The harder work of holding Papua

The struggle to maintain control over Papua is a complex issue that extends beyond the mere assertion of authority. The question at hand is what sustains sovereignty, not just as a claim of power, but as a political bond that citizens can identify with. Natalius Pigai, the Human Rights Minister, emphasized this distinction on August 17, highlighting a clear constitutional boundary. However, this boundary alone does not resolve the political relationship.

For Indonesia, sovereignty over Papua is unquestionable. The crux of the matter lies in how Papua's sovereignty endures as a political relationship in which citizens perceive their own existence. John Locke, in his seminal work "Two Treatises of Government" (1689), posited that political authority is not merely about the capacity to rule but hinges on the consent of the governed and the protection of their rights. In essence, authority must be justified, not just asserted.

For Papua, this does not entail revisiting the question of Indonesian sovereignty. Instead, it requires a more challenging proposition: sovereignty must consistently demonstrate its worth to the people living under it. Legitimacy is seldom found in mere constitutional language; it is evidenced through everyday institutions such as schools, hospitals, courts, local government offices, workplaces, and political arenas. A policy might appear benevolent from Jakarta's perspective but may fall short in Jayapura.

The Basque experience in Spain provides a pertinent comparison, albeit distinct from Papua's context. The Basque experience should not be viewed as a blueprint for Papua. The Jakarta Post invites readers to share their experiences, suggestions, and any challenges they've faced in this ongoing narrative. Your feedback is invaluable as we strive to understand this complex issue better.