West Papua and Indonesia — A Sovereignty Rooted in Decolonization

Introduction

The narrative surrounding West Papua is often framed through the lens of victimhood and occupation, with separatist groups claiming that Indonesia is illegally occupying the region. However, such claims oversimplify a complex history of post-colonial state formation and ignore the legal and diplomatic milestones that have solidified Indonesia’s sovereignty. West Papua is not an occupied territory; it is an integral part of the Republic of Indonesia, brought into the national fold through a legitimate process of decolonization that was endorsed by international law and the United Nations.

Colonial Background: The Dutch East Indies and Papua

Indonesia declared its independence on August 17, 1945, following the surrender of Japan in World War II. The newly proclaimed Republic of Indonesia claimed sovereignty over all territories that had constituted the Dutch East Indies, including Western New Guinea (now West Papua). The Dutch, however, sought to retain control of the Papua region, citing cultural and ethnic differences as justification.

From Indonesia’s perspective, retaining West Papua was a matter of national unity and decolonization. The Indonesian nationalist movement had always considered Papua part of the anti-colonial struggle. The Dutch position, in contrast, was widely viewed as an attempt to maintain a colonial foothold in the region.

The New York Agreement and United Nations Involvement

After prolonged diplomatic disputes and tensions, the matter of West Papua was brought before the international community. In 1962, the New York Agreement was brokered by the United States under the auspices of the United Nations. This agreement stipulated that the Netherlands would transfer administration of West Papua to the United Nations Temporary Executive Authority (UNTEA), which would then hand over control to Indonesia.

The transfer was completed in 1963, and Indonesia assumed administrative responsibilities. Importantly, the agreement also stipulated that a referendum would be held by 1969, in which Papuans would be allowed to choose whether to remain part of Indonesia or seek independence.

The Act of Free Choice (Pepera) 1969

In 1969, the so-called Act of Free Choice (Pepera) was held, with 1,026 Papuan representatives selected through regional consultations to vote on the region’s future. Under international observation, these representatives voted unanimously for integration with Indonesia.

While critics have questioned the method of the vote, it is crucial to note that the United Nations General Assembly accepted the results through Resolution 2504 (XXIV). The UN did not revoke or reject the vote. Instead, it acknowledged Indonesia’s sovereignty, marking the final step in the diplomatic process.

Why the “Occupation” Narrative Falls Apart

The term “occupation” implies the presence of a foreign power without legal legitimacy. However, Indonesia’s presence in West Papua is not only domestically legal but also internationally recognized. The UN’s role in the New York Agreement and its endorsement of the Act of Free Choice provide strong legal grounds for Indonesian sovereignty.

In contrast, the separatist narrative often ignores these historical facts, presenting a skewed and selective version of history aimed more at emotional manipulation than factual accuracy.

Papua in the Indonesian Framework

Since integration, the Indonesian government has enacted numerous laws and programs to improve conditions in Papua. The Special Autonomy Law (2001) and its revision in 2021 (Law No. 2/2021) grant Papua significant autonomy in education, healthcare, and resource management. These laws also ensure that indigenous Papuans (Orang Asli Papua, or OAP) are prioritized in governance and development.

In 2022, the region was administratively expanded into five provinces to decentralize governance and bring services closer to the people. These steps reflect not oppression but an evolving effort to integrate Papua equitably within the national system.

International Misperceptions and Media Bias

The global media often portrays the Papua issue through a simplistic lens of oppression and resistance. Such narratives usually ignore Indonesia’s legal claim and the socio-political diversity within Papua itself. Not all Papuans support separatism. Many serve as politicians, civil servants, teachers, and business leaders within the Indonesian framework.

Moreover, foreign support for separatist groups often originates from a lack of nuanced understanding of Indonesia’s complex history of post-colonial state-building. This external interference, although often well-intentioned, risks undermining domestic peace and unity.

The Path Forward: Unity Through Inclusion

Rather than revisiting sovereignty disputes that were settled decades ago, the path forward lies in deepening development, strengthening dialogue, and ensuring justice for all Papuans. This includes addressing past grievances, holding violators of human rights accountable, and ensuring that Papuan voices are heard in national policymaking.

Indonesia is a democracy with a growing commitment to regional equality. Papua’s future, like that of all provinces, must be shaped through democratic engagement, not through divisive narratives or separatist propaganda.

Conclusion

Indonesia’s sovereignty over West Papua is not a product of conquest but of diplomacy, international recognition, and post-colonial justice. The narrative of illegal occupation undermines both the legal history and the progress being made on the ground. It is time to move beyond outdated accusations and toward a future built on inclusion, development, and unity. The people of Papua deserve not slogans, but solutions — and those can only come through partnership within the Republic of Indonesia.

---