Maintaining Balance in East Timor’s Post-election Pains

More on East Timor's Crisis
Tuesday 14 August, 2007 - 22:53 by James Dunn AM in Default


Australia’s belated support for East Timor’s emergence into nationhood is obviously an achievement John Howard is proud of, hence his birthday visit to Dili. Right now he needs to keep as much focus as possible on his positive achievements, and in foreign affairs there are not really a lot of those. We could expect to be hearing a lot about East Timor in the next couple of months, but the problem is that, with further outbreaks of violence, to some observers this venture more resembles a basket case than a success story.

However, the situation, though troubling, is both understandable and manageable though political preferences and prejudices are unbalancing the media view of what the Timorese are going through. The preferences are obvious enough. On the one hand we have the Marxist Alkatiri, while, on the other, his main opponent is the resistance hero, Xanana Gusmao. But Alkatiri is not really a Marxist and although Xanana’s distinctive status is not in dispute there are hundreds of resistance heroes in East Timor. Alkatiri is essentially a Third World nationalist, one who had been praised by the then World Bank president, Paul Wolfowitz, for his management skills.

As for their contributions to East Timor’s independence, Xanana, Horta and Alkatiri all played key roles in bringing that about. Without Horta and Alkatiri’s diplomatic efforts Xanana’s armed resistance would probably have failed. It is sad to see domestic political rivalry narrowing the visions of such leaders, but that is happening in East Timor just as it occurs in Australia. The differences have led to an animosity that has divided and destabilized the Timorese community for more than a year. We had hoped that the election would help resolve the dispute but it seems to have intensified it, placing a heavy responsibility on East Timor’s leading peace-maker, President Horta. The President is of course a friend of Xanana, but he has also had a long working friendship with Alkatiri. Our media’s prejudices have not helped the situation. Our journalists have tended to dramatize the divisions, and downplay efforts to overcome them. Also the extent of the violence has often been sensationalized and exaggerated. This has not only encouraged a pessimistic view of East Timor’s future abroad; it has also fuelled tensions in Timor where the Australian media has a strong presence.

The problem is of course serious, but its impact should be seen as hampering East Timor’s development and political stability, rather than as condemning the new nation to failed state or basket case status. And it does not weaken East Timor’s independence credentials. The violence that followed Xanana Gusmao’s appointment as East Timor’s prime minister was disturbing but it was to be expected. To a degree it exposed East Timor’s political immaturity, but it also exposed problems in the wording of a constitution that reflected the influence of Australian and Portuguese advisers. Fretilin supporters considered their party the victor in the National Assembly’s elections because it received more votes than any of the other parties, and according to the constitution the ‘most voted’ party should be asked to form a government. The political manoevring that ensued inevitably led to a coalition, or alliance as the Timorese call it, with enough seats to ensure a parliamentary majority.

In preparing the East Timorese for independence we really neglected to prepare them for the kind of political manoevring they would find hard to understand. Mari Alkatiri, who favoured the government of national unity which advisers like myself had recommended as a way of restoring national unity, was especially bitter, for he evidently hoped that the election outcome would lead to a compromise that would atone for the humiliating events last year.

Xanana’s coalition or alliance was a predictable outcome, one that would have been accepted if an inclusive government of national unity had been agreed to. Fretilin supported that end, but refused to accept Xanana as prime minister, dashing hopes for the wider coalition. The new government looks strong enough, but unfortunately the outcome has widened the political divide, leading to violence in eastern districts that are Fretilin political strongholds. Alkatiri erred when he encouraged his supporters to protest because, in the present tense circumstances, such responses are bound to lead to violence. The incidents that occurred were nasty, with the UN, a convent and the Australian military being targeted. There is little doubt about our Prime Minister’s preference but, in my experience our military forces have always sought to remain neutral. The UN chief, Atul Khare, has wisely called a conference of all political leaders. However, it is now really up to Xanana and Alkatiri to take the initiative to heal the wounds undermining the unity of purpose that 1999 won international admiration for the courage of the Timorese. As for the role of Australians it is important for us to act as concerned but neutral observers, ever conscious of our past contribution to the new nation’s growing pains, and to remain committed to generous support for the delayed fulfillment of its development objectives.