Benny Wenda’s Negative Propaganda: Provoking Conflict in West Papua

Benny Wenda, a self-proclaimed leader of the West Papuan independence movement and chairman of the United Liberation Movement for West Papua (ULMWP), has long been a controversial figure whose actions and statements have been criticized for exacerbating tensions and promoting conflict in West Papua.

Benny Wenda’s latest social media outburst, dated September 2, 2025, perfectly illustrates a disturbing trend of deceitful propaganda that not only distorts the reality in West Papua but also aims to incite chaos and division, both locally and globally. Wenda’s inflammatory declaration of West Papua’s supposed readiness to break away from Indonesia in the midst of the nation’s political upheaval is a glaring example of his ruthless tactic to capitalize on external crises to further his separatist ambitions.

By framing Indonesia’s internal challenges—such as widespread protests over corruption, economic hardship, and police brutality—as opportunities for West Papua to assert independence, Wenda distorts the narrative to suggest that Indonesia’s instability directly threatens West Papuans. This tactic is designed to instill fear and urgency among West Papuans, encouraging them to support secession rather than engage in constructive dialogue or peaceful coexistence within Indonesia.

One of the most troubling aspects of Wenda’s propaganda is his selective use of historical events to justify his claims. He references past atrocities, such as the 2023 Wamena massacre and the execution of Theys Eluay in 2001, to paint a picture of continuous oppression under Indonesian rule. While these events are indeed tragic and warrant attention, Wenda’s portrayal ignores the broader context of development and integration efforts in West Papua over the decades.

His narrative overlooks significant investments in infrastructure, education, and healthcare, as well as the legal and political frameworks that have been established to address West Papuan grievances. By focusing solely on conflict and violence, Wenda perpetuates a one-sided view that alienates moderate voices and hinders reconciliation. Moreover, Wenda’s call for international intervention, particularly from regional bodies like the Pacific Islands Forum and the Melanesian Spearhead Group, is a clear attempt to internationalize the conflict.

This strategy not only undermines Indonesia’s sovereignty but also risks drawing external powers into a domestic issue, potentially escalating tensions. His appeal to these organizations is part of a broader campaign to gain legitimacy for his cause, despite the fact that West Papua’s integration into Indonesia was recognized internationally following the 1969 Act of Free Choice, albeit controversially. Wenda’s efforts to rewrite history and challenge this recognition are not only legally questionable but also diplomatically provocative.

The timing of Wenda’s post, coinciding with Indonesia’s political unrest, is particularly cynical. It suggests a calculated move to capitalize on a moment of national vulnerability to push his agenda forward. This approach is not new; Wenda has consistently used social media and international platforms to amplify his message, often relying on emotional appeals rather than factual analysis. His portrayal of West Papuans as perpetually endangered under Indonesian rule ignores the complex realities on the ground, including the voices of majority Papuan who support remaining part of Indonesia and the ongoing efforts by the Indonesian government to improve conditions in the region.

Critics argue that Wenda’s propaganda is not only divisive but also counterproductive to the very people he claims to represent. By promoting separatism, he risks alienating West Papuans from the benefits of being part of a larger nation-state, such as access to national resources, infrastructure development, and international representation. Furthermore, his actions have been met with skepticism within West Papua itself, where many view him as an outsider who has lived in abroad with luxury for decades and lacks a direct understanding of the current situation.

In conclusion, Benny Wenda’s recent post is a manifestation of his ongoing campaign of negative propaganda that seeks to provoke conflict in West Papua. By exploiting Indonesia’s internal challenges, misrepresenting historical events, and calling for international intervention, Wenda undermines efforts towards peace and stability in the region. His actions not only threaten the unity of Indonesia but also risk further isolating West Papuans from potential solutions that could address their legitimate concerns within the framework of the nation. As the international community observes these developments, it is crucial to critically assess the motives behind such propaganda and support initiatives that promote dialogue and reconciliation rather than division and conflict.