. Paris, Wednesday, September 15, 1999
BUT WHO ARE THESE WESTERN CRUSADERS TO BE LECTURING ASIANS?
--------------------------------------------------------------
By Philip Bowring International Herald Tribune.
--------------------------------------------------------------
LONDON - In helping to make an international issue out of the
East Timor tragedy, Western media and human rights and church
groups have strengthened their self-image as a global moral
police force. But no amount of brutality by the Indonesian
military should disguise the discomforting aspects of the
current crusade.
Much is done in the name of the "international community" and
"international standards," vague concepts often invoked by the
West regardless of whether they reflect the majority view of
the United Nations, as over Palestine, or of allies such as
Turkey, in the Kurdish case.
On East Timor, the standard bearers of "internationalism"
include former colonial states whose assumptions of a duty to
intervene are viewed with skepticism in Asia, even in
countries which have agreed in principle to join a UN force.
The Western urge to intervene might at least seem selfless if
it were accompanied by acceptance of real losses. But, having
in Kosovo shown scant willingness to risk many lives even for
a cause on NATO and EU doorsteps, they seem unlikely to face
down Indonesian militias should that be necessary to win in
Timor.
Indeed, the latest "international community" exercise may well
make matters worse, promoting separatism by falsely promising
protection while inciting violence by the militias. Who pushed
B.J. Habibie into a rash promise that he could not keep? Who
made Timorese think that outside supervision equaled
protection? What precipitated in East Timor the scorched earth
policies so familiar from ex-Yugoslavia?
The West has been stirred into semi-action not by national
interest but by a frenzy of moralizing unrelated to any prior
interest in an archipelago of 200 million people.
In Britain, expansion of sanctimonious editorializing on
international issues has mirrored the decline of foreign news
coverage. Like tears on television, writing now aims not so
much to inform as to tug at heartstrings.
But in Indonesia it does not go unnoticed that the Western
groups and nongovernmental organizations active in bringing
East Timor to the forefront also lecture about "Javanese
imperialism" and call for "freedom" for the Acehnese,
Irianese, Ambonese etc. Do not be surprised if Indonesians see
plots behind such support for a breakup of the nation.
Asian neighbors are reluctant to intervene in Timor because
they know that any breakaways from Indonesia risk raising a
multitude of other separatist and irredentist issues. Take
Sabah. Should it be independent, remain part of Malaysia, be
acquired by the Philippines (which still formally claims it)
or be incorporated into a revived state of Sulu, encompassing
parts of the Philippines and Indonesian Borneo? Or become part
of a re-expanded Brunei?
The risks of disintegration are not as great in Asia as in
Africa. But they do exist, and the dangers to the interests of
the region as a whole are greater than the possible benefits
of independence for a few oil- and gas-rich groups, such as
the Acehnese and Irianese. As Abraham Lincoln recognized, the
right to self-determination must coexist with other
principles, in this case the greatest good of the greatest
number.
That is not to imply that, as some nationalists aver, the West
is using "human rights" now, as it used other methods in the
1950s, to keep access to resource-rich islands. But it does
make it essential that self-proclaimed saviors of Timor
understand the unsavory post-1945 history of Western attempts
to divide Indonesia.
As for Rome, which not so long ago was a bulwark of Portugal's
dismal role in East Timor, it needs to recognize that
Indonesia has been trying harder than most Catholic countries
to avoid confessional politics. It is bad news for
Christianity in Asia and secularism everywhere if East Timor
is deemed to deserve independence because it is predominantly
Catholic and Indonesia is mainly Muslim.
The brutality of the Indonesian military (not only in East
Timor) should not blind us to the benefits of large,
multiethnic, multireligious states. Does the West really want
to promote the Balkanization of Southeast Asia?
--------------------------------------------------------------
