Constructing Papuan Nationalism: History, Ethnicity ... - ScholarSpace

Constructing Papuan Nationalism 87that’s history, and it cannot be changed. However, he argues, it is often thecase with forced marriages that if life at home is good and harmonious,and if the reluctant bride is happy, she will forget that she was forced intothe marriage. If the wife is happy, why would shewant to divorce? For Barnabas Suebu, SpecialAutonomy offered the prospect of marital harmonyand Papuan acceptance of the marriage.But the future of Special Autonomy is uncertain,and Papuans don’t know what the future willbring. Though the Special Autonomy Law still exists, the problem isJakarta’s intentions. 143Barnabas Suebu’s sentiments reflect something of the flexibility andadaptability this study has identified in Papuan nationalist thinking. ThePapuan participation in the formulation of the Special Autonomy Law, particularlythe manner in which Papuans imbued the law with Papuan idealsand interests, suggested that the Papuan ideals of Merdeka could be accommodatedwithin the Indonesian state. However, even if the law were implementedeffectively, Barnabas Suebu and his fellow elite supporters of theSpecial Autonomy Law would still face a great challenge in convincing theirmore skeptical compatriots that the government’s commitment to SpecialAutonomy is to be believed this time and that the Law will create a politicalsystem that is an acceptable alternative to independence from Indonesia.Indeed, the enactment, of the Special Autonomy Law, followed by the failureto implement it, confirmed for many Papuans their deep-seated distrustof Jakarta’s promises and intentions. In the Papuan interpretation of thepast four decades of Indonesian rule, the failure to implement the SpecialAutonomy Law was but the most recent example of Jakarta’s empty andunfulfilled promises. When the Special Autonomy was being debated, thequestion was often asked: Why should we believe Jakarta now? The issue isone of trust, and whether and how it can be restored.However, this challenge has not yet been confronted, because the centralgovernment has not implemented the Special Autonomy Law. Indeed,with the partition of Papua, the central government has sought to undermineSpecial Autonomy. As noted earlier, the Special Autonomy Lawoffended deeply held Indonesian nationalist values and would haveinvolved the devolution of decision-making powers and revenue to aPapuan elite in Jayapura that many in the central government did not trust(also see Chauvel and Ikrar Nusa Bhakti 2004). Whether there is a formBut the future ofSpecial Autonomyis uncertain