In
“a reluctant response" to Axel G Sturm’s caustic open letter, DR KRISTIAN
LASSLETT* sets the record straight on his views of how Bougainville’s future
can be better assured by an accurate and informed understanding of its
turbulent past
It
was not a new argument, indeed the distinguished ANU scholar John Braithwaite wrote
in 2011:
Reconciliation
between the mining company, a subsidiary of Rio Tinto, and Bougainvilleans is
yet to be achieved. An obstacle here is that the company fears ritual apology
would expose it to liability in the courts. Yet this reconciliation to some
extent holds a key to international reconciliation among Bougainville,
Australia and Papua New Guinea.
In
response to my article the President of the European Shareholders of
Bougainville Copper composed an open letter
addressed to me. This letter included comments that bordered on the slanderous.
In particular Axel G Sturm argued:
Your
disgraceful lampoon is remarkable. It’s really shameful if an expert in
criminology completely ignores facts and reality. Your
naive adoption of statements and claims from rebel groups on the ground disqualify you as an
honest scientist...I suppose your work in Ulster [Northern Ireland], a region
well known for rebellion and organised crime, troubled your
vision...Unfortunately you are also allowed to spread your ideas among you
students. You shall not use your academic position as a platform for
indoctrination and agitation [emphasis added].
I
took it from Mr Sturm’s statement, he had not bothered to familiarise himself
with my research on the Bougainville conflict. Had he, Mr Sturm would have
discovered that my findings are based upon interviews with General Managers and
three Managing Directors who steered BCL during the 1987-1991 period.
These
interviews were triangulated through extensive documentary research, using
internal BCL records including meeting minutes and company memorandums (these
documents became available following two court cases involving BCL and its
parent company).
I
also interviewed senior state officials in Papua New Guinea, including the
former Prime Minister Sir Rabbie Namaliu (1988-1992), and senior military
officers involved in the operations on Bougainville.
I
remained somewhat aloof during the controversy elicited by an SBS report in
June 2011, as I feel my research speaks for itself – on reflection, I perhaps
erred in not correcting factual inaccuracies that were subsequently reported in
the media (see Callick
2011).
However,
in light of recent personal attacks on my credibility as a researcher and
scholar, I feel compelled to summarise the empirical evidence on which my
recent suggestions were based.
BCL
placed substantive pressure on the Papua New Guinea government to send the
Royal Papua New Guinea Constabulary Mobile Squads – a paramilitary style force,
who according to their own commanders excel in the use of terror [RPNGC
Assistant Commissioner, Personal Communication, 2006] – to Bougainville in
1988, following attacks on mine property by a landowner group.
They
made this request in full knowledge of the Mobile Squads’ chequered human
rights record. As one General Manager informed me:
We
knew the riot squads were heavy handed, that was well known in PNG. That’s how
they worked. If you threw a rock at them you would get ten rocks thrown back.
They were very heavy handed in the way they handled disputes in the
Highlands…It was a case, somebody has to come. They were the only ones that
could come, and put a lid on this thing before it got out of hand [Personal
Communication, 2006].
The
Mobile Squads were responsible for numerous atrocities on Bougainville during
1989-1990.
When
Prime Minister Namaliu opted to send a peace delegation to Bougainville to
resolve the impasse with landowners in December 1988, BCL’s Chairman – who was
also an executive at Conzinc Rio Tinto Australia (CRA) – threatened to withdraw
all CRA investments from Papua New Guinea.
In
a memorandum dated 6 December 1988 he recounts his reaction to the Prime
Minister’s proposal: “The PM’s priority was to ‘appease’ the landowners. I
expressed the view that CRA would want to review its assessment of PNG as a
place to invest. In all, it was an unsatisfactory meeting”. At the time CRA was
investing heavily in mineral projects at Hidden Valley in Morobe, and Mount
Klare in Enga [Post-Courier, 29/11/1988; Business Review Weekly, 9/6/1989].
When
Mobile Squad units and Papua New Guinea Defence Force (PNGDF) soldiers arrived
on Bougainville during December 1988 and early 1989, BCL gave the security
forces access to company assets.
A
BCL General Manager from the period recalls:
We
did everything they asked of us to make their life more comfortable, and better
able to manage through, with transport, communications, provisions, whatever,
fuel. You know we gave them everything, because as a far as we saw it we were
hoping that they were going to solve the situation, so we could start operating
again. So we supported them every way we could [Personal Communication, 2006].
This
claim was confirmed by a senior civil servant who was working in Papua New
Guinea’s Prime Minister’s department: “We relied heavily on some of the
civilian facilities provided by the company. They did everything, I mean we
spent lots and lots of money, to provide backup support services for the
operation. But the defense force was not properly equipped at all” [Personal
Communication, 2006]. I have found no evidence to suggest BCL were forced by
the PNG government to make this contribution.
BCL
regularly met with military commanders from the PNGDF and senior Cabinet
figures. During these meetings security force operations were discussed in
detail. For example, BCL was informed by the Minister of State that the
security forces were planning to use “brutal firepower” to resolve the
situation on Bougainville. This is evidenced in meeting minutes dated 8 June
1989. BCL did not alert the domestic or international community of the impeding
humanitarian crisis.
BCL
meeting minutes evidence the fact that during 1989 the company’s Managing
Director provided strategic input to PNGDF commanders and government officials
on security force offensive operations.
BCL
was aware of the illicit tactics being employed by the government’s security
forces, yet still availed company assets to the PNGDF and RPNGC. For example,
the company’s charitable arm – the Bougainville Copper Foundation (BCF) – had
surveyed homes lost to village burnings, which were conducted en masse by the
Mobile Squads and the PNGDF during 1989.
A
BCF official informed me that during a security operation in March/April 1989,
“forty, fifty villages, and the crops [were destroyed]. The villages were
varying from five or six houses to twenty or thirty houses” [Personal
Communication, 2006].
There
is evidence to suggest BCL’s Managing Director did raise concerns with PNGDF
officers over the loss of civilian life. Nevertheless, the company continued to
provide material assistance to the security forces.
Allegations
have been made that BCL’s Chairman supported the military blockade which was
placed around Bougainville during 1990 – this blockade included the denial of
humanitarian aid.
In
particular, the former Prime Minister and Foreign Minister (1988-1992) of Papua
New Guinea, Sir Michael Somare, alleges that the Chairman stated lets “starve
the bastards out”. Sadly the Chairman has passed away, and I have not been able
to confirm the veracity of this particular allegation.
However,
I was told by a senior BCL executive that the company was supportive of the
blockade for two reasons:
One
was the ability of the militants to get more weapons to increase the level of
their militancy. And the second was that there was always these threats that
they were going to sell off the mine equipment [Personal Communication, 2006]
Of
course, I can only hint here at the evidence collected over several years of
doctoral research. Moreover, in a blog post, it is clearly impossible to add
more context, which would help readers understand some of the complex factors
influencing BCL’s decisions.
Though
in light of the above, I would suggest – to borrow the words of Mr Sturm – it
was in fact those scholars and journalists that rejected the allegations made
against BCL by landowners and activists who might be accused of being “naive”,
after all accessible documentary evidence on BCL’s involvement has been
available since 1990 (following a Supreme Court of Victoria court case
involving BCL and their insurers – BCL records are also stored in an archive at
the University of Melbourne and may be viewed upon request).
Nevertheless,
it is not my intention to vilify BCL. They operated the Panguna mine for 17
years, and many scholars and journalists have written quite favourable pieces
on their corporate record during this period. My specific claims relate to a
small window in the company’s life, 1988-1990, where decisions were taken that
implicated BCL in the hostilities, and the human rights abuses they generated.
Clearly
it is up to the people of Bougainville to decide how they wish to manage their
natural resources. However, democratic decision making about the future depends
upon accurate knowledge of the past. In this respect, BCL can make an important
contribution to democracy and reconciliation in Bougainville by, a) fully
disclosing their role in the conflict; and b) making amends with those affected
by their actions.
I
am more than happy to engage in further probing dialogue with anyone who cares
to comment; but I will not react to any further personal attacks, or ill
informed judgements on the rigour of my research. I consider that issue now
resolved.
*Kristian Lasslett is a Lecturer in
Criminology at the University of Ulster and he sits on the Executive Board of
the International State Crime Initiative.
Retrieved from: Keith Jackson & Friends PNG ATTITUDE (http://asopa.typepad.com/asopa_people/2012/04/the-evidence-on-bcls-role-in-the-bougainville-conflict.html
)
No comments:
Post a Comment