[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 134 (Wednesday, September 25, 1996)]
[Senate]
[Pages S11232-S11234]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
UNITED STATES POLICY TOWARD INDONESIA
Mr. FEINGOLD. Thank you, Mr. President. I rise today to make a few
brief remarks about United States policy in Indonesia.
I am deeply concerned about some of the views being expressed by some
members of the Clinton administration, and am particularly concerned
because the administration has been quite culpable in the past with
regard to aspects of our Indonesia policy. Despite a violent crackdown
in Jakarta on July 27--not quite 2 months ago--this administration says
it still intends to go forward with the sale of nine F-16 fighter jets
to Indonesia.
Mr. President, the administration had fully intended to send up
notification of this sale earlier this month. Fortunately, objections
from myself and many of my colleagues convinced the administration that
now was not the right time to announce officially the intention to sell
fighter jets to Indonesia.
I am pleased that--for the time being--this sale cannot move forward,
at least until Congress reconvenes in January.
But what concerns me today, Mr. President, are recent statements that
suggest that the administration necessarily will attempt to notify
Congress again in January--apparently without conditioning this move on
any actions by the Indonesian authorities either in the past or in the
coming months.
Given the history of human right abuses in Indonesia, as well as the
events of July 27, I find this attitude difficult to accept.
Last week, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee held a hearing on
United States policy toward Indonesia. We heard from two very capable
administration witnesses and four distinguished private panelists,
including a political science professor from the University of
Wisconsin, Madison.
As one of the witnesses commented, this may have been the first
hearing in many years to look at the full scope of American ties to
Indonesia.
Mr. President, I recognize that Indonesia is an important country and
a valuable ally. It is the largest country in Southeast Asia, and its
population
[[Page S11233]]
of more than 200 million people is the fourth largest in the world. It
plays a significant role in Asian affairs, and has been instrumental in
conflict resolution efforts in the region. It also has been an
important ally of the United States in international forums, such as
the United Nations.
I also salute Indonesia's economic success, and believe there are
many valuable lessons in Indonesia's experience which can be applied to
other developing countries across the world.
Mr. President, these achievements cannot--and do not--excuse
Indonesia's consistently dismal record on human rights and its
continuous assault on democratic freedoms.
Mr. President, I am particularly concerned about the massive human
rights abuses that continue in East Timor.
As we all know, Indonesia has sustained a brutal military occupation
of East Timor since 1975. Human rights organizations from around the
world, as well as our own State Department, continue to report
substantial human rights violations by the Indonesian military--
including arbitrary arrests and detentions, curbs on freedom of
expression and association, and the use of torture and summary killings
of civilians.
More recently, we have heard reports of the Indonesian military
conducting systematic training of East Timorese youth to take part in
local militia groups. We also have heard disturbing reports of
increasing religious and ethnic tension in East Timor, which at times
is exacerbated by government inaction.
On top of the ongoing pattern in East Timor, the July 27 events in
Jakarta reinforce my perception of an Indonesian regime that squashes
alternative political discourse.
On that day, hundreds of people rioted after President Soeharto
attempted to oust Megawati Sukarnoputri, a popular opposition leader,
from her position as chair of the Indonesian Democratic Party, or PDI.
During the riot, arson-led fires caused considerable property damage.
At least five people were killed, at least 149 injured, and hundreds
arrested. But, as Human Rights Watch reports, many of those arrested
did not appear to be responsible for initiating the riot. Instead, most
were linked, or accused of being linked, to the reform movement or
specifically to the Megawati camp.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record
a September 20, 1996, article from the Washington Post which describes
how difficult it is for Megawati to operate as an opposition candidate
after government officials ousted her as party leader, threatened to
shut down party headquarters, and arrested many of her supporters.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:
[From the Washington Post, Sept. 20, 1996]
Indonesian Says Slow Approach Avoids a Trap
(By Keith B. Richburg)
Jakarta, Indonesia, Sept. 19--Police are still hauling in
her supporters for questioning. Already more than 100
languish in jail, and dozens others are missing. A member of
parliament, she has been left off the list of candidates for
next year's parliamentary elections, meaning she may lose her
only official platform for challenging the government. Now
the police say they will shut down her new headquarters
because it violates local zoning laws.
These are trying times for Indonesia's premier opposition
leader, Megawati Sukarnoputri. Just a few months after she
emerged from virtual obscurity to become the first real
rallying point for opposition to President Suharto's 30-year
rule, Sukarnoputri finds herself besieged, harassed, called
in for questioning like a common criminal, facing the
likelihood of being sidelined from her country's tightly
controlled political process--and grappling with the mounting
impatience of her own supporters.
But even with these pressures weighing on her, Sukarnoputri
remains surprisingly sanguine, unhurried, almost eerily
serene. She is not out on the streets, not leading rallies,
not exhorting her followers. This morning, she is seated at
the dining room table of her spacious house in Jakarta's
south suburbs, taking a Spanish lesson from her regular
tutor.
What has learning Spanish got to do with leading a ``people
power'' movement against Asia's longest-serving and most
durable leader?
``I think it will be easier for me to communicate with
Latin American people,''; Sukarnoputri explains later, after
the tutor has left for the day. ``And also Spanish is more
important in the United States,'' she adds, citing the
increasing Hispanic population there.
Sukarnoputri clearly has her own agenda. And while her
backers and sympathizers may be growing frustrated, she is
determined to proceed at her own slow and steady pace,
careful not to engage the government in direct confrontation
and not be goaded by her more radical followers.
``They want me to do something more concrete, like have a
rally,'' she said. ``But at the moment, I think that is not a
good tactic, because so many people are still intimidated.''
She said the political situation remains tense after a July
27 riot--prompted by a government raid--in which five people
were killed and several banks and government offices gutted
by fire. The government used the riot as a pretext to launch
a widespread crackdown on opposition organizers, labor
leaders, human rights activists and anyone else suspected of
links to the long-dormant and outlawed Indonesian Communist
Party, which tried to foment revolution here three decades
ago.
The most serious anti-government outburst in recent memory,
the July riot erupted after police backed by army troops
raided the old headquarters of the officially sanctioned
Indonesian Democratic Party, or PDI, to oust a group of
Sukarnoputri supporters who had occupied the building in
protest of a government-orchestrated party coup that replaced
her as party leader. The government apparently feared that
Sukarnoputri, the daughter of Indonesia's charismatic first
president, Sukarno, could become a potent challenger to the
incumbent Suharto.
Sukarnoputri said today that she did not believe her
supporters were involved in the rioting, but that the
violence was sparked by government agents who wanted to
discredit her movement and use the unrest as the pretext for
the wider crackdown that followed.
``It could not have been common people,'' she said. ``It
must have been professionals. . . . I think there was some
engineering. How could common people burn so many high
buildings in such a short time? I think they wanted to make a
trigger, a trap, for people who are pro-democracy.''
Sukarnoputri said her go slowly, softly approach--for
example, not calling any new street protests and, thus, not
defying a government ban on rallies--is to avoid falling into
another ``trap.'' She said: ``So many people try to make
moves, to push, to push PDI to use violence or hard action.
But if we do, they will trap us, just like that riot.''
Some observers here--Western diplomats, journalists,
academics--say Sukarnoputri may be correct, that moving too
quickly with mass actions will expose more of her supporters
to arrest, prison, or worse.
But many also say that with her quiet approach,
Sukarnoputri may have let her moment pass, that the momentum
and publicity generated by the government's heavy-handed
takeover of party headquarters may already be lost.
``I don't think she's in an enviable position,'' a Western
diplomat said. ``She can maintain her status as a symbol of
opposition, but without doing anything, that fades.''
The other legal challenges and obstacles Sukarnoputri faces
may prove even more damaging to her long-term ability to
mount a credible challenge to the regime.
On Monday, the day for filing candidate lists for next
June's parliamentary elections, the anti-Sukarnoputri faction
of the Democratic Party showed up early in the morning at the
National Election Commission offices with a list of names
that did not include Sukarnoputri or any of her supporters.
When a Sukarnoputri deputy came that afternoon with a
separate ``Megawati slate,'' election officials refused to
accept it.
Sukarnoputri is challenging her ouster as party leader in
Indonesian courts, and she said she also will file suit to
have her candidates' list accepted. If she is not a candidate
next year, she will lose her seat and whatever slim chance
she may have had of running against Suharto for the
presidency in the next election in two years. (The Indonesian
president is not directly elected but voted on by a people's
assembly.) Under Indonesia's restricted political system, if
Sukarnoputri loses her current parliamentary seat, she will
be unable to gather supporters, make speeches or call
political rallies.
But Sukarnoputri is undeterred. She said she insists on
exhausting all legal remedies first, mainly as a way to test
the independence of the country's judiciary. If she is
prevented from running for office next year, she said, her
exclusion will serve to point out flaws in the electoral
process.
``It will be a big problem for the government,'' she said.
``There are already so many people protesting to the
government [about] why I, a popular and sympathetic person in
the country, am not on the national list. People will see the
election is not free and fair.''
But even if she loses, Sukarnoputri disagrees with the
analysis that her stature will fade.
In our culture, there is not only a formal leader. There is
also an informal leader,'' she said. ``Sometimes the informal
leader can be more powerful than the formal leader. You can
see how my father, even though he has already passed away, in
spirit still lives inside the Indonesian people.''
[[Page S11234]]
She added, ``I'm sure about that.''
Mr. FEINGOLD. The climate described in the article clearly is not one
that supports freedom of expression, freedom of the press or freedom of
association.
The events of July 27 underscore the Government's intention to foster
a repressive climate in the months leading up to the 1997 parliamentary
elections.
As the New York Times declared in a recent editorial, ``This is no
time to be selling high-performance warplanes to Indonesia.''
The administration says its policy is ``to make available to
Indonesia military equipment that will support legitimate external
defense needs.'' At the same time, the United States will not export or
transfer to Indonesia small arms, crowd control equipment or armored
personnel carriers until we have seen significant improvement in human
rights in the country, particularly in East Timor.
Mr. President, I am pleased that the Congress and the administration
have worked together to develop a policy linking the sale of small arms
to Indonesia to its human rights record. This policy evolved from an
amendment that I offered to the foreign aid appropriations bill several
years ago.
But I believe that we are missing an important opportunity to apply
pressure to the Indonesian regime by failing to impose comparable
conditions on the F-16 sale. In fact, in public statements since
congressional notification was delayed, the administration has not even
mentioned human rights or democratic values in connection with the
sale.
Instead, it continues to state publicly that it intends to go through
with the sale as early as January.
I believe official advocacy of the F-16 sale sends the wrong message
to the Indonesian military. It sends the message that--despite our
concerns about the lack of respect for human rights in East Timor and
despite the continued failure of the Indonesian military to respond
substantively to these concerns--the United States will continue to
supply substantial amounts of lethal military equipment to Indonesia.
If the events of July 27 tell us nothing else, they should signal to
us that Indonesia still has a long way to go in terms of respect for
human rights and democratic values.
I believe that we should support progress in these areas--only when
real progress actually is achieved. Instead, within weeks of a major
crackdown by the Indonesian authorities, the administration persists in
its plans to provide Indonesia with nine advanced military planes.
I do not think now is the time to be rewarding Indonesia with nine
planes. Only when we see some improvement in Indonesia's conduct should
we be elevating the level of our military ties to the country.
In sum, I continue to believe that--in Indonesia, as elsewhere--we
must consider a military's human rights record as one of the
determining factors in deciding whether or not the U.S. Government
should license or facilitate a foreign arms sale.
As a result, I oppose the administration's plans to allow the
transfer of the F-16's to Indonesia at this time, or in the near
future, and I intend to work with a number of other Members of the
Senate who share that view to persuade the administration that a change
in policy is warranted here.
Mr. GRAHAM addressed the Chair.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Florida is recognized.
(The remarks of Mr. Graham pertaining to the introduction of S. 2121
are located in today's Record under ``Statements on Introduced Bills
and Joint Resolutions.'')
____________________