Bonaire Activist calls for political evolution in the 'public entity'

James Finies

Presidente I kordinado “Fundashon Nos Ke Boneiru Bek”

Our future is in our own hands again. Netherlands pulls back its position that the BES islands have no other choice outside the Dutch state-constellation. The people of Bonaire have the option to choose to change and improve the current state structure.

The year 2014 started for Boneriaans people with the good news that the Netherlands by Minister Plasterk has stated that the BES islands, may choose another state structure that they want and not be bound to as they previously proclaimed. And that this choice is to the BES populations themselves to do, but must of course take into account that it is realistic and reasonable. Netherlands has made ​​it very difficult since 10-10-10 by having positioned itself, that the only possibility to us as a people is evaluation of 2015 and at this is at administrative level and not political and that either then to continue as public entity as special municipality or convert it into a full-fledged municipality or not we should leave the kingdom and become independent.

This brings us to an end, after 10-10-10, at least 2 years of intense fight to convince the Dutch and local leadership, that not the administrators or politicians neither of Netherlands or Bonaire, but the Bonerian people the right have as, as people’s, to determine their own future and because the result that we have now, we all agree that it cannot continue like that, and was not the desire or what we expected. And to improve is good, but that has to be effected by means of a people’s expression, a referendum, to meet a wide fundamental basis, that can unite the majority of our people and find themselves happy with the support and help of the Netherlands and the other partners in the Kingdom.

worldatlas.com

This is the result of our ongoing struggle of all of us who have always believed that our people deserve a real chance and has the right as a people and this is enshrined in international law by the United Nations, and we did not gave up and now can look back that our fight has borne fruit, that Netherlands renounces its position. And even states that it must take account of the Charter of the United Nations because they are members and want to continue to be member of the United Nations and our people should be given the possibility to choose and that the Netherlands will cooperate to realize the will and desire of the majority of the Bonerian people.

Because of these statements, it is also understandable why Plasterk's assertion that a small group wants a referendum, can be qualified as a distraction maneuver or intention is to make our people that has united for a “change” , to divide us again, and tries to camouflage the fact and reality that Plasterk itself and other Dutch leaders as, Bijleveld, Camp etc included PM Rutte have launched acts of intimidation and blackmail towards Bonaire and St Eustatius and these without any basis and foundation and Netherlands has to refrain  of these now and indeed must take into account and the international  laws of the United Nations must be respected. And that we as a people are free to start preparing to choose ourselves another state structure outside the Dutch state and within the Kingdom if we want to serve our people better.

So where with the help and support of the Netherlands we can continue to further emancipate and develop, to continue catching up on the arrears and development-backlog,  and to achieve prosperity and happiness, but also governed by our own leaders and parliament, elected by our own people.

Now it is clear to us to unite as Bonaire and together as Bonaire to strive for the "change"; we have this opportunity again!

******

Nos futuro ta den nos mes man atrobe. Hulanda ta hala tras su posishon di ku islanan BES no por skohe algu otro pafor di e konstalashon estatal Hulandes. Boneiru I su pueblo tin oportunidat di por skohe su mes pa kambia I drecha e struktura estatal aktual.

Anja 2014 ta habri pa nos pueblo Boneriano ku e bon notisia ku Hulanda pa medio di Minister Plasterk, di Relashonan Eksterno di Reino,  ta deklara na parlamentu Hulandes ku  e islanan BES, por skohe un otro eskoho estatal ku nan mes ta desea  I no ta mara mas na e posishon ku nan a informa prome. Ku e eskoho aki ta keda na e pueblo nan di BES mes, pero naturalmente mester tene na bista ku e eskoho lo mester ta algu realistiko I rasonabel. Hulanda a bin ta hasi esaki basta difisil  despues di 10-10-10, dor di a posishona su mes ku e uniko posibilidat ku a keda nos komo pueblo ta e evaluashon na 2015 I riba e tereno administrativo gubernamental I no politiko I lo bai evalua ku lo keda komo entidat publiko ku ta un gemeente spesial o bira un gemeente kompletu lo ta e uniko opshon  sino nos lo tin ku sali for di Reino Hulandes I bira independiente .

worldatlas.com

Esaki ta pone fin, despues di 10-10-10, na por lo menos dos anja di lucha intensivo pa por a konvense e mandatarionan Hulandes I lokal ku nos pueblo, I no gobernantenan o politikonan ni di Hulanda o lokal, pero ta nos pueblo tin e derecho komo pueblo di disidi su mes futuro, pasobra e lokual ku a resulta aki, I nos tur ta di akuerdo ku no por sigui asina aki, no tabata nos deseo o loke nos a spera.  I pa purba dreche ta posibel , pero esey mester tuma lugar pa medio di un konsulta di e pueblo kompleto, esta un referendum ku lo por pone  un base fundamental I amplio pa asina e pueblo den su mayoria por ta satisfecho I por dirigi su mes futuro ku ajudu di Hulanda I otro partnernan den Reino.

Esaki ta resultado di e lucha kontinuo di nos tur ku a kere semper ku e pueblo aki merese un chens real I alaves tin e derecho aki komo un pueblo I esaki nan ankra den leynan internashonbal di Nashonan Uni no a entrega I awor nos ta mira fruta di nos lucha ku Hulanda ta laga los su posishon. I asta ta deklara ku nan tambe lo tin ku tene nan mes na regla  I carta di Nashonan Uni  pasobra nan ta miembro I kier keda miembro di Nashonan Uni I mester duna nos pueblo  e oportunidat di por skohe I Hulanda lo kopera ku eskoho I deseo di mayoria di e pueblo.

Ku e deklarashonan aki ta kompredibel tambe ku Plasterk su ponensia ku un grupito so kier un referendum por wordu kalifika komo “afleidingsmanouvre” o purba dividi nos pueblo ku a uni I kier un kambio , I ta purba desvia e realidat ku Plasterk I demas mandatarionan Hulandes ultimo, Bijleveld,Kamp, etc, inkluyendo PM Rutte ku a lansa deklarashonan di imtimidashon I chantage direkshon di Boneiru I Statia I ku esaki nan no tabatin base I mester a bek I ku Hulanda mester respeta I tene kuenta ku leynan internashonal di  Nashonan Uni.  I nos por libremente kuminsa prepara pa skohe pa un struktura estatal  pafo di e konstelashon Hulandes I den Reino Hulandes si nos kier ku por sirbi nos pueblo mas miho. Pues kaminda nos por sigui hanja judansa, sosten di Hulanda pa juda nos sigui emansipa I desaroya, drecha e retrasonan I logra bienestar I felisidat,  pero alaves ser dirigi I goberna pa nos mes lidernan I parlamento  skohe pa nos mes pueblo.

Awor a keda nos nada mas, pa uni komo Boneiru I ban huntu komo Boneiru pa e kambio ku nos merese, e oportunidat tey atrobe!

Northern Mariana Islands ownership of its natural resources limited by U.S. monument, military control

CNMI control of submerged lands 
may be limited to 9 islands for now

Pacific Islands News Association

The CNMI (Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands) could end up controlling the 3-mile submerged lands around only nine of its 14 islands—at least in the foreseeable future—because three are part of a national marine monument that still doesn’t have a co-management agreement and two are leased to the U.S. Department of Defense.

This, as the CNMI awaits President Barack Obama’s proclamation transferring control over submerged lands to the CNMI.

lonelyplanet.com

Governor Eloy S. Inos, in an interview Friday, said his understanding is that the three northernmost islands—Farallon de Pajaros, Maug, and Asuncion—would be exempted from the transfer of control until a co-management agreement has been finalized.

Such co-management agreement has not been drafted five years since a 2009 presidential proclamation creating the marine monument.

“I think we’re fine with that except we’d like some finality on the co-management agreement,” Inos said, referring to a specific timeline for the co-management deal so that the CNMI could also have control of the submerged lands on the three islands.

Tinian and Farallon de Mendinilla, under lease to the U.S. military, are also exempted from the transfer.

The governor said a presidential proclamation is expected on or before Jan. 16, which he said is the statutory deadline by which the president must proclaim the transfer.

There’s no telling yet whether Inos would go to Washington, D.C. for any such proclamation. As of Friday, there’s no invitation for him from the White House.

Delegate Gregorio Kilili C. Sablan (Ind-MP) and the governor separately confirmed the White House’s plan for a presidential proclamation transferring submerged lands to the CNMI, months after Obama signed Public Law 113-34 that conveys 3 miles of submerged lands to the Commonwealth.

At Sablan’s request, U.S. Sens. Ron Wyden and Lisa Murkowski introduced S. 256 or the submerged lands legislation that became law. It gives the CNMI control of the underwater coasts of its islands. The CNMI became the last U.S. coastal state or territory to own its offshore lands.

SOURCE: SAIPAN TRIBUNE/PACNEWS

Melanesian Spearhead Group (MSG) Ministers 'visit' West Papua

MSG delegation visits Papua under heavily armed guard

Vanuatu minister withdraws from MSG mission

Pacific Islands News Association

A delegation of Foreign Ministers of the Melanesian Spearhead Group (MSG) visiting the troubled province of Papua this date were met and escorted under heavy guard by the Joint Indonesian Military (TNI) and Indonesian Police (POLRI).

en.wikipedia.org

Even peaceful demonstrations were banned by the Police. Around 46 indigenous Papuan activists were arrested in Jayapura for attempting to demonstrate, including well known figures Markus Haluk and Yusak Pakage. All are believed to have been released. 

The MSG delegation’s visit is in response to an invitation from Indonesia in mid 2013 prompted by the MSG 19th Summit’s consideration of an application for membership by Papua in June 2013.

An application which caused significant debate within the Summit at the time and since and which has seen ceaseless efforts during the last 6 months by Indonesia to undermine the application.

Members of the Indigenous Papuan community were not given even the slightest space to be able to access let alone meet with members of the MSG Delegation, who were heavily guarded every moment of their time in Papua. 

The delegation met only with Government Officials from the Provincial level of Government. The Indonesian Government’s attitude was that they invited the MSG delegation so it was the Government that would meet with them.

Students responded by blockading the main road leading from Jayapura city to the airport by burning tyres on the road. As there was no other road route to escort the MSG delegation back to the airport so they were taken instead by Helicopter from the Military Headquarters.

“By these means Indonesia has isolated Papua yet again. The Government has silenced the indigenous population of Papua and closed down any possible space for democracy. The MSG delegation wanted to visit Papua to see the situation for themselves first-hand yet they have not been able to access the people.

“The MSG Delegation was escorted by the Indonesian Armed Forces as if indigenous Papuans wanted to kill their fellow Melanesian brothers and sisters. Indigenous Papuans know and live by what is required by their culture and their religion and it’s absolutely absurd to even consider that they would harm or make things difficult for their Melanesian brothers and sisters visiting Papua. The culture of terrorists in this region is the culture of others and not of Papuans,” a statement said.

“The events of this date in Papua tell the world that the State of Indonesia is still hiding something in Papua from the rest of the world. That something is the humanitarian evil that is being committed by the State of Indonesia against Indigenous Papuans. The events of this date in Papua also tell the world that the State of Indonesia is not yet mature in its practice of democracy.”

Yan Ciristian Warinusy, a human rights activist in Papua, said the visit was in line with the preliminary agenda of the MSG summit held in June 2013 in Noumea, Kanaky-New Caledonia.

“This is an important matter, a prerequisite for them to determine how they will consider the membership of Papua into the MSG membership,” he said, “as based on the application by the West Papua National Coalition for Liberation (WPNCL).”.

SOURCE: PACIFIC SCOOP/JAKARTA GLOBE/PACNEWS

..........................

Arrests during MSG visit to Papua capital

Reports from Indonesia's Papua region say more than 40 West Papuans were arrested during the visit by the Melanesian Spearhead Group in Jayapura.

The MSG Foreign Ministers made a fleeting visit to the Papua provincial capital and has brief meetings with the Governor and the Papua regional legislature.

However, Tabloid Jubi reports that dozens of activists were arrested by Indonesian police outside the legislature for demonstrating against the lack of access that the West Papuans have been granted to the MSG.

This comes after Vanuatu's government withdrew from the mission, saying it felt Indonesia was not allowing the foreign ministers access to the people who the MSG sought to meet.

The visit is part of an effort to vet a formal bid for MSG membership by the West Papua National Coalition for Liberation.

The head of the MSG delegation, Fiji's foreign minister Ratu Inoke Kubuabola, has rebuffed the separatists' aspirations, saying the ministers fully respect Indonesia's sovereignty and territorial integrity and further recognise that West Papua is an integral part of Indonesia.

SOURCE: RNZI/PACNEWS

.........................

Vanuatu withdraws from MSG mission to Indonesia,

West Papua

The Vanuatu government has withdrawn from a Melanesian Spearhead Group Foreign Ministers delegation to Indonesia to discuss and visit West Papua this week.

The delegation, which is led by Fiji, is visiting after a resolution by the MSG to engage more closely with Jakarta over issues raised about extensive alleged human rights abuses in Indonesia's Papua region.

A decision on the formal bid for MSG membership by the West Papua National Coalition for Liberation was deferred pending the outcome of this visit.

However, Vanuatu's Foreign Minister Edward Natapei has pulled out of the visit because his government believes its scheduled programme shows that the mission is highly unlikely to achieve what MSG leaders wanted it to achieve.

MSG leaders had wanted to meet various West Papuan groups, including some leaders of pro-independence movements, in order to enhance its understanding of the Papuans's membership bid.

Vanuatu is still part of the delegation by sending an envoy.

Reparations Reloaded - Danish West Indies / U.S. Virgin Islands

By Shelley Moorhead

dcstamps.com

In the words of Vaughn Benjamin of the St. Croix based Midnite Band, “Well, I and I now get I time fi come in. Reparation is a realistic ting. Weap not, rejoice for Conqueror and conquering.” I want to very publicly thank US Virgin Islands Lieutenant Governor Gregory Francis for providing the impetus and platform for what has become, to date, the most significant Virgin Islands political statement ever made in Denmark. That “LT” at the very last minute tip-toed and backpedaled his way out of a delegation to Copenhagen he in fact initiated and offered to fund is of no consequence to Virgin Islanders.

Was it a campaign ploy gone wrong? Did LT bite off more than he thought he could chew? Or, did Mr. Francis simply lack the political strength requisite to accomplish such an internationally and historically important feat? Be that which it may, in the face of a two month long Danish national debate on an official government apology by Denmark to the people of the US Virgin Islands we have succeeded in moving the reparations football further downfield to where the end zone is now in sight; 1st down, 10 yards to goal, clock running, and our ball.

In the short span of a month, generated by the Virgin Islands Reparations Movement in Denmark have been: a number of important apologies for slavery – 2 from elected members of the Danish parliament, 1 from a significant political party, and 1 from a family member of the Danish Royal House who has direct ties to the Virgin Islands; invitations to meetings at the Danish parliament to strategize on apology and future cooperation; invitations to Roskilde University and the University of Copenhagen for scholarly debates and forums on apology; over one hundred (100) mainstream news articles, editorials, and debate entries regarding US Virgin Islands reparations, apology, and slavery; 2 pre-recorded and 1 live national television news interview broadcast to DR studios in Copenhagen from the Legislature building in Frederiksted; and 3 national radio interviews.

When all was said and done, despite the fact that Lt. Governor Francis removed himself from his own delegation causing it to be cancelled, many millions of Danes, more than ever before, had from November 6th to December 5th 2013, been directly engaged by the African-Caribbean Reparations and Resettlement Alliance (ACRRA) on the matter of reparations and an apology to US Virgin Islanders for slavery. So, brushing off ACRRA’s shoulders, I again thank Mr. Francis for both his initiative and his lack thereof.

Sparked no doubted by the publicized ACRRA hunger action planned to take place at the St. Thomas Legislature building on October 23rd, and fueled by the averting of the same when subsequently planned was a legislative hearing on reparations scheduled for October 30th 2013, news that an official Virgin Islands delegation was being planned to arrive in Denmark right smack in the middle of their national apology debate was a happening watched closely by world governments and welcomed both by Danes in public and private sectors.

Let’s face it. Reparations represent conflict. It is a contest of political wills. Although reparations present confrontation, the associated initiatives do not represent armed conflict with the consequences being the decimation of populations and national economies and infrastructures. The battle rather is one of ideas, concepts, policies, and principles and whether the theatre be the International Court of Justice at the Hague or the international court of public opinion, reparations is an idea whose time has come and it is a contest that the US Virgin Islands can win should we muster the wherewithal to espouse our political maturity. Reparations do, however, require that attendant to its pursuit are men and women who possess no less measure of diplomacy, political fortitude, intelligence, and organization than would be requisite if the conflict was actual.

For example, when Mr. Søren Espersen who is an elected member of the Danish parliament and who represents a far right political party in the country, on November 17th 2013, in a session of the parliament asked the Acting Danish Foreign Minister Mr. Nick Hækkerup to place on the record the Government of Denmark’s position regarding slavery and apology and in doing so recorded was that Denmark will not apologize to the US Virgin Islands; only the weak among Virgin Islands politicians, those who are deficient of courage and steel in their spinal columns are accepting of this affront to our human dignity and have retreated, packed up the reparations shop and run home. However, His Excellency, Dr. Ralph Gonsalves, Prime Minister of St. Vincent and the Grenadines, who now heads CARICOM, is cut from no such cloth and understands the political, economic and humanitarian stakes at hand for the entire Caribbean. In the US Virgin Islands ACRRA alone maintains the Territory’s international voice and presence with respect to reparations.

When Mr. Hækkerup on November 17th placed Denmark’s outdated 2008 policy regarding slavery and US Virgin Islands relations on the parliamentary record, Prime Minister Gonsalves responded on December 12th 2013, by directing CARICOM to publicly announce that it was expanding its Caribbean reparations initiative to now include Denmark and Norway and in one bold political move directly implicated both the Kingdom of Denmark and the US Virgin Islands. To date, no statement has been issued by any Virgin Islands official, whether in gratitude for, or in condemnation of CARICOM’s December 12th action. Was it coincidence that this CARICOM announcement came on the exact same day that the intended US Virgin Islands delegation was to be hosted at the Danish parliament for apology talks and future cooperation? I think not. These are the type of bold political actions which are required to achieve and realize our reparations. Denmark must know that the US Virgin Islands means business.

It is as a result of such daring initiatives that the Virgin Islands today have a reparations movement it can boast of. When in the year 2005 it was against the policy of the Danish Government to even mention the word slavery in the context of the US Virgin Islands, ACRRA organized and led a delegation of Virgin Islands leaders and officials to Copenhagen to open talks on slavery reparations. In April of the same year ACRRA negotiated, signed, and entered into an historic agreement with the Danish Institute for Human Rights which became the first accord of its kind whereby Danes established a reparations task force and acknowledged their cruelty and brutality and their role and responsibility for the dehumanization of Virgin Islanders. In July of 2008, ACRRA’s efforts resulted in a “statement of regret” being issued by the Danish Ministry of Foreign Affairs on the occasion of the 160th anniversary of Emancipation from chattel slavery in the Danish West Indies. Late last year ACRRA dared to demand that Denmark apologize to Virgin Islanders for slavery and as a result we are today where we are with respect to Danish relations. While there will remain some closed doors in Denmark (and Norway), the record will show that we have met many more doors that were open and even succeeded in opening some that were before closed. Those who champion this cause expect that we will see further political concessions in the years that follow.

You see, while the current Virgin Islands Government has left much to be desired with respect to reparations, there are those of us at the helm of this international initiative who understand that at the core of the law governing reparative justice is the principle that the perpetrators of Crimes Against Humanity are not afforded the right to dictate the outcome of the judgment. In other words, Mr. Espersen, the Danish People’s Party, and Denmark’s Acting Minister of Foreign Affairs can cry “we won’t apologize” all they want, but, truth is they don’t get to determine or control the terms of repair. This power rests even beyond the Kingdom of Denmark. Don’t believe me? You don’t have to take my word for it. Ask “Bodil” who on December 5th 2013 had the final word in the Danish national debate on apology for slavery. This particular fat lady, the blonde, Danish, warrior princess Ms. Bodil has yet to sing, so, far are things from being over.

Mr. Shelley Moorhead is the founder of the ACRRA initiative, president of the Caribbean Institute for a New Humanity, Inc. based in the US Virgin Islands and Chairman of Carida – the Danish Movement for Virgin Islands Reconciliation which is based in Copenhagen, Denmark.

US should stand up for Western Sahara's self-determination

 

Stephen Zunes

Viewpoint

U.S. President Barack Obama met with Morocco's King Mohammed VI in Washington Nov. 22 for their first face-to-face meeting. The result was a bitter disappointment for supporters of human rights and international law.

Two days before the summit, Human Rights Watch issued a statement calling on the U.S. president to tell the king that "U.S. support for the reform process in Morocco depends on moving beyond rhetoric and making tangible change." Specifically, the human rights group called for "stronger legal protections for rights and an end to impunity for police who use violence and commit other abuses."

Instead, according to a White House statement, Obama applauded the Moroccan monarch for "deepening democracy, promoting economic progress and human development."

The most critical issue facing the northwestern Africa region involves Western Sahara, a sparsely populated country on the Atlantic coast that has been under Moroccan occupation since the kingdom invaded the former Spanish colony in 1975, just prior to its scheduled independence. Defying a series of U.N. Security Council resolutions, a landmark World Court decision, and international mediation efforts, the Moroccans have continued to deny the people of the territory their right of self-determination through a U.N.-sponsored referendum. 

No country recognizes Moroccan sovereignty over the territory and more than 80 nations, as well as the African Union, have formally recognized Western Sahara as an independent state.

When the nationalist Polisario Front, which had been fighting for the occupied nation's independence, agreed to end the armed struggle in 1991 in return for a referendum, the United Nations brought in a peacekeeping force known as MINURSO (the U.N. Mission for the Referendum in Western Sahara) to enforce the cease-fire and oversee the scheduled plebiscite that never came. The United States and France, both of which hold veto power in the U.N. Security Council, blocked the United Nations from enforcing a series of resolutions demanding that Morocco provide the Western Saharan people an opportunity to exercise their right of self-determination.

MINURSO is the only U.N. peacekeeping operation in the world without a human rights mandate. In sponsoring the Security Council resolution renewing MINURSO operations earlier this year, the United States removed a provision in the original draft that would have added such a provision.

While the human rights situation within Morocco itself has improved somewhat since Mohammed VI came to power in 1999, Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International and other reputable human right groups have highlighted ongoing severe repression in the occupied Western Sahara. Even the State Department's annual report on human rights acknowledges that "limitations on the freedom of speech, press, assembly, and association, the use of arbitrary and prolonged detention to quell dissent" and that open support for the right of self-determination is ruthlessly suppressed. The report goes on to note how security forces have "engaged in torture, beatings, and other mistreatment of detainees" with impunity.

Despite this, the White House statement following the conclusion of the summit pledged that the United States and Morocco would "work together to continue to protect and promote human rights in the territory."

As an alternative to allowing the Western Saharan people to go forward with a referendum on the fate of their country, the Moroccans have proposed what they refer to as an "autonomy" plan. Unfortunately, not only are important matters such as control of Western Sahara's natural resources and security ambiguous under the Moroccan proposal, all powers not specifically vested in the proposed autonomous region would remain with the king. Furthermore, based upon Morocco's long record of breaking its promises to the international community regarding the U.N.-mandated referendum and related obligations based on the cease-fire agreement 22 years ago, there is little to inspire confidence that Morocco would live up to its promises to provide genuine autonomy for Western Sahara.

More problematically, the proposal is based on the presumption that Western Sahara is part of Morocco, a contention that has long been rejected by the United Nations, the World Court, the African Union and a broad consensus of international legal opinion. To accept Morocco's autonomy plan would mean that, for the first time since the founding of the United Nations and the ratification of the U.N. Charter more than 68 years ago, the international community would be endorsing the expansion of a country's territory by military force, thereby establishing a dangerous and destabilizing precedent.

If Western Saharans accepted an autonomy agreement over independence as a result of a free and fair referendum, it would constitute a legitimate act of self-determination. However, Morocco has explicitly stated that its autonomy proposal "rules out, by definition, the possibility for the independence option to be submitted" to the people of Western Sahara, the vast majority of whom -- according to knowledgeable international observers -- favor outright independence.

Despite this, White House spokesman Jay Carney announced that Obama believes "Morocco's autonomy plan is serious, realistic and credible. It represents a potential approach that can satisfy the aspirations of the people in the Western Sahara to run their own affairs in peace and dignity."

It appears, then, that the administration's policy on Western Sahara constitutes a rejection of fundamental principles of international law that prohibit territorial expansion by force, thereby constituting a de facto acceptance of the right of conquest.

In the comparable case of East Timor, it was only after human rights organizations, church groups and other international activists successfully pressured their governments to end their support for Indonesia's occupation that the Indonesian regime was finally willing to offer a referendum that gave the East Timorese their right to self-determination. It may take a similar grassroots campaign to ensure that the United States pressures Morocco to allow the people of Western Sahara their right to determine their own destiny.

[Stephen Zunes is a professor of politics and coordinator of Middle Eastern studies at the University of San Francisco. He is co-author with Jacob Mundy of Western Sahara: War, Nationalism, and Conflict Irresolution.]

Western Sahara Resource Deals Stoke Territorial Tensions

This is Africa

by Adam Green

Interest in Western Sahara's oil, phosphate and fishing resources prompts growing anger from local populations.

This week, the European Union parliament approved a four-year accord with Morocco allowing its boats to fish in disputed territorial waters off the Western Sahara. Angry demonstrators quickly gathered in towns across the annexed region, claiming Morocco has no right to enter into such treaties on their behalf.

Western Sahara, known by its inhabitants as the Saharawi Arab Democratic Republic (SADR), is Africa's last remaining colony. After the withdrawal of Spain in 1975, it was illegally occupied by Morocco.

Officially, it is regarded as a 'non self-governing territory' and the UN has stipulated that Morocco has no territorial claim to the territory, yet today Morocco effectively controls approximately 80 percent of the territory and almost all of its coastline.

This week's clashes are the latest flare up in a long-running dispute that has received little media coverage. Around 20,000 Saharawis demonstrated against Morocco outside the capital of Western Sahara in 2010. Noam Chomsky, the American linguist and philosopher, has stated that the gathering marked the real start of the Arab Spring.

Tempers looks set to rise as more deals are signed. Geological surveys suggest the waters off the Western Sahara are rich in hydrocarbons, and Kosmos, which holds the Boujdour license, calls the Aaiun Basin, which is in disputed territory, "one of the remaining frontier exploration provinces in Africa". Cairn Energy is awaiting approval for a farm-in as a Kosmos partner.

In mining, a deal between the Moroccan state phosphate company, OCP, and Canadian firm Agrium for more than $10m of phosphate rock attracted international attention, while in infrastructure, Siemens has come under fire for a wind farm deal signed in April, part of which will be constructed in Foum El Oued, in the disputed region.

Companies deny they are breaking any laws, and the legalities are ambiguous at present. Current international rules stipulate that it is illegal to trade with or use resources from non self-governing states without the indigenous population "benefiting from and agreeing to the deal" - interpreted to mean deals can be made as long as the Saharawi people are meaningful stakeholders

In a press release about its investment, Siemens said: "The participation of Siemens in this project is permissible under the applicable laws and regulations and does not infringe the right of self-determination or any other human right in public international law".

William Hayes, senior vice president of Kosmos Energy, tells This is Africa his that exploration offshore Western Sahara is "fully consistent with international law and the 2002 UN Legal Advisor's Opinion", adding that the company has taken the territorial issue seriously. "From the very beginning of our involvement in the territory, we have spent both time and resources to develop a deep knowledge of the complex and nuanced situation in Western Sahara."

Mr Hayes says the Moroccan government will keep to its side of the bargain by ensuring revenues, if exploration is successful, benefit the people of the region.

"In our discussions with ONHYM [the Moroccan national oil company] regarding our exploration activities, it is evident to us that Morocco is paying increasing attention to consultation, transparency and resource governance models," he claims.

But Kamal Fadel, spokesperson for the SADR Petroleum and Mines Authority, says no companies have contacted them about their investments at all - and he is sceptical that revenue resources will be allocated to the Saharawi people as the international law demands.

"Payments for resources from occupied Western Sahara are not returned to the territory. They are paid to the central Moroccan state treasury in Rabat.

Any deals made with Morocco involving Western Sahara would only be a source of employment for Moroccan nationals settled into the territory. Any deals with Morocco involving Western Sahara will only serve to legitimise and entrench Morocco's illegal occupation and serve as pretext for seemingly normal commercial activity," he tells This is Africa.

Either way, any commercial deals will likely not benefit the roughly 165,000 Saharawis who have fled to refugee camps in southwest of Algeria.

The EU accord seems to lend strength to the legitimacy of Morocco's claim, but the country has no jurisdiction in Western Sahara, Mr Fadel says. "No country in the world recognises Morocco's sovereignty over Western Sahara and the UN does not even consider Morocco as the administering power, while the Saharawi republic is a member of the African Union and is recognised by more than 80 states worldwide," he says.

The SADR is considering legal action against the companies investing in the territory, including long-term future compensation claims.Mr Fadel says all deals signed with Morocco "will be considered null and void" when the Saharawi republic achieves its full sovereignty. The EU and international firms seem to be betting that day won't come.

Additional reporting by Tom Stevenson

CARICOM Reparations Commission Identifies areas for reparatory diplomacy and action

CARICOM REPARATIONS COMMISSION PRESS STATEMENT

 Delivered by Professor Sir Hilary Beckles (Chairman) 

on behalf of the CARICOM Reparations Commission

The Thirty-fourth Meeting of the Conference of Heads of Government which was held in July 2013 in Trinidad and Tobago, agreed to set up National Committees on Reparations, to establish the moral, ethical and legal case for the payment of reparations by the former colonial European countries, to the nations and people of the Caribbean Community, for native genocide, the transatlantic slave trade and a racialized system of chattel slavery.

Heads of Government further agreed to establish a CARICOM Reparations Commission comprising the Chairs of the National Committees and a representative of the University of the West Indies (UWI), which would report directly to a Prime Ministerial Sub-committee on Reparations, chaired by the Prime Minister of Barbados, the Hon. Freundel Stuart.

To date, National Reparations Committees have been established in 8 Member States, namely Antigua and Barbuda, Barbados, Belize, Guyana, Jamaica, St. Lucia, St. Vincent and the Grenadines and Suriname.

The Executive of the CARICOM Reparations Commission met on December 9, 2013 in Jamaica at the Regional Headquarters of the University of the West Indies in order to define and set in train its plan of action.

It did so within the context of the global celebration of the life of Nelson Mandela, who, by his sacrifice and teachings, provided the world with a moral and ethical framework within which the diplomatic and political search for truth, justice, and reconciliation can be attained. The Commission affirmed its commitment to the principles inherent in the living legacy of Mr. Mandela.

The Commission affirmed the argument that Caribbean societies have been built upon transatlantic slave trading and chattel slavery, which have been declared by the United Nations as crimes against humanity. These societies are uniquely placed to advance the global cause of truth, justice, and reconciliation, within the context of reparatory justice for the victims and their descendants who continue to suffer harm as a consequence of these crimes.

The Commission called upon the former slave-owning nations of Europe - principally Britain, France, Spain, Portugal, the Netherlands, Norway, Sweden and Denmark - to engage Caribbean governments in reparatory dialogue to address the living legacies of these crimes.

The Commission noted that Caribbean societies also experienced the genocide of the native population, which was also declared a crime against humanity by the United Nations. The victims of these crimes and their descendants were left in a state of social, psychological, economic and cultural deprivation and disenfranchisement that has ensured their suffering and debilitation today, and from which only reparatory action can alleviate their suffering.

The Commission stated its intention to call upon CARICOM Heads of Government to seek reparatory dialogue with the former slave-owning states of Europe, which were enriched by these crimes, with a view to seeking their support for the eradication of the legacy that serves to subvert the development efforts of national societies.

The Commission endorsed the view expressed by the CARICOM Heads of Government that this dialogue be conducted in a diplomatic, conciliatory, and morally uplifting fashion, consistent with the reparatory search for social justice and human decency.

The Commission recognized that Caribbean youth are among those most disenfranchised and denigrated by the colonial legacy that racially profiles and oppresses them as descendants of the enslaved, and who have a human right to live in an environment that is supportive of their willingness to contribute positively to humanity.

The Commission calls upon Caribbean youth to participate in reparatory consultations aimed at uprooting these legacies that define, oppress, and limit their ability to be positive global citizens.

The Commission affirms the principles of the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action that call for an acknowledgement by former slave-owning nations that slavery and slave trading were crimes against humanity; and calls upon these nations to issue statements of formal apologies and commit to a reparatory process that includes, among other actions, the facilitation of the repatriation programme.

The Commission identified and discussed six broad aspects of the Caribbean condition that are the direct result of these crimes that should be the focus of reparatory diplomacy and action.

These are:

1) Public Health: The African descended population in the Caribbean today has the highest incidence in the world of chronic diseases in the form of hypertension and type two diabetes that are the direct result of their nutritional exposure, endemic inhumane physical and emotional brutalization and other aspects of the stress experience of slavery and post slavery apartheid. Scientific research and costs associated with stemming this historically derived pandemic must be addressed.

2) Education: At the end of the colonial period the British left the African descended population, and survivors of the native genocide, in a state of general illiteracy. Some 70 percent of these persons were functionally illiterate at the onset of the Independence era. Widespread illiteracy continues to plague Caribbean societies and accounts for significant parts of their development challenges.

3) Cultural Institutions: Europeans have invested in the development of institutions such as museums and research centres in order to prepare their citizens for an understanding of their imperial history that defined them as rulers and beneficiaries of slavery. There are no such facilities in the Caribbean where the crimes were committed and the victims left disenfranchised in respect of their institutional and cultural experiences and memory. This crisis must be remedied.

4) Cultural Deprivation: The primary cultural effect of slavery was to break and eradicate African commitment to their culture. African culture was criminalized and the cultural basis of identity shattered. Africans were deculturalized and today remain impoverished in respect or cultural legitimacy and supportive appropriate institutional arrangements. These matters represent the colonial legacy of slavery and must be addressed. Contemporary manifestations of these include low ethnic self-esteem; the devaluation of black identity; broken structures and diminished family values; delegitimization of African derived religion and cultural practices, and disconnection from ancestral roots and culture.

5) Psychological trauma: For over 400 years Africans were classified in law as non-human, chattel, property and real estate. They were denied recognition as members of the human family by laws and practices derived from the parliaments and policies of Europe. This history has inflicted massive psychological damage upon African descendants and is evident daily in social life. Only a reparatory dialogue can begin the process of healing and repair.

6) Scientific and technological backwardness: For 400 years the policy of Britain and Europe had been that the Caribbean should not participate in any manufacturing or industrial process, and should be confined to the production of raw materials. This policy has rendered the Caribbean a technologically and scientifically ill-equipped civilization for which it continues to experience debilitating backwardness in a science and technology globalized world. The subjection of the Caribbean to this state has denied Caribbean youth membership and access to an enhancing science and technology culture that has become the world youth patrimony. This matter must be addressed in reparatory dialogue.

The Commission engaged in two hours of consultation with British attorneys from Leigh Day, an internationally respected law firm that specializes in cases of this nature in respect of the legal framework within which such dialogue should and can take place, and was satisfied with the soundness of their brief and recommendations.

The Commission agreed that the services of Leigh Day were valuable and when articulated with those of Caribbean legal luminaries, should constitute the advisory legal team necessary to frame recommendations to the Heads of Governments.

The Commission reaffirmed the argument that CARICOM should request reparatory dialogue with beneficiary slave-owning European states with a view to formulating a new development agenda for the Caribbean, taking these reparatory objectives into consideration, in order to promote the 21st century as a period of mutual respect, recognition, and conciliation.

The Executive agreed that there shall be a meeting of the full Commission towards the end of January 2014, in order to further develop these positions and to provide the Caribbean and the wider world with an opportunity to discuss and deliberate upon the evidence that speaks to reparatory justice within the Caribbean context.

The Commission agreed that its first interim report should be ready for submission to the CARICOM Heads of Government meeting in mid-February, 2014.

El Caribe: dependencia, integración y soberanía - Book by Dr. Norman Girvan

 by Lilien Trujillo Vitón 

Translation Keith Ellis

El Caribe: dependencia, integración y soberanía

by Norman Girvan 

Santiago de Cuba: Instituto Cubano del Libro 

Editorial Oriente; y Casa Del Caribe; 2012

 ISBN 978-959-11-0808-1. 246 pp. 

Email edoriente@cultsgo.cult.cu 

Internet www.editorialoriente.cul.cu 

Y caribe@cultsgo.cult.cu Tlf (53-226) 643-609 

The book El caribe, dependencia, integración y soberanía, [The Caribbean, Dependence, Integration and Sovereignty], by the Jamaican professor Norman Girvan was presented this morning in the José Antonio Portuondo Hall at the San Carlos de la Cabaña fortress by Dr. Tania García and Professor Silvio Baró, both of them specialists in problems of underdevelopment. 

Emancipation from mental slavery in this geographical area is brandished as the central theme of the text, in which the author merges his status as an academic with that of a political person, in order to tackle in a masterful way aspects that are inherent to this very old although not exhausted problem. 

In keeping with all of his work, this book makes an important contribution to the formation and renovation of anti-hegemonic Latin American and Caribbean thinking, as Tania García pointed out. She also attributed this result to a transdisciplinary analysis, which is the only way to achieve a holistic view of reality. 

For his part, the researcher Silvio Baró observed that El Caribe… is a text that gathers together, in several essays, all the phases traversed by the peoples of the region in pursuit of their integration. It also examines the relations between these peoples and their former metropolitan centres. 

Apart from the praiseworthy perceptions the work offers, the author himself insisted on being self-critical, pointing to the absence from the text of two themes that are of indispensable relevance for this specific analysis. Those are: a Pan-Caribbean perspective and a class analysis, specifically of class conformation within the Caribbean. 

Nevertheless, the book explores and systematizes other elemental aspects, such as the relationship between constitutional independence and substantial sovereignty, as well as the connection between them and the imperative of achieving regionalism in the Caribbean. 

Professor Graciela Chailloux, the panel’s moderator and author of the Foreword, stated that this book, the result of coordination between the University of Oriente and the Casa del Caribe, constitutes a further step in the unparalleled effort made by Cuban scientific and literary institutions to make the intellectual legacy of the region widely known. 

The morning session, more than being the mere presentation of a book that is of exceptional value for the future of the peoples of the Caribbean, became an opportunity for the reflexion on and the exchange of ideas among renowned figures in that field of study. 

The West Papuan independence movement - a history

Indigenous Papuans still fight for self-determination, more than 40 years after Indonesia acquired the territory in a sham ballot

• Marni Cordell
• theguardian.com 

West Papuan students in Yogyakarta protesting in support of independence for the territory, which has been part of Indonesia since 1969. Photograph: Ulet Ifansasti/Getty

Indonesia officially acquired West Papua in 1969, after a sham ballot on independence in which only a handful of the local population were allowed to vote.

The region, which makes up the western part of the island of New Guinea to Australia's north, was once a Dutch colony, but the Netherlands began to prepare for withdrawal in the 1950s.

In 1961, West Papuans held a congress to discuss independence and raised the West Papuan "morning star" flag.

But a newly independent Republic of Indonesia began to assert its claim over the province and a conflict broke out between Indonesia, the Netherlands and the indigenous population.

In 1962, a United Nations-sponsored treaty known as the New York agreement was drawn up to put an end to this territorial battle, and Indonesia was appointed temporary administrator of West Papua from May 1963 – without West Papuan consultation or consent.

A key requirement of the treaty was that all West Papuans be allowed to vote in a referendum on independence, which was to be overseen by the UN.

But when the ballot was held in 1969, it was far from free and fair: the Indonesian military handpicked 1,026 leaders to vote on behalf of the entire population, and threatened to kill them and their families if they voted the wrong way.

In this environment, the outcome of the so-called "Act of Free Choice" was unanimous – and Indonesia's takeover of West Papua was rubber-stamped by the UN.

Almost all indigenous Papuans reject the referendum, dubbing it the "act of no choice", and many continue to demand a real vote on self-determination to this day.

This history forms the basis for West Papuans' call for independence – but it is not just historical injustice that fuels the movement today.

Indigenous West Papuans face daily surveillance and intimidation by the Indonesian military and police, and many report living in constant fear. Thousands have been killed, detained and tortured since 1963.

Those who agitate for independence openly do so at a high personal cost. It is illegal to raise the morning star flag and many of the province's leaders are sitting out long jail terms for peaceful acts of defiance.

The region has an armed movement for independence that has been responsible for the deaths of Indonesian security personnel and actively engages in armed skirmishes, but there is a much larger civil movement that is also heavily suppressed.

In October 2011, the Third Papuan People's Congress, a civilian gathering that addressed issues of self-governance, was violently quashed by Indonesian forces. Six people were killed and dozens more injured.

Indonesia guards its "territorial integrity" jealously. And it's no surprise – the massive Freeport McMoran gold and copper mine in West Papua is one of the country's largest taxpayers.

For its part, Indonesia argues that since West Papua was once a part of the Dutch East Indies, it should also be part of today's independent Indonesian Republic.

Both major Australian political parties support them in this stance.

Indonesia is seen as an important political ally for Australia, and politicians from both sides are loth to antagonise their Indonesian counterparts. Australia maintains close ties with the Indonesian military. It also provides training and funding for its counter-terror police unit, Detachment 88, which has been involved in recent crackdowns on the independence movement.

But Australia is home to a significant West Papuan community and a large network of supporters of West Papuan independence. The West Papuan Freedom Flotilla is the latest in a long history of co-operation between activists from the two countries.

*****