[Marxism] Re: Australian and NZ intervention in East Timor

[Alan Bradley <alanb1000@xxxxxxxxx>]

From: "Fred Feldman"
>From the standpoint of Freitilin, they faced
> a no-win situation in the earlier period.  If
> they did not get foreign military help, they
> would have been destroyed  by the Indonesian
> forces and their de facto allies within East
> Timor society.

The tragedy was that this two-edged "help" wasn't
going to happen.

The Australian government (and the US was, I think,
more or less going along with them around this
question) had a historic position of supporting East
Timor being integrated into Indonesia. When this was
no longer viable, they turned towards supporting
"autonomy", that is, the defeat of the referendum on
independence.

In the process, they ensured the conditions that
permitted the post-referendum violence, by insisting
that the Indonesian state would remain in full control
during the referendum and its aftermath, and that the
UN observers present would be few in number and
unarmed. Furthermore, the observers were withdrawn
when the violence began.

This was what Australia's policy was. The Australian
imperialists wanted to preserve their well-developed
ties with the Indonesian state and bourgeoisie, and
only support Indonesian concessions to the Timorese to
the degree necessary to maintain "stability".

What they *didn't* want, was the complication of
dealing with the East Timorese resistance movement,
which, despite the fact that it had become massively
less radical than at their peak, were, at least,
genuine nationalists.

The Australian government twisted and turned, and
supported every possible alternative to East Timorese
independence.

Ultimately, they were faced with no other choice than
to accept, and attempt to co-opt that independence. A
small part of closing off their options was played by
the pro-intervention movement, which was an organised
expression of the genuine sympathy felt by the
Australian working class for the Timorese struggle.

The entire left (apart from the committed
abstentionists) participated in that movement. That
includes those who notionally opposed sending
Australian troops!

Did we warn that this was a dangerous step for the
East Timorese? We most certainly did, and from the
speaking platforms of that movement. We spoke directly
to the tens of thousands of people who participated,
and through our literature to tens of thousands more.

But at the same time we had to point out that the
Australian state had helped *cause* the violence in
East Timor, through its persistent pattern of
*opposition* to East Timorese independence. And that
meant that we had to demand that it *support* East
Timorese independence. "Hands off East Timor", for
example, wouldn't have done the trick, since the
imperialists had shown that they were quite happy to
have Indonesian "hands on" ET.

Whether or not we used the correct demands at the time
can be debated, but the essential imperatives
operating at the time were, as I argued them above.

And none of this stuff applies in any way to the
current situation, which is just good old-fashioned
imperialist opportunism. They don't like being
obstructed by East Timorese nationalism, and are
taking advantage of a situation, which, consciously or
otherwise, they helped stir up, to try and marginalise
the more nationalist-minded forces.

This situation is not the same as 1999. In a sense,
it's the reversal of 1999. East Timor actually did
become (somewhat) independent after '99, and this
situation is a chance for that to be reversed. It's a
counter-revolution of sorts.

> This did not mean a huge campaign for troops out.
> There was no basis for one.

And, unfortunately, there isn't one at the moment. The
DSP has admitted this explicitly, while its critics
have only done so tacitly, through their inaction.

> It did mean a careful and factual campaign of
> exposure, ...

See:
http://www.greenleft.org.au/back/2006/673/673p16.htm
http://www.greenleft.org.au/back/2006/673/673p15b.htm

Incidentally, the sum total of Timorese killed by the
interventionist forces in the past few weeks is zero
(unless I missed one or two). That isn't actually of
any particular significance, but it may help comrades
maintain a sense of proportion. It's likely, in fact,
any such killings would be the beginning of the end of
the intervention.

The way to kick the interventionists out is for the
Timorese to mobilise against them... And then we would
see a mass "Out Now!" movement in Australia.

But I think Clinton has made it pretty clear that that
isn't going to happen for quite a while.

Alan Bradley

PS: It's spelt Fretilin.
PPS: While I support Brazil in the World Cup, the way
Australia was knocked out was a bit heart-breaking.

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com

________________________________________________
YOU MUST clip all extraneous text before replying to a message.
Send list submissions to: Marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Set your options at: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism