EMAIL SIGN UP!
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
US Must Atone for Aiding Suharto
The death of Suharto, the strongman who ruled Indonesia for more than three decades, is cause for reflection in the United States, particularly as Americans choose our next president and wrestle with the question of our nation's proper role in the world.
Countless atrocities marked Suharto's rule, and his legacy scars Indonesia's politics as well as the social fabric of neighboring East Timor, which his regime violently annexed. But the United States backed those crimes and, like Indonesia, has never taken responsibility - which has made it that much easier for the Bush administration to strengthen ties with the country's brutal military under the guise of fighting terrorism.
In late 1965, as part of a power grab from his predecessor, Sukarno, Gen. Suharto and his army organized and carried out what the CIA described as "one of the worst mass murders of the 20th century." Over several months, they slaughtered hundreds of thousands of members of the Indonesian Communist Party, a legal entity, and of loosely affiliated organizations such as women's groups and labor unions. A decade later, Suharto's military invaded neighboring East Timor. The ensuing war and almost 24-year occupation cost many tens of thousands East Timorese lives.
The U.S. embassy in Indonesia encouraged and lauded the military's actions in the 1965-66 killings' early stages. It supplied radio equipment and small arms, and gave the army thousands of names of Communist Party members. In the case of the Dec. 7, 1975, East Timor invasion, President Gerald Ford and Secretary of State Henry Kissinger approved the aggression and the use of American weaponry while meeting with Suharto the previous day in Jakarta. About 14 hours after they left, Indonesian forces attacked.
Democratic and Republican administrations alike provided billions of dollars in military weaponry and training and economic aid, as well as diplomatic cover, to Jakarta over Suharto's 32-year reign.
That Suharto, who a Clinton administration official characterized in 1995 as "our kind of guy," proved so welcoming of Western investors helps to explicate the bipartisan largesse. A State Department official explained in early 1976, for example, why Washington was condoning Jakarta's illegal invasion of East Timor. Indonesia, he said, is "a nation we do a lot of business with." Richard Nixon once characterized the country rich in resources ranging from oil to rubber to gold as "the greatest prize in the South-East Asian area."
Suharto was forced from power in May 1998. Today's Indonesia, which has the fourth largest population and most Muslims in the world, is now much more open and democratic. Yet, Suharto's legacy deforms the society, especially in terms of the military, which still looms large over the country's political system. As such, there has been no thorough investigation of, nor any accountability among, military or political leaders for any of the countless Suharto-era massacres. This impunity is a source of continuing worry for civil society and restless outlying regions, as well as now-independent East Timor.
In the United States, Washington's role in Indonesia's killing fields of 1965-66 is effectively forgotten. And the record of American complicity in atrocities in East Timor has been largely ignored - despite calls by that country's official truth commission that the United States apologize and pay reparations.
It's a short leap from this history to the tendency of all too many of our elected leaders to prefer bullying over negotiation, cooperation and regard for established international norms. Among the results: ongoing support for Morocco's illegal occupation of the Western Sahara, the disastrous invasion of Iraq and U.S. rejection of international law - UN Security Council resolutions and the Geneva Conventions, for example - as the basis for a just resolution of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict.
Suharto's death, in addition to being an opportunity for self-reflection in the United States, is an occasion for atonement and positive change. This should entail full accountability for U.S. involvement in Suharto's crimes, and a commitment to alter our ways overseas.
Congress and the next president ought to consider these meaningful steps as ways of reconciling with those victimized by the U.S.-Indonesia alliance, and also contributing to a less violent, more just world - at home and abroad.
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...
24 Comments so far
Show Alli host a website for an East Timor Relief organization. i am betting that most americans don't even know about the atrocities committed there. a real tragedy that must be exposed
In late 1965, as part of a power grab from his predecessor, Sukarno, Gen. Suharto and his army organized and carried out what the CIA described as "one of the worst mass murders of the 20th century."
Wikipedia also says of the purge: American diplomats 25 years later revealed that they had compiled lists of Indonesian "communist operatives" and had turned over as many as 5,000 names to the Indonesian military. Kathy Kadane, "Ex-agents say CIA compiled death lists for Indonesians", San Francisco Examiner, 20th May, 1990.
US hypocritical support for despots and dictators is renown. Nothing new here. Move along.
American support of Suharto was one of the more shameful episodes and quite hard to beat (supporting Mobutu of Congo was worse). Again, the main consideration was oil (extraction and the shipping of it), plus the communist boogie man. Also of note to California residents was that Michael Huffington's (Arianna's ex) company sold torture devices to the regime and it was a significant charge that led to his defeat in his race for the Senate in the 90's.
Thank you Joseph Nevins and the commentors above.
We in the U.S. live in a frightening denial
of what happened in both Indonesia and East Timor.
I did make some feeble attempt at
including the story of East Timor
as a significant part
of my recent novel, "Tokyo Twins".
I hope somebody who knows more than I do
about the situation will read it and tell me
if I have come anywhere close
to addressing the East Timor issue.
peace,
tommy.
here's a download link for the story on pdf: http://www.mediafire.com/?5kx3svt4chy
...
If the US had to atone for all the harm it has done it wouldn't exist. It exists by virtue of its malevolence. The US can forget Suharto, atonement begins with the First Peoples. I haven't seen anything yet. Suharto? Insignificant.
The US would continue to exist sans it's malevolence but not as an empire and with a lot less earned animosity. Still, atonement is not enough. It would take at least a century of very different behavior along with reparations to begin to undo the damage. The millions of lost lives cannot be returned and the ruining of future generations would require massive decontamination (DU . . .).
Suharto is no worse than a host of other dictators the USA has supported from Pinochet to Saddam, Marcos, Mubarak, King Fahd and many many more. Worse than supporting these criminals is installing them in the first place. The USA has supported insurections and coups throughout the civilized world. Imagine what Iran would be today if Eisenhauer hadn't brought down the liberal democracy that was in place in '53 and replaced it with the brutal Shah. Ron Paul is right - we should mind our own business!
The U.S. bully isn't going to allow itself to be held accountable to anything. Might is Right according to its imperialist philosophy.
Suharto is there kinda guy and it doesn't end in East Timor .Those that are pulling on the strings believe that the world and it's inhabitors are their property and they will manipulate their property any way the please.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1070329053600562261
Suharto was "our" Pol Pot.
And after his series of massacres, he put his nation on a stable economic footing.
Or did he?
What would have occurred if Suharto was not given large amounts of military, logistical and economic aid by the US, Australia under donor countries? In other words, what would have happened if he was forced to "sink-or-swim" based on the merits of his method of ruling and his economic priorities?
Was his stability the stability of the graveyard? Did it produce less inequality? How much access to good medical care, good paying jobs, educational resources, good shelter, water and food, etc. did Suharto's government provide to the average citizen?
Are the cities' transport systems well-run, efficient and non-polluting?
Does a Suharto political dynasty still posses a powerful influence on Indonesia's political democracy? How responsive is that democracy to the needs of everyday people?
Did the Suharto family and cronies steal most of the nation's oil revenues and other monies gained from external trade?
Like the propagandists of the Roman Empire implied: forget the dead, the enslaved and the marginalized and enjoy the circus.
Also we should not forget that our paragon of liberal politics, Daniel Patrick Moynihan, proudly stated in his memoirs how he carried out instructions from Kissinger when Ambassador to the United Nations, to stall the pleas and cries of East Timor to the Security Council for help, so that no action was taken.
outsider said:
"Suharto is no worse than a host of other dictators the USA has supported..."
This is a shockingly ignorant statement. I of course realize that you had an understandable rhetorical point to make. But to downplay Suharto's deeds by comparing him to the likes of Pinochet to Saddam, Marcos, Mubarak, King Fahd is ludicrous. You should read up on this matter.
Indonesia is about 1001 days and nights from another overthrow. Shall we all watch Foggy Bottom sit on it's foggy bottom and pretend?
Soeharto: Read up on the matter? The article we are supposed to be discussing makes the point clearly: hundreds of thousands killed in a few months. I do believe that is worse than all the others. I myself was not aware of it. What you find to be shocking ignorance is probably also true for 99 % of the US population.
Amy Goodman's audience is long familiar with Suharto's atrocities; she was witness to one massacre and nearly a fatality herself.
A decade-old tidbit from Mother Jones on the Indonesian Riady family interests & connections with the '90s royal family --
http://www.motherjones.com/news/outfront/1997/01/davis.html
It really wasn't that long ago that I actually loved America. But I have learned too much about it. This Suharto thing doesn't even fit in the bucket which spilled over long ago. I've broken I don't know how many camel's backs. I should have never learned to read and lived in blissful ignorance like everybody else, and I would be able to watch a damn baseball game in peace. I can't even do that anymore. The whole money and winning at all costs thing, whether in sport or war, just pisses me off.
lizard,
Did you read any more than the first six words of my short comment?
My point was that outsider was mistaken to suggest that Suharto was "no worse than" (say) Pinochet.
We should always read each others coomments here on CD before we post comments about them.
Why would the US atone for a relatively unknown series of crimes against humanity when they have a bigger run going now?
The US has installed, supported and pulled the puppet strings on a lot of horrible thugs. But, Suharto was, by far, the worst. He killed a million in "65 to 66, then at least 200,000 in East Timor from 1975 to 2000.
Of course, the biggest massacres weren't outsourced to these dictators, they were done by the US itself - about 3 million killed by US bombs and bullets in Vietnam and Cambodia. They also were killed for advocating a more fair economy and society - those evil "communists" again!
Not only atone for aiding Suharto, but many other dictators, despots, murderers too. Too bad that US governments can't be as concerned about their own people as they are about the rest of the world. Who appointed the US the saviour of anything?
Having read the obits in the New York Times and the Washington Post, both papers gloss over the atrocities this man committed, even to the extent of stating that "no evidence connects Suharto with the mass killings". Both papers also, at most briefly mention the invasion of East Timor in one short sentence.
The MSM at work, changing the past, distorting the present, hyperboling the future.
"In the case of the Dec. 7, 1975, East Timor invasion, President Gerald Ford and Secretary of State Henry Kissinger approved the aggression and the use of American weaponry while meeting with Suharto the previous day in Jakarta. About 14 hours after they left, Indonesian forces attacked."
----
When Gerald Ford died Democracynow talked about his role in Indonesia but that was all that we heard of US role. Other media outlets were too busy being patriotic and talking about how Gerald Ford brought together a divided nation after Nixon's impeachment.
Its funny to me that even though Ford was in office for 2 years he still managed to get his hands soaked up in blood just like any other US president. Apparently, you just need to place one step into the Oval office and you automatically get involved in bloodbaths and massacres.
I laughed for 2 days each time someone on TV mentioned Ford's Legacy. I now laugh when GOP candidates talk about Reagan's legacy!
Did you notice how perfunctory and mechanical the response to the death of Reagan and Ford.
Both events were obviously stage managed and
the eulogies had been composed and constructed many years before the death of each.
Both events steathily entered the frontstage and left it as does a thief in the night.
I remember a slew of books written attempting to prove that RWR possessed an internal life and a reflective mind. In fact, so-called Liberal, John Diggens recently published a book that judged Reagan as one of the top two or three presidents that ever held that office.
It was all typical cultural history stuff: no connection to the negative material realities his decisions and actions caused millions in the US and the other nations the US attacked and/or subverted.
Diggens forgot the adage my Daddy always shared with me, "Don't look at what a man says, look at what he does."
"The Secret History of the American Empire" by John Perkins tells the story of our government's "covert" relationship with Suharto.
As always, that relationship showered billions on American corporations involved in those operations.