East Timor and Indonesia Action Network

East Timor and Indonesia Action Network The East Timor and Indonesia Action Network was an advocacy coalition formed to support self-determination in East Timor (Timor-Leste), to respond to human rights abuses associated with Indonesia's presence on the island, and to pressure international institutions and governments such as the United States Department of State, the United Nations, the European Union, and the International Criminal Court to act. The coalition connected activists, non-governmental organizations like Human Rights Watch, faith-based groups including the Catholic Church in East Timor and the World Council of Churches, and diaspora networks such as the Timorese diaspora to amplify campaigns around events including the 1999 East Timorese independence referendum and the 2006 East Timorese crisis.

History

The network emerged in the context of long-term resistance against Indonesian occupation of East Timor and followed campaigns led by figures such as Xanana Gusmão, José Ramos-Horta, and Bishop Carlos Belo—all of whom engaged with institutions like the United Nations Transitional Administration in East Timor and the Non-Aligned Movement. Influences included earlier solidarity movements connected to the Jakarta riots, the Santa Cruz massacre, and international responses to interventions like the East Timor Scorched Earth campaign. Key moments in the network’s timeline corresponded with policy shifts by the Clinton administration, diplomatic pressure from the Australian Government and the Portuguese Republic, and the deployment of multinational forces such as INTERFET. The coalition coordinated with groups focused on international law, such as the International Commission of Jurists, and with media outlets like The New York Times and BBC News that covered events including the 1991 Dili massacre. Post-independence, the network adapted to challenges tied to peacebuilding actors like the United Nations Development Programme and regional bodies such as the Association of Southeast Asian Nations.

Mission and Objectives

The coalition articulated objectives to influence policy in capitals including Washington, D.C., Canberra, Lisbon, and Brussels; to support survivors engaged with tribunals like the Extraordinary Chambers in East Timor and the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (as a model for accountability); and to collaborate with advocacy partners including Amnesty International, Asia Watch, and the Asia Pacific Network. Strategic aims included pressuring legislatures such as the United States Congress and parliaments like the Parliament of Australia to enact measures similar to sanctions used in responses to the Apartheid regime and to promote resolutions in assemblies like the UN General Assembly. The network prioritized support for leaders and institutions tied to nation-building, including the Constitution of East Timor framers and the National Parliament (Timor-Leste), while engaging legal scholars from institutions such as Harvard Law School and Yale Law School.

Activities and Campaigns

Operational activities ranged from public demonstrations alongside movements like Solidarity (Poland), letter-writing campaigns to officials in the United States Department of Defense and ministries in Indonesia, and lobbying efforts targeting committees such as the United States House Committee on Foreign Affairs. The coalition organized informational briefings with think tanks like the Center for Strategic and International Studies and the Brookings Institution, published reports in partnership with International Crisis Group and Human Rights Watch, and coordinated cultural events with artists influenced by works like the Film: Balibo and journalism by reporters from The Guardian and The Washington Post. Campaigns supported investigative journalism into events such as the Liquiçá massacre and sponsored legal aid clinics collaborating with entities like the International Committee of the Red Cross and local non-profits. It facilitated diaspora mobilization during electoral moments like the 2001 East Timorese parliamentary election and humanitarian crises comparable to the 2006 East Timorese crisis, working with emergency organizations such as Médecins Sans Frontières.

Organizational Structure and Funding

The network’s structure combined grassroots coalitions modeled after groups like Greenpeace and faith coalitions similar to the National Council of Churches with coordinating bodies that engaged policy shops such as the Open Society Foundations and philanthropic funders including the Ford Foundation and Rockefeller Foundation. Leadership involved activists with ties to NGOs like Asia Foundation and academic appointments at universities such as Australian National University and University of Oxford. Funding sources reportedly included private foundations, membership donations, and grants from governmental agencies like the United States Agency for International Development and bilateral programs from the Australian Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade. Administrative coordination mirrored standards used by organizations such as the International Republican Institute and the National Democratic Institute for civil society assistance, while financial oversight referenced practices from auditing bodies like PricewaterhouseCoopers.

Impact and Criticism

The coalition contributed to international pressure that preceded formations like INTERFET and to diplomatic shifts culminating in recognition by states including Portugal and Australia, and Nobel laureates such as José Ramos-Horta and Bishop Carlos Belo acknowledged global solidarity campaigns. Its advocacy influenced legislative debates in bodies like the United States Congress and the European Parliament and supported prosecutions referencing cases in the International Criminal Court. Critics—from some analysts at institutions like Lowy Institute and commentators in outlets such as The Economist—argued that external advocacy sometimes oversimplified complex regional dynamics involving actors such as Fretilin and FALINTIL, and risked tensions with multilateral processes led by the United Nations Security Council. Others raised concerns about funding transparency similar to debates around NGO accountability and the effects of international advocacy on domestic reconciliation efforts led by figures like Xanana Gusmão and institutions such as the Reconciliation Commission. Overall, evaluations by researchers at think tanks including the Asia Foundation and the International Crisis Group present mixed assessments of the network’s legacy in transitional justice, state-building, and civil society consolidation in Timor-Leste.

Category:Non-governmental organizations