted that desekuritisasi not mean a total reduction of security forces in Papua. However, desekuritisasi security approach is a model more in line with the principles of democracy and peaceful conflict resolution. Associated with the TNI desecuritization covers the main aspects. First, each placement (deployment) military personnel in Papua have to go through a political decision between the government and the House of Representatives or in accordance with military law mandated mechanisms. It is important to avoid the occurrence of behavioral / illegal operation. Second, the placement of military personnel in Papua should be measured both the quantity, quality, duration and target its operations so that the people of Indonesia as a whole can monitor the performance of TNI in Papua. Then, thirdly, the military should be used wherever possible approaches to non-violence (more persuasive than repressive) in Papua. It is very important, considering the face of 'Indonesia' in Papua is often recognized only to the extent of violence forces rather than as an entity that protects all the people of Papua.

• In relation to law enforcement (police) then they should immediately evaluate the security policies in Papua. Often, law enforcement officers acted in accordance with its identity as the state apparatus, especially in the context of the interests of foreign corporations in Papua. As a result, it is not surprising when there are still people who think that the Papua law enforcement in Indonesia is a form of 'colonization' of the land of Papua is not 'The Indonesia's' sense of justice because they are injured. Discriminatory practices by the authorities should be evaluated by the government because it will further aggravate the face of 'Indonesia' in Papua

• In addition, the Government may use the instrument of internal control in monitoring the performance of state officials in Papua, for example by placing a representative / office of National Human Rights Commission, Ombudsman, Kompolnas, Agency in Papua; It can be effective as a state institution in charge of giving a correction to other state agencies as well as provide security for the people of Papua.

• Strategically, desekuritisasi will foster mutual trust both between governments and people of Papua that the conflict can be resolved without any suspicion by the dominance of the security approach. This then encourages the formation of the next stage.

Phase 2. Strengthen the dialogue as a discourse of conflict resolution• Both the government and the Papuan people must realize that dialogue is a model of conflict resolution that occupy the top priority. Government should be encouraged to realize that so far there has been marginalized politically, socially, economically and culturally to the people of Papua in the context of Indonesia's All. Meanwhile, the Papuan people should also realize that violence is not the only way to remind the government's negligence. Build this awareness is the key for both parties (government and people of Papua) to be able to sit together and discuss solutions to offer.• Discourse dialogue must gain legitimacy from both sides, rather than a party merely to avoid the politicization of the peace efforts of either party. 

B. Long-Term SolutionWhen desecuritization Papua conflict has been implemented and intensified dialogue discourse, then the next step was to conduct a dialogue that includes three stages: 

Phase 1. Identification of actors and issues in the dialogue• In the context of dialogue, identification of actors into the process early will determine the legitimacy of the dialogue. It is important to prevent any parties who feel excluded from conflict resolution and potentially disrupt the dialogue.• Identification of actors should carefully consider the issues to be discussed and the interest to be negotiated in the dialog.• In addition, it should also be noted that a representative of the location of the dialogue as an observer and mediator / party agenda to keep the dialogue remains consistent.

Phase 2. Importance of Reconciliation in Dialogue• The main purpose of dialogue is to build mutual trust between the actors in the conflict to want to talk about conflict resolution that can be agreed.• One of the key elements to build trust is through reconciliation.• Reconciliation requires a mutual understanding between the parties to the conflict that they are 'victims' of conflict with violence.• Therefore, efforts to resolve the conflict by force will only add to the victim in each of the parties without any constructive solution for the future of Papua.

Phase 3. Build understanding that dialogue is sustainability (continuity)• Dialogue is not how fast (instant) to resolve the conflict. However, the dialogue is how to manage conflict more dignified than the use of violence will only lead to losses on each side.• Model ways of thinking (mindset) like it should dominate every actor in dialogue in order not to return to violence in the event of a deadlock in negotiations. Expected when there is deadlock in the negotiations, each actor must hold back and re-scheduled dialogue with a clearer mind.Key Success Conflict Resolution in Papua• Resolution of conflict in Papua is not confined to the central government and the Papuan People alone, but the responsibility of the whole people of Indonesia. Here, the importance of strengthening the awareness of all the people of Indonesia that the identity of 'The Indonesia-ness' in Papua has been held hostage by violence in the conflict. Therefore, non-violent peace efforts to the conflict in Papua have to get the full support of all the people of Indonesia.• As a democratic country, then the ways of conflict resolution through violence in Indonesia is rightly not a priority. Instead, conflict resolution should be put in particular peaceful means through dialogue. Both the government and the groups involved in conflicts in Papua have to stop all acts of violence for any reason.Concluding Note• Settlement of the conflict in Papua is one of the major test for the Indonesian people to be able to resolve the conflict with dignity. In this context, at least Indonesia has had experience in resolving peacefully the conflict in Aceh.• Relies only on the government alone will not guarantee that problems can be resolved peacefully Papua. However, an even more important is to strengthen solidarity and solidity all elements of the Indonesian people to support and engage in real (concrete) in conflict resolution efforts of dignity to our brothers in Papua