Venezuela under siege – some class reflections from Max Lane

Report by Dr David Robie – Café Pacific.

By Max Lane

IT IS necessary to understand that the conflict in Venezuela manifests a war between classes, not between factions of the one class, as in elections in “normal” bourgeois democracies.. The victor will not be inclined to give the other side a chance to come back into power “at the next election”.

We cannot expect the Chavistas to play by “normal” bourgeois electoral rules while the other side tries coups, economic sabotage, actively supports a foreign state’s economic sanctions, takes tens of millions from a hostile foreign state, attempts presidential assassination, and kills pro govt activists, while also owning all the private media.

Some expect the so-called liberal democratic rules of the game to be applied – but by one side only.

And what will be the result if the Venezuelan Bolivarian movement plays to lose and is defeated. Just remember two names: Pinochet and Suharto.

All out class war for a state based one class or the other has usually been resolved militarily, through a revolutionary war (Russia, China, Vietnam, Cuba) or counter-revolutionary violence (Indonesia, Chile). Uniquely, in the case of Venezuela, neither war nor a counter-revolution has yet occurred, even 20 years on.

My guess is that the Chavistas are constrained to show restraint towards the capitalist class, avoiding escalation to a military confrontation, because of one main factor: the threat of military destruction.

Libya showed that the US was willing to see a country go to hell as long as oil could still flow. The US is now threatening military intervention – but to militarise a class war in Venezuela will run the risk of it spreading beyond national borders.

Economic constraints
Besides this constraint, the Venezuealan Bolivarians have been constrained by the objective limits of a 3rd world economy – and a 3rd world economy under siege and with no Soviet Union to protect or aid it, only valiant and principled little Cuba.

When Chavez became President in 1998, the GDP had already fallen back to 1963 levels. Corruption, including in the oil sector, was endemic. Immediately on Chavez’s election US and local capitalist economic sabotage began.

Underpinning this is the reality of a 3rd world economy in an imperialist world economy. The achievements of the Chavez government in improving economic conditions in these circumstances between 1998 and when oil prices started to fall in 2013 was extremely impressive.

Declining oil prices in a country 90 percent dependent on oil for foreign exchange hit the economy hard, all worsened by ongoing economic sabotage from within and without. From August 2017, the sabotage became even more savage with intensified US economic sanctions.

The Chavista government, like the governments of all 3rd world countries, most of whom are still pro-capitalist, did not have the financial capacity (capital) or access to technology (monopolised by imperialist countries) to embark on any significant program of diversified industrialisation.

This has not occurred anywhere by a medium sized poor country, let alone by an anti-capitalist government under siege, still consolidating itself.

Active support
The 2018 presidential elections showed the current government had the active support of 6 million Venezuelans, mostly from among the poor. The demonstrations over the last few days shows that this 6 million will still struggle, struggle to win more to their side.

More elections may figure in the evolution of this struggle, but we should all note that any such new election processes, should they occur, will be part of a struggle where one side, since the beginning, from at least 2002, has resorted to coups, economic sabotage, political collaboration with a hostile foreign power (much deeper than anything D. Trump may have been involved in), among other “non rules of the game” practices.

Only recognise the Maduro government!

Demand the end of economic sanctions against the Venezuealan people and state!

No to any US military intervention!


MIL OSI – Source: Evening Report Arts and Media

Contrasting accounts of Indonesian genocide and betrayal in West Papua

BOOK REVIEW: By David Robie

Two damning and contrasting books about Indonesian colonialism in the Pacific, both by activist participants in Europe and New Zealand, have recently been published. Overall, they are excellent exposes of the harsh repression of the Melanesian people of West Papua and a world that has largely closed a blind eye to to human rights violations.

In Papua Blood, Danish photographer Peter Bang provides a deeply personal account of his more than three decades of experience in West Papua that is a testament to the resilience and patience of the people in the face of “slow genocide” with an estimated 500,000 Papuans dying over the past half century.

With See No Evil, Maire Leadbeater, peace movement advocate and spokesperson of West Papua Action Auckland, offers a meticulously researched historical account of New Zealand’s originally supportive stance for the independence aspirations of the Papuan people while still a Dutch colony and then its unprincipled slide into betrayal amid Cold War realpolitik.

Peter Bang’s book features 188 examples of his evocative imagery, providing colourful insights into changing lifestyles in West Papua, ranging through pristine rainforest, waterfalls, villages and urban cityscapes to dramatic scenes of resistance to oppression and the defiant displays of the Morning Star flag of independence.

Some of the most poignant images are photographs of use of the traditional koteka (penis gourds) and traditional attire, which are under threat in some parts of West Papua, and customary life in remote parts of the Highlands and the tree houses of the coastal marshlands.

Besides the photographs, Bang also has a narrative about the various episodes of his life in West Papua.


Never far from his account, are the reflections of life under Indonesian colonialism, and extreme racism displayed towards the Papuan people and their culture and traditions. From the beginning in 1963 when Indonesia under Sukarno wrested control of West Papua from the Dutch with United Nations approval under a sham “Act of Free Choice” against the local people’s wishes, followed by the so-called ‘Transmigrassi’ programme encouraging thousands of Javanese migrants to settle, the Papuans have been treated with repression.

‘Disaster for Papuans’
Bang describes the massive migration of Indonesians to West Papua as “not only a disaster for the Papuan people, but also a catastrophe for the rainforest, eartyn and wildlife” (p. 13).

“Police soldiers conducted frequent punitive expeditions with reference to violation of ‘laws’ that the indigenous people neither understood nor had heard about, partly because of language barriers and the huge cultural difference,’ writes Bang (p. 11). The list of atrocities has been endless.

“There were examples of Papuans who had been captured, and thrown out alive from helicopters, strangled or drowned after being put into plastic bags. Pregnant women killed by bayonets. Prisoners forced to dig their own graves before they were killed.” (p. 12)

A “trophy photo” by an Indonesian soldier from Battalion 753 of a man he had shot from the Lani tribe in 2010. Image from Papua Blood

A book that provided an early impetus while Bang was researching for his involvement in West Papua was Indonesia’s Secret War by journalist Robin Osborne, a former press secretary for Papua New Guinea Prime Minister Sir Julius Chan, the leader who was later ousted from office because of his bungled Sandline mercenary affair over the Bougainville civil war. Osborne’s book also influenced me when I first began writing about West Papua in the early 1980s.

After travelling through Asia, a young Peter Bang arrived in West Papua in 1986 for his first visit determined to journey to the remote Yali tribe as a photographer and writer interested in indigenous peoples. He wanted to find out how the Yali people had integrated with the outside world since missionaries had first entered the isolated tribal area just 25 years earlier.

When Bang visited the town of Angguruk for the first time, “the only wheels I saw at the mission station were punctured and sat on a wheelbarrow … It was only seven years ago that human flesh had been eaten in the area” (p. 16).

During this early period of jungle trekking, Bang rarely “encountered anything besides kindness – only twice did I experience being threatened with a bow and arrow” (p. 39). The first time was by a “mentally disabled” man confused over Bang’s presence, and he was scolded by the village chief.

Political change
Ten years later, Peter Bang again visited the Yali people and found the political climate had changed in the capital Jayapura – “we saw police and military everywhere” following an incident a few months earlier when OPM (Free Papua Movement) guerrillas had held 11 captives hostage in a cave.

He struck up a friendship with Wimmo, a Dani tribesman and son of a village witchdoctor and healer in the Baliem Valley, that was to endure for years, and he had an adoptive family.

On a return visit, Bang met Tebora, mother of the nine-year-old boy Puwul who was the subject of the author’s earlier book, Puwul’s World. At the age of 29, Puwul had walked barefooted hundreds of kilometres across the mountains from the Jaxólé Valley village to Jayapura, and then escaped across the border into Papua New Guinea. A well-worn copy of Puwul’s World was the only book in the village apart from a single copy of the Bible.

Years later, Bang met tribal leader and freedom fighter Benny Wenda who, with the help of Australian human rights activist and lawyer Jennifer Robinson, was granted asylum in the United Kingdom in 2003: “I felt great sympathy for Benny Wenda’s position on the fight for liberation. By many, he was compared to Nelson Mandela, although he was obviously playing his own ukelele” (p. 81)

A local chief in red sunglasses and bra talks to his people about the dangers of Indonesian administration plans for Okika region. Image: Peter Bang

Wenda and Filip Karma, at the time imprisoned by the Indonesian authorities for 15 years for “raising the Morning Star flag”, were nominated for the 2013 Nobel Peace Prize.

Bang founded the Danish section of the Free West Papua Campaign and launched an activist Facebook page.

One of the book’s amusing and inspirational highlights is his secret “freedom paddle” on the Baliem River when Peter Bang used a yellow inflatable rubber boat and a pocket-sized Morning Star flag to make his own personal protest against Indonesia (p. 123). This was a courageous statement in itself given the continued arrests of journalists in West Papua by the military authorities in spite of the “open” policy of President Joko Widodo.

As a special section, Bang’s book devotes 26 pages to the indigenous people of West Papua, profiling some of the territory’s 300 tribes and their cultural and social systems, such as the Highlands communities of Dani and Yali, and the Asmat, Korowai and Kombai peoples.

Fascinating insight
This book is a fascinating insight into West Papuan life under duress, but would have benefitted with tighter and cleaner copy editing by the English-language volunteer editors. Nevertheless, it is a valuable work with a strong sociopolitical message.

Peter Bang concludes: “Nobody knows what the future holds. In 2018, the Indonesian regime continues the brutal crackdown on the native population of West Papua.”

In contrast to Bang’s authentic narrative of life in West Papua, Maire Leadbeater’s See No Evil book – launched yesterday – is an activist historical account of New Zealand’s shameful record over West Papua, which is just as disgraceful as Wellington’s record on Timor-Leste over 24 years of Indonesian illegal occupation (tempered by a quietly supportive post-independence role).

Surely there is a lesson here. For those New Zealand politicians, officials and conservative journalists who prefer to meekly accept the Indonesian status quo, the East Timor precedent is an indicator that we should be strongly advocating self-determination for the Papuans.

One of the many strengths of Leadbeater’s thoroughly researched book is she exposes the volte-face and hypocrisy of the stance of successive New Zealand governments since Walter Nash and his “united New Guinea” initiative (p. 66).

“A stroke of the pen in the shape of the 1962 New York Agreement, signed by the colonial Dutch and the Indonesian government, sealed the fate of the people of West Papua,” the author notes in her introduction. Prior to this “selling out” of a people arrangement, New Zealand had been a vocal supporter of the Dutch government’s preparations to decolonise the territory.

In fact, the Dutch had done much more to prepare West Papua for independence than Australia had done at that stage for neighbouring Papua New Guinea, which became independent in 1975.

Game changer
Indonesia’s so-called September 30th Movement crisis in 1965 – three years after paratroopers had been dropped on West Papua in a farcical “invasion” – was the game changer. The attempted coup triggered massive anti-communist massacres in Indonesia leading to an estimated 200,000 to 800,000 killings and eventually the seizure of power by General Suharto from the ageing nationalist President Sukarno in 1967 (Adam, 2015).

A West Papua cartoon by Malcolm Evans (who also has a cartoon featured on the book cover) first published by Pacific Journalism Review in 2011. © Malcolm Evans

As Leadbeater notes, the bloodletting opened the door to Western foreign investment and “rich prizes” in West Papua such as the Freeport’s Grasberg gold and copper mine, one of the world’s richest.

“New Zealand politicians and diplomats welcomed Indonesia’s change in direction. Cold War anti-communist fervour trumped sympathy for the victims of the purge; and New Zealand was keen to increase its trade, investment and ties with the ‘new’ Indonesia.” (p. 22)

The first 13 chapters of the book, from “the Pleistocene period” to “Suharto goes but thwarted hope for West Papua”, are a methodical and insightful documentation of “recolonisation” and New Zealand’s changing relationship are an excellent record and useful tool for the advocates of West Papuan independence.

However, the last two contemporary chapters and conclusion, do not quite measure up to the quality of the rest of the book.

For example, a less than two-page section on “Media access” gives short change to the important media role in the West Papuan independence struggle. Leadbeater quite rightly castigates the mainstream New Zealand media for a lack of coverage for such a serious issue. Her explanation for the widespread ignorance about West Papua is simplistic:

“A major reason (setting aside Radio New Zealand’s consistent reporting) is that the issues are seldom covered in the mainstream media. It is a circular problem: lack of direct access results in a dearth of objective and fully rounded reporting; editors fear that material they do receive may be inaccurate or misrepresentative; so a media blackout prevails and editors conflate the resulting limited public debate with a lack of interest.” (p. 233)

Mainstream ‘silence’
Leadbeater points out that the mainstream media coverage of the “pre-internet 1960s did a better job”. Yet she fails to explain why, or credit those contemporary New Zealand journalists who have worked hard to break the mainstream “silence” (Robie, 2017).

She dismisses the courageous and successful groundbreaking attempts by at least two New Zealand media organisations – Māori Television and Radio New Zealand – to “test” President Widodo’s new policy in 2015 by sending crews to West Papua in merely three sentences. Since then, she admits, Indonesia’s media “shutters have mostly stayed shut” (p. 235).

One of the New Zealand journalists who has written extensively on West Papua and Melanesian issues for many years, RNZ Pacific’s Johnny Blades, is barely mentioned (apart from the RNZ visit to West Papua). Tabloid Jubi editor Victor Mambor, who visited New Zealand in 2014, Paul Bensemann (who travelled to West Papua disguised as a bird watcher in 2013), Scoop’s Gordon Campbell, Television New Zealand’s Pacific correspondent Barbara Dreaver and Tere Harrison’s 2016 short documentary Run It Straight are just a few of those who have contributed to growing awareness of Papuan issues in this country who have not been given fair acknowledgement.

Also important has been the role of the alternative and independent New Zealand and Pacific media, such as Asia Pacific Report, Pacific Scoop (both via the Pacific Media Centre), West Papua Media and Evening Report that have provided relentless coverage of West Papua. Other community and activist groups deserve honourable mentions.

Even in my own case, a journalist and educator who has written on West Papuan affairs for more than three decades with countless articles and who wrote the first New Zealand book with an extensive section on the West Papuan struggle (Robie, 1989), there is a remarkable silence.

One has a strong impression that Leadbeater is reluctant to acknowledge her contemporaries (a characteristic of her previous books too) and thus the selective sourcing weakens her work as it relates to the millennial years.

The early history of the West Papuan agony is exemplary, but in view of the flawed final two chapters I look forward to another more nuanced account of the contemporary struggle. Merdeka!

David Robie is director of the Pacific Media Centre and editor of Pacific Journalism Review. He was awarded the 1983 NZ Media Peace Prize for his coverage of Timor-Leste and West Papua, “Blood on our hands”, published in New Outlook magazine.

Papua Blood: A Photographer’s Eyewitness Account of West Papua Over 30 Years, by Peter Bang. Copenhagen, Denmark: Remote Frontlines, 2018. 248 pages. ISBN 9788743001010.
See No Evil: New Zealand’s Betrayal of the People of West Papua, by Maire Leadbeater. Dunedin, NZ: Otago University Press, 2018. 310 pages. ISBN 9781988531212.

Adam, A. W. (2015, October 1). How Indonesia’s 1965-1966 anti-communist purge remade a nation and the world. The Conversation. Retrieved from

Bang, P. (1996). Duianya Puwul. [English edition (2018): Puwul’s World: Endangered native people]. Copenhagen, Denmark: Remote Frontlines.

Osborne, R. (1985). Indonesia’s secret war: The guerilla struggle in Irian Jaya. Sydney, NSW: Allen & Unwin.

Robie, D. (1989). Blood on their banner: Nationalist struggles in the South Pacific. London, UK: Zed Books.

Robie, D. (2017). Tanah Papua, Asia-Pacific news blind spots and citizen media: From the ‘Act of Free Choice’ betrayal to a social media revolution. Pacific Journalism Review : Te Koakoa, 23(2), 159-178.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Article by

MIL OSI – Source: Evening Report Arts and Media

Tommy Suharto: Indonesians are ‘longing’ for return to Suharto rule

Talk to Al Jazeera in the Field programme features Tommy Suharto.

Pacific Media Centre Newsdesk

The Suharto political dynasty is being revived in Indonesia, reports Al Jazeera.

Twenty years after the fall of the country’s notorious former President Mohamed Suharto, his youngest son is leading a new political party into next year’s elections.

Hutomo Mandala Putra, or “Tommy Suharto”, as he is commonly known, has been touring several Indonesian regions, even travelling to Solo to receive a royal title in an attempt to gain the support of would-be voters.

Suharto and his newly-formed Party Berkarya (Work Party) are focusing on the widening gap between rich and poor in Indonesia.

“We have gone through 20 years of reforms, but the situation has not improved,” he said. “Our national debt has increased, and the living conditions of our people have not improved significant[ly].”


Party Berkarya’s aim, according to Suharto, will be to “develop a people’s economy that will be controlled by the people and benefit the people to improve people’s welfare”.

Suharto is not worried that his father’s legacy of corruption and brutality will taint his campaign; he said that Indonesians were “longing” for the return.

Legacy of corruption
The United Nations and Transparency International have alleged that Mohamed Suharto stole more state assets than any other world leader, amounting to billions of dollars, a claim his son has denied.

“These figures are not true,” he claimed. “They have said that my father owns billions of dollars in Europe in a Swiss bank … nobody has provided any evidence. It was never proven.”

In 2015, Indonesia’s Supreme Court ordered the Suharto family to repay more than $400 million embezzled from a scholarship foundation, but the money is yet to be returned.

According to Suharto, the court’s ruling is impractical and does not take into account the government closure of a bank where much of the money was invested.

“How can foundations give money back to the government if these foundations are using donors’ money, not only [money] from the government, and this money has already been given to those receiving scholarships?” he says.

“The money that they are looking for is the money which was invested in Bank Duta. The bank has been closed by the government … [and] has bigger obligations towards its customers, of course, the customers are being prioritised.”

Tommy Suharto himself has been convicted of corruption but went into hiding to avoid jail. In 2002, he was again sentenced for ordering the murder of the Supreme Court judge who handed down his previous sentence.

Released early
He was released after serving four years of his 15-year sentence.

“I have done my term and, according to the laws, I now have the same rights as anyone else. I have the right to vote and the right to be elected,” he says.
Deadly paradise

More than one million Indonesians died during Mohamed Suharto’s rule, while thousands of others were jailed without legal process.

He stepped down in 1998, after 32 years in power, following a series of riots.

One thousand Indonesians are estimated to have died during the riots, which destroyed shopping malls and homes in the capital, Jakarta.

At least 150 ethnic Chinese women were raped in the violence, which began after the Asian financial crisis caused the stock market to crash, and escalated when soldiers shot four students at a university.

Military and political leaders said Mohamed Suharto had lost his grip and abandoned him, forcing him to step down.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Article by

MIL OSI – Source: Evening Report Arts and Media

Another Suharto makes push to launch Indonesian politics career

MIL OSI – Source: Evening Report Arts and Media

Headline: Another Suharto makes push to launch Indonesian politics career

The youngest son of former Indonesian president Suharto, Hutomo “Tommy” Mandala Putra (centre), attending the opening of the Berkarya (Working) Party national meeting where he was voted chairman in Solo, Central Java, earlier this month. Image: Jakarta Post/Antara

By Ed Davies and Agustinus Beo Da Costa in Jakarta

The youngest son of former Indonesian president Suharto, Hutomo “Tommy” Mandala Putra, is making a new push to launch a career in politics at the helm of a party that believes it can cash in on his late father’s legacy.

Suharto, who ruled Indonesia with an iron fist for 32 years, was brought down by protests in 1998, amid accusations of vast corruption and nepotism benefiting his family and cronies.

Nonetheless, family members have made repeated attempts to get into politics, often seeking to tap into nostalgia about the unity and security under Suharto’s government, which was backed by a military that crushed any sign of revolt.

READ MORE: Open letter to PM Ardern – raise Papua human rights issue with Jokowi

“The vision and mission of this party is to prepare an alternative option for the 2019 elections,” Badaruddin Andi Picunang, acting sectary-general of the Berkarya Party, said in an interview at its Jakarta headquarters.

Yearning for stability
Many people still yearned for the stability and the robust economic growth and development, at least in the earlier decades, of the Suharto era, said Picunang.


“But now we see killings everywhere, pickpockets and religious leaders attacked,” he said.

Hutomo echoed this theme in a news conference after being elected chairman of Berkarya, which means “working” in Indonesian, at a party meeting earlier this month in the city of Solo.

“It is impossible for us to return to the New Order, it has become part of the history,” said Hutomo, who is widely known as Tommy, referring to his father’s government.

“But what we want to develop and continue are the good things that were carried out by the New Order,” he said, highlighting Suharto’s rolling five-year development plans.

Berkarya has an ambitious target of winning 80 seats, or about 14 percent of the 575 seats in Parliament. It is mostly being funded by Tommy and associates, according to Picunang.

Political machine
A former racing driver with a playboy reputation, Tommy, 55, made a fortune under his father’s powerful patronage. His Humpuss Group of companies held the national monopoly on clove distribution, the key ingredient in Indonesia’s favourite sweet-smelling kretek cigarettes.

He was sentenced in 2002 to 15 years in jail for paying a hitman to gun down and kill a supreme court judge, who had convicted him in a graft case. His term was later reduced on appeal and by remissions and he was released in 2007.

In his speech in Solo, Tommy said those who had been convicted and served their sentence, like himself, had the same rights as anyone else.

Many of the members of Berkarya are former members of Golkar, his father’s old political machine and still the second-biggest party in Parliament.

Tommy failed in an attempt to win the top job at Golkar and also to get backing from other parties for a bid at the presidency. His sister, Siti Hediati, popularly known as Titiek, has stuck by Golkar and is a member of Parliament.

Tobias Basuki, a political analyst at the Centre for Strategic and International Studies, was sceptical about Tommy and other family members getting much traction from a link to the Suharto legacy.

The nationalist Gerindra party, led by a former son-in-law of Suharto, Prabowo Subianto, had been able to successfully target many of the voters who might support them, he said.

“I think this is one of their last attempts. They have been trying to stay in the mainstream but none could take control of Golkar and if they don’t move fast they will be irrelevant,” said Basuki.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Article by