[R-G] Australian foreign minister unveils plans for the colonial occupation of East Timor

[Anthony Fenton]

Australian foreign minister unveils plans for the colonial occupation  
of East Timor
Wed, 2006-06-07 12:25

By Peter Symonds – World Socialist Web Site
http://wsws.org
Australian Foreign Affairs Minister Alexander Downer visited East  
Timor last weekend and laid out the broad outlines of Canberra’s  
plans to establish a long-term colonial-style occupation of the  
country. Downer arrived in Dili on Saturday amid continuing looting  
and violence by rival street gangs, despite the presence of an  
Australian-led force of more than 2,000 troops and police.

It is now clear that Canberra’s military intervention was aimed, not  
at ending the disorder in Dili, much less at assisting the estimated  
100,000 displaced persons living in squalid camps.

Rather its purpose has been to enable the Howard government to  
dictate terms to East Timor’s leaders and preempt Australia’s Asian  
and European rivals, most notably the former colonial power, Portugal.

The continuing chaos in Dili is serving as a useful political lever  
to achieve these ends. While Downer was in Dili, Australian Justice  
Minister Chris Ellison was at the UN in New York pressing for  
agreement with an ongoing Australian-led operation, along the lines  
of Canberra’s takeover of the Solomon Islands in 2003. Under the  
guise of assisting a “failed state”, Regional Assistance Mission to  
the Solomons Islands (RAMSI) controls all the main levers of  
executive power—finance, the police, courts and prisons—in the country.

Monday’s Sydney Morning Herald provided details of Downer’s three key  
proposals for a new UN mandate in East Timor. He argued firstly for  
“a large police force, comprising officers from a broad group of  
countries, preferably under an Australian commander.”

“Second, it [Canberra] wants a more capable UN role in helping the  
East Timorese with governance and administration. East Timor has a  
budget surplus yet scant investment in vital infrastructure, shoddy  
systems of administration and justice, and no serious economic  
activity beyond the oil sector,” the article explained.

Finally, Downer proposed that “a role for the UN in reconciliation of  
a shattered society”.

In effect, the Howard government is demanding control of East Timor’s  
administration via a large, permanent police presence, the  
installation of Australian officials in key positions of finance,  
justice and security, and the means for political manipulation via  
“reconciliation”. Completely absent is any desperately-needed aid to  
provide basic services including welfare, education and health for  
the poverty-stricken country—one of the poorest in the world.

What “reconciliation” means is indicated by the ongoing efforts to  
oust Prime Minister Mari Alkatiri, regarded as too closely aligned  
with Portugal. In less than a fortnight, Alkatiri has been compelled  
to cede substantial control over the country’s security forces to  
President Xanana Gusmao and has lost two close allies—the defence and  
interior ministers—who have been forced to resign.

While Downer declared on Saturday that he would not take sides in  
East Timor’s political conflict, Australia is obviously backing moves  
against Alkatiri. Yesterday, around 2,000 anti-Alkatiri demonstrators  
were shepherded into Dili by Australian troops to protest outside the  
current session of parliament and demand the sacking of the prime  
minister. At the same time, Major Alfredo Reinado, an anti-government  
“rebel leader”, who, in other circumstances would be treated as a  
renegade and terrorist, is being feted by Australian military  
commanders, officials and media as a political leader-in-waiting.

The hypocrisy and cynicism of the military intervention is  
highlighted by the abrupt reversal of the Australian government’s  
position on extending the UN mandate for East Timor. In early May,  
Washington and Canberra vigorously opposed calls from the East  
Timorese government and the UN special representative Sukehiro  
Hasegawa for a one-year extension of the UN Office for Timor-Leste  
(UNOTIL). UNOTIL had organised police, military and civilian advisers  
in all the areas outlined by Downer.

Both the Bush administration and the Howard government regarded  
UNOTIL as being too closely aligned with Alkatiri—and with  
Australia’s rivals in Portugal and elsewhere. With UNOTIL’s mandate  
due to expire on May 20, Washington and Canberra initially opposed  
any renewal, then, on May 12, reluctantly accepted a one-month  
extension.

On the same day, without informing Dili, Prime Minister Howard  
announced that Australian warships would be deployed to waters near  
East Timor, then boarded a plane for Washington. Less than a  
fortnight later, using the pretext of violence stirred up by figures  
such as Reinado, Australian troops began landing in Dili.

Now Downer is demanding a mandate for a long term UN presence— 
dominated by Australian officials and police. Not surprisingly, he  
has also called for the current UN representative Hasegawa to be  
replaced and has objected to Portuguese paramilitary police operating  
independently of Australian military command.

At a regional security conference last weekend, Australian Defence  
Minister Brendan Nelson called for Asian countries, including  
Singapore and South Korea, to contribute to the international force  
on East Timor—a transparent attempt to further dilute any Portuguese  
or European involvement.

A “weighter role” for Australia

While Downer was careful to use diplomatic language in Dili,  
Murdoch’s Australian has felt no such constraint. In his comment last  
Saturday entitled “A weightier role in Dili”, editor-at-large Paul  
Kelly drew attention to Downer’s plan, endorsed by cabinet’s National  
Security Committee, for “an Australian military-civilian strategy for  
East Timor’s future”. “This envisages that Australia will control  
military security in the short term through the Australia-led  
coalition that now exists and influence East Timor’s military  
structure in the long run. The aim is to minimise the influence of  
the UN or other nations, notably Portugal, on East Timor’s military  
structure,” he explained. The UN could be confined to “a stronger  
civilian role in East Timor’s governance, its civil service and its  
police.”

Kelly, who had clearly been briefed by the government, made no bones  
about the object of the exercise. “The lesson Australia has drawn  
from the intervention is that its security views cannot be  
marginalised any longer as they were ignored at the time of  
independence. The feature of East Timor’s brief history is that  
Portugal has exercised more influence than Australia, notably on its  
language, constitution and institutions. This is one of the reasons  
for its failure. It is obvious that as ultimate security guarantor,  
Australia must exert a greater authority,” he wrote.

Kelly’s call for Australia to become a regional hegemon was, however,  
quite restrained compared to what foreign editor Greg Sheridan penned  
on the same day. In his column entitled “Throw Troops at Pacific  
Failures”, he argued for a far broader and more aggressive Australian  
role, writing: “Australian policy in the South Pacific has been  
undergoing an agonising and profound revolution, from hands-off  
respect for South Pacific sovereignty to deepening involvement. But  
it may be that we still have not conceived of our involvement in the  
most useful strategic terms.”

Sheridan openly called for Canberra to use its power and influence to  
get rid of Alkatiri. “Certainly if Alkatiri remains Prime Minister of  
East Timor, this is a shocking indictment of Australian impotence. If  
you cannot translate the leverage of 1,300 troops, 50 police,  
hundreds of support personnel, buckets of aid and a critical  
international rescue mission into enough influence to get rid of a  
disastrous Marxist Prime Minister, then you are just not very skilled  
in the arts of influence, tutelage, sponsorship and, ultimately,  
promoting the national interest,” he declared.

Sheridan went on to outline his vision for the region, insisting: “It  
is perhaps time that Australian conceived of itself as the ‘US of the  
South Pacific’.” He attempted to blunt the sharp edge of his message  
by referring to America’s post war role in East Asia, but then  
continued: “Like the US in Asia, we should do this in part through a  
system of military deployments, though naturally we would not call  
them Australian bases... What I am arguing is that, as part of a  
wider program of assistance involving lots of Australian personnel  
operating in South Pacific government agencies, deployments of  
Australian soldiers should be semi-permanently stationed in East  
Timor, Solomon Islands and, if necessary, other regional basket cases.”

Sheridan is simply stating what the Howard government is actually  
doing. Having secured the backing of the Bush administration by  
extending unconditional support for the US military subjugation of  
Afghanistan and Iraq, Australian imperialism is aggressively carving  
out its own sphere of influence in the South Pacific. Its strategy  
involves, not just transforming “failed states” into dependent  
vassals, but setting the course for broader inter-imperialist  
conflicts throughout the region.

- World Socialist Web Site -

http://www.infoshop.org/inews/article.php?story=20060607044907982