Home | Business News | Browse by Publication | A | Arena Magazine

Playing the man in Timor-Leste: the recent violence in Timor-Leste has been blamed on former prime minister Mari Alkatiri or on political opportunists. Kym Holthouse reveals a more complex picture.

Article Excerpt
Much of the discussion around the recent violence in Timor-Leste, whether in the mainstream media, academic or activist circles, has tended to take the form of a polarised debate spinning on the question of whether the ruling party, Fretilin, and Prime Minister Mari Alkatiri were victims or villains in the crisis. This simplification has produced a lot of 'heat' between anti- and pro-Fretilin camps, but has contributed little to a deeper understanding of the conflict and its relationship to a post-conflict state-building environment.

Much of the media reporting either implied or directly stated that resolving the crisis was as simple as removing Alkatiri from office. Now that this has happened, and a semblance of stability has returned, it remains to be seen whether Fretilin, the government and the country can re-unite around a non-party leader in interim Prime Minister, Jose Ramos Horta.

The majority of media criticism on Alkatiri has focused more on his Marxist background and his aloof and highly centralised leadership style rather than attempting either to unpack the antagonism towards him in Timor-Leste, or offer serious critiques of his policies assessed against the many constraints any East Timorese leader would face.

If true, the allegations against Alkatiri of knowingly permitting one of his ministers to supply firearms to civilians are obviously a far more serious category of criticism. However, even if ultimately proven, the media treatment of Alkatiri's role, and to a lesser extent dismissed Interior Minister Rogerio Lobato (arrested and under investigation for supplying weapons to civilians), overlooks more important questions of why figures such as Alkatiri and Lobato emerged as post-independence leaders if their political legitimacy was so weak.

The reduction of Timor-Leste's political problems to its now-deposed leader led conservative commentators such as The Australian's Greg Sheridan and UNSW/ADFA academic James Cotton to conclude disturbingly that Australia, as Timor-Leste's 'security guarantor', must exert greater influence in determining East Timorese political leaders. Cotton even argued that non-engagement would be preferable to engagement without such influence. Not surprisingly, this line of reasoning has fuelled conspiracy theories on the left of active...

View this article FREE - Now for a Limited Time, try Goliath Business News
Free for 3 Days!