I know I keep changing topics but this sounds really interesting. I was thinking of looking at Australia’s betrayal of East Timor, and the Australian governments past relations with the Indonesian and East Timor governments. I have been doing a little research to get a brief of history of the relations and would really like to expand on them.
To start I would look at Word War 2 when Japan became involved in the war, and an Australian force known as the Sparrow force was defending the island of Timor, they relied heavily upon Timorese support, and East Timor was very supportive of them.
Australia opposed Indonesia during the Sukarno era (1949-1966); he was anti-imperialist, supported communists and a wartime collaborator with Japan and wanted to gain control of the old empire. Conservative Australia hated him and conflicted with him on two issues: Dutch New Guinea, stood in the way of Sukarno creating his old empire and the confrontation of Malaysia.
After the Sukarno government, Suharto’s ‘New Order’ government (1966-1998) offered a stable government to West Timor and was anti-communist. This government invaded East Timor in 1975, to which the Whitlam government didn’t want to intervene and encouraged Indonesia to take East Timor because he was against their independence. This was seen as a betrayal because of East Timor’s support to Australian troops during WW2.
This is just a brief over view, obviously there is a lot more to it! I have also found this document: amnesty international, East Timor, The movement for a comprehensive human rights program: Statement before the United Nations Special Committee on Decolonization – 30 June 1998
Jose Ramos-Horta, East Timor’s 2nd president since its independence, has written a book funu: the unfinished Saga of East Timor, has a section on ‘Australia – betrayal’
Yes it is interesting - and I suppose it happened long enough ago to be studied as history. The historiographical challenges are numerous. Consider these points:
ReplyDelete1. Hindsight - how much are perceptions of events coloured by our awareness of human rights offenses, including massacres, in East Timor (and Balibo). How much are they coloured by the events surrounding INTERFET and independence.
2. Selection - where does an historian begin the story? You began it (above) with the Japanese invasion and Sparrow force. Should it really begin earlier? What about the ghastly Dutch and the pathetic Portuguese? Is this just another case of post-colonial settlements creating regional imbroglios?
3. Morality - You used the term "betrayal". What have moral judgements got to do with history? (Real question, not rhetorical...) Is tacit support for the occupation of the other half of an island, surrounded by an important neighbour and regional power like Indonesia, less sensible than commitment to a state so small and poor that its survival will always depend upon Australian aid and Indonesian tolerance or weakness? (Just asking.)
4. Indonesia - What sort of neighbours do we want? Does anybody think that Australian policy should support self determination in Indonesia? There are 716 languages spoken on 17508 islands.