HS Dillon, Jakarta – Despite evident shortcomings, one of the outstanding features of post-Soeharto reform has been the devolution of considerable authority to the regions. This includes Papua, where, dating back from the Dutch colonial days, the institutional setup and policy-making has not favored ethnic Papuans. Ethnic Papuans have never been prominent actors in shaping their own future, let alone in determining the distribution of benefits.
It comes as no surprise then, that the growth and increases in regional income are not reflected in the Human Development Index.
It is clear that the planning and decision-making systems have not been able to address the development challenges posed by Papua. The dominant development paradigm, placing emphasis on physical infrastructure, is certainly not the correct answer, either. Ethnic Papuans have not been empowered to draw full benefits from such public investment.
Historically speaking, infrastructure has generally served the dominant groups without generating meaningful value-added, either economic or social, for ethnic Papuans. In the current context, additional physical capital would certainly benefit non-ethnic Papuans and the national economy, but given the fact that ethnic Papuans are still not in a position to compete, it might very well widen the social gap.
The discrepancy between ethnic Papuans and non-ethnic Papuans is widely manifest in cities, as this is where the value-added gravitates toward. Thus, there are historical and structural underpinnings to the Papuan paradox of a resource-rich Papua with more than 80 percent of ethnic Papuans wallowing in abject poverty.
The special autonomy granted to Papua in 2001 provides ethnic Papuans greater latitude for cultural expression and represents an opportunity to reverse the historical injustices and institutional failures. However, poor governance among ethnic Papuan elite, perhaps, explains the persistence of the Papuan paradox: During the first five years the massive influx of funds failed to make a dent in widespread poverty.
Governor Suebu has a magnificent obsession: Using the second chance provided him to lead his people to write a new chapter in Papua's history by employing a new development paradigm that attaches the highest priority to the welfare of ethnic Papuans.
He has set a Herculean task for himself from the very onset: engaging marginalized Papuans in equal discourse to better identify their needs and capacities.
It has taken him 46 days of traveling around Papua by land, over water, flying in light planes and helicopters, and even walking long distances to cover 16 of the 36 meeting points mapped out. On many occasions, voices of disenfranchised ethnic Papuans have brought tears to the eyes of his entourage, comprising state-level and senior officials from the different regencies.
He plans to capitalize upon the reformasi and democratization momentum to build a new Papua within the folds of the Republic of Indonesia. To ensure that ethnic Papuans get a fair share of public funding, his administration has formulated a strategic plan for village-based development, aptly named RESPEK.
Toward this end, in the current fiscal year he has reversed the top-heavy budget pyramid, reducing bureaucratic expenditures from 70 percent to 27 percent, and increasing the share accruing to villages from 10 percent to 45 percent at one stroke. Therein, kampongs are being provided greater latitude and means to establish their own budget priorities and enhance their capacity as they deem fit.
At around the same time, President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono has issued an instruction espousing a "New Deal" for Papua, focusing on health, vocational education, the acceleration of basic infrastructure development, food security and affirmative action measures to give more ethnic Papuans the opportunity to hold posts within the administration, the police and military forces.
However, all this would require a quantum leap in the capacity of ethnic Papuans to plan and manage the overall system, institutions and apparatus. To strengthen fundamentals and to empower ethnic Papuans to assume key roles in development, and to ensure that the development path from the kampongs up unfolds such that Papuans continue to progress from one stage to another, an institutional home for the formulation of requisite breakthroughs and innovations might be in order.
Governor Suebu has expressed a desire to establish a People-Driven Development Knowledge Center, which would help ensure that all policies formulated, institutions established and technologies designed (or transferred in) were driven by the needs and capacities of ethnic Papuans.
Support for an institution dedicated to helping ethnic Papuans catch up, should also rank high on the priority list of the corporate sector and donor community already committed to forging meaningful partnerships with local government and ethnic Papuans.
To achieve these objectives, such a center would need to begin by mapping the diverse physical-ecological, economic, social, cultural and human resource potentials, as well as population dynamics, and record both local initiatives and responses to interventions. With sincere donor support, all international best practices could be recast to meet the unique needs and capacities of ethnic Papuans, starting from the village.
Then, and only then, would Governor Suebu's vision of a Papuan society which upholds ethics and morals, truth and justice, and fully respects the dignity and value of mankind, come to be.
People-driven in a dynamic sense, such a society would also place specific emphasis on the environment, striking a balance between utilization and conservation of natural resources in order to ensure a high quality of life for both current and future Papuans. Under such enlightened stewardship, development would continue to progress and become self-sustaining – turning perceived weaknesses into strengths.
As we move forward, it would serve us well to heed the lessons of East Timor, particularly that national unity cannot be preserved through the barrel of a gun. Despite the massive public investment (in sharp contrast to the immiserization during the Portuguese era), all that Indonesia earned in East Timor was hatred and disgrace.
We need to listen more to the Papuans. However, let there be no mistake: ethnic Papuans do not have a palm outstretched for charity. All they want is to be treated with dignity, and to be given their due. A Papua governed through good governance, with widespread prosperity among ethnic Papuans, would no doubt also contribute to the integrity of our Republic.
Perhaps, the wisdom gleaned from forging equal partnerships with ethnic Papuans will, in turn, be of value in transforming the rest of Indonesia into a more just and prosperous society.
[The writer is a political economist and member of the Papua Forum. He can be reached at hsdillon@gmail.com.]