NEWS: Government Of Indonesia Restrictions in Tsunami Effort, Refugees Want Troops To Stay

The U.S. military participating in tsunami relief efforts were placed under tighter restrictions on their activities. The restriction placed on them by the Indonesian government came as they try to reassert control over foreign troops, media, and relief workers in the devastated area. In response, the aircraft carrier USS Lincoln sailed out of Indonesian territorial water to allow it to conduct air operations needed to maintain pilot efficiency. Helicopter operations will continue however.


UPDATE 1/14/05 Trunami Refugees Want Troops To Stay

BANDA ACEH, Indonesia - Jordanian military doctors treat patients at a clinic inside a refugee camp, while Australian and German troops swarm around the city's main hospital making repairs. The buzz of U.S. military helicopters has become so routine it's now ignored

Foreign troops have been a key lifeline in the tsunami relief effort — and welcomed warmly in Aceh province despite its history of resistance to outside forces. Though the government says it wants foreign soldiers to leave by March 26, refugees say they hope the troops will stay as long as needed — provided they stick to aid work and don't establish permanent bases.

"If they leave, we will starve," said Syarwan, 27, a tailor who is now crowded with some 45 relatives under a tarp at a survivor camp in the provincial capital, Banda Aceh.
Troops

I have to say while I respect a countries desire to maintain its territory, I am really ticked off by the attitude. After all we are there providing them with goods and services and rescuing their people whom they CANNOT care for. To place restrictions on aid workers and the like seems to be very puzzling as well. They are citing security concerns and the like. Its almost like give us the money and get out.


[edit on 14-1-2005 by Banshee]

ABOARD THE USS ABRAHAM LINCOLN - The aircraft carrier leading the U.S. military's tsunami relief effort steamed out of Indonesian waters Wednesday because the country declined to let the ship's fighter pilots use its airspace for training missions.

Meanwhile, the U.S. Marines have scaled back their planned contribution to the aid operation after compromising with the Indonesian military and agreeing not to carry weapons or set up a base camp on Indonesian soil.

The moves underscore sensitivities in nationalistic Indonesia at having foreign military forces operating there, even in a humanitarian operation. They also come amid warnings from the Indonesian military that areas of tsunami-battered Aceh province may not be safe for aid workers.

Sensative

The US and Indonesia have decent relations. Why complain Fred? Indonesia isn't a backwater knowing nothing about American opportunism and aggrandizement.

Indonesia is heavy Islamic, America has been conquering and killing Islamists for more than two years- what do you expect?

About the marines not being armed- America has proved itself to not be trustworthy. Remember Lebanon, Somalia?

If the Indonesians let America land armed troops who would be next?

I say, fine. Dump whatever food and medicine we have onboard, onto the shore, and let them distribute it. Then sail on home.

Sad. How many people are going to suffer because Islam doesn't want to accept help from non-Islamics?

Fine. Maybe the Iranian or Syrian Navy can provide relief services there.

The country needs assistance. No doubt about that. But there is no sense in insisting that if you give aid, you should be able to carry arms into a country, unless of course, if guns and bullets are part and parcel of the aid package ? To top it all off, military training flights in Indonesian airspace ? It's an aircraft carrier. OK. But can the training take place outside ? From some of the posts, really, if this is the attitude that the Indonesians are beggars and their country is not wirth respecting because of aid being given, then I am sure they will take the positiion of keep it, shove it where the sun don't shine. Being grateful does not equate having armed troops and combat aircraft being given free run of the place. Did an emergency evacuation in 1997 of foreign national (including Americans) from Cambodia. Sent in 7 charlies. Took special pains to ensure that no arms ever left the charlies. This is a given in consular relations. There is no relevance to guns and munitions being brandished in this instance.

Originally posted by JoeDoaksAbout the marines not being armed- America has proved itself to not be trustworthy. Remember Lebanon, Somalia?

If the Indonesians let America land armed troops who would be next?

waa? we attacked noone in lebanon or somolia, WE were attacked, ungreatful people is all they are, we shouldnt help anyone if this is all we get from everyone.

Originally posted by dixon
The country needs assistance. No doubt about that. But there is no sense in insisting that if you give aid, you should be able to carry arms into a country

well with armed rebels around what do you expect them to do?

and it is being ungreatful to limit transports and other aircraft that bring aid and rescue people when they dont have any reason to, we offer it all free and they limit it , why? no other country has our transport ability, sure some can get stuff there but we can get more there faster so why?

[edit on 12-1-2005 by namehere]

I have no issue with the marines being asked not to be loaded for bear. However, they admit they cannot guarantee the safety of ground workers in the area. Perhaps armed marines can build a degree of stability.

Also, Now because the CBG has to move further off shore the number of missions the copters can fly goes down because of the distance. Furthermore its not as if they were asking to fly a CAP over the country for crying out loud. They wanted to launch proficency flights period. Now they do that from a few more miles offshore. Ohhhhhhhh Ill bet they feel safer now No this is about accepting help and about gratitude. i don't expect them to join hand and sing its a small world, but I DO expect some degree of flexability. Its like the homeless guy on the street getting mad because you gave him food instead of booze :shk:

UNITED NATIONS - The United Nations (news - web sites) is concerned that new Indonesian restrictions could delay the delivery of aid to tsunami victims by apparently requiring military escorts for humanitarian workers, a senior U.N. aid official said Wednesday.

Margareta Wahlstrom, the U.N. coordinator for aid to tsunami victims, met with Indonesian authorities Wednesday to clarify Indonesia's announcement and to assess the operational impact, "if any," said Kevin Kennedy of the U.N. Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs.

"We're concerned that any requirements that would create any additional bottlenecks or delays or otherwise adversely reflect our operations need to be reviewed very carefully," Kennedy said.
UN Concerned

Well now we know how some countries feel about having armed American troops around.

I feel that our troops should not be left vulnerable like that, but what can I said US image in the world has change since we took Iraq.

A New York Times article from 2000 presented a bleak picture of US and Indonesian relations. U.S. Braces for Trouble in Indonesia as Relations Rupture

They seem to be very distrustful of foreign governments and seem to be quick to make accusations of interference by those governments.

They are probably very wary of any nation using this event to try and set up bases in Indonesia.

BTW, the restrictions they are placing on the US seem to be applied to other nations also, so it's not just an anti-US thing.


[edit on 12-1-2005 by AceOfBase]

Ace,

From the article I quoted in the inital story:

The moves by the Indonesian government, aimed primarily at U.S. troops, underscore the nationalistic country's sensitivities at having foreign military forces operating there — even in a humanitarian effort. They also come amid warnings from the Indonesian military that areas of tsunami-battered Aceh province may not be safe for aid workers.

I think this is aimed at Americans by and large as we may have the biggest presence of military/aid workers in the area.

The moves by the Indonesian government, aimed primarily at U.S. troops, underscore the nationalistic country's sensitivities at having foreign military forces operating there — even in a humanitarian effort. They also come amid warnings from the Indonesian military that areas of tsunami-battered Aceh province may not be safe for aid workers.

Fred, they've changed the text in the story you've linked to then.

This is what it says now:

BANDA ACEH, Indonesia - Indonesia announced that U.S. and other foreign troops providing tsunami disaster relief must leave the country by the end of March and ordered aid workers Wednesday to declare their travel plans or face expulsion from devastated Aceh province on Sumatra island.

The article also says that other nations are adhering to the same rules:

Australia has more than 600 troops in Aceh and expects to have about 300 more by week's end. Japan has sent two ships with 350 troops, and has promised to deploy about 1,000. Germany and Britain each has a smaller presence, involving mostly medical teams.

They, too, have agreed not to carry weapons while on Indonesian soil and are leaving security to the Indonesian military.

for namehere
Lebanon

and then?

Twice during the early 1980s the United States deployed troops to Lebanon to deal with the fall-out from the Israeli invasion. In the first deployment, U.S. marines helped oversee the withdrawal of the PLO from Beirut. In the second deployment, 1,800 marines were sent as part of a multinational force after Israel's Lebanese allies massacred civilians in the Palestinian refugee camps. Given a vague mandate to restore order, support the weak Lebanese government, and work for the withdrawal of all foreign forces, the troops slowly became entangled in the Lebanese civil war. On October 23, 1983, a truck bomb exploded at the vulnerable marine headquarters, killing 241 marines -- the largest loss of life in a military operation since Vietnam. For the military, Beirut becomes a symbol of ill-considered political objectives and poorly-defined rules of engagement.

O.K., so how about Somalia?

say Blackhawk down?

Toward the end of the Bush administration, the United States sent approximately 25,000 troops to Somalia to assist the United Nations with the distribution of famine relief supplies. By the time Bill Clinton took office in 1993, U.S. troop levels had been vastly reduced, largely replaced with forces operating under the UN flag. However as UN clashes with local "warlords" increased, American troops became engaged in policing and wider peacekeeping operations. After 18 U.S. Rangers were killed in a firefight in Mogadishu on October 3, 1993, the United States briefly reinforced its troops but retreated from the more ambitious "nation-building" agenda previously outlined by Secretary of Defense Les Aspin. Criticized for having made decisions that may have contributed to the disaster, Aspin resigned two months later.

I realize that reality sometime ruins a good argument, but here it is. It's a good thing we aren't discussing Central America and Caribbean- I would fall asleep before we finished.

Armed American soldiers just make people nervous.

.

.

Ace: no doubt the text was changed to soften the blow, but I believe that that was the intent. They could not very well go out and say "all welcome except the US, you guys disarm and go beyond our territorial limit"

Joe: Lebanon and Somalia are basically a false anaolgy. This is not a peacekeeping mission nor a warlord hunt, its disaster relief.

Originally posted by FredT
Lebanon and Somalia are basically a false anaolgy. This is not a peacekeeping mission nor a warlord hunt, its disaster relief.

...making it far more important for US soldiers to bear arms.




.

Originally posted by soficrow
[...making it far more important for US soldiers to bear arms.

Sigh, not quite, but they are saying it may not be safe. How better to make the area safe than to have some armed marines around. They clearly cannot provide security, or so they say

BANDA ACEH, Indonesia (Reuters) - Leaders in the international tsunami aid effort expressed concern about how curbs on the movement of workers and a deadline for foreign troops to leave would affect relief in Indonesia's worst-hit Aceh province.
Aid Restrictions

Come on Fred. I'm yanking you (a little)

We don't want this thread to spin really out of control by arguing America's 'sterling' past of humanitarian relief now do we?

When I say America in this context I mean the government. The American people have ALWAYS acquited themselves in relief situations that not only they but their children can be proud of

(ps.- I always liked apple pie )