Kopassus

[Marina]

It sounds like Indo may be asking for some goodies when POTUS visits next week. Resuming training for Indonesian Kopassus is a bad idea. They seem to have overcome their past repressive tactics and human rights issues. Police and LE take down serious bad guys on a regular basis. No need to poke a stick in a hornets nest.

Will Obama get in bed with Indonesia’s deadly Kopassus special forces?

"ETAN is warning President Barack Obama against renewing any U.S. training for Indonesia’s notorious special forces. 'Training Kopassus will set back efforts to achieve accountability for past and recent human rights violations and will do little or nothing to discourage future crimes,' said John M. Miller, National Coordinator of ETAN. 'This is a bad idea whose time has not come.'

"The Obama administration is considering resuming training of Kopassus and may announce a change in policy when President Obama visits Indonesia later this month.

"Kopassus retains active duty soldiers convicted of human rights violations. These include soldiers convicted of killing West Papuan leader Theys Eluay and the kidnapping and disappearances of Indonesian activists in 1997 and 1998.

"For decades, the U.S. military provided training and other assistance to Kopassus, despite the demonstrated failure of international assistance to improve its behavior. Its widely acknowledged abuses and criminal activity simply continued.

"Restrictions on U.S. military assistance to Indonesia provide leverage to support democracy and human rights in Indonesia. Working with Kopassus, which has a long history of terrorizing civilians, will undermine those fighting for justice and accountability in Indonesia and East Timor.

"The initial offer of training is likely to involve Kopassus Unit 81, which focuses on counter-terrorism. Unit 81 was co-founded as Kopassus Group 5 by then-captain Prabowo Subianto, who later admitted his involvement in the kidnapping of student activists in the late 1990s. He recently ran for Vice President of Indonesia.

"The U.S. has praised Indonesia’s successes in fighting terrorism, but it is the police – not the military – who have the major role.

"Greater Kopassus involvement in counter-terrorism will undercut police and civilian primacy in this effort, while strengthening the military’s controversial internal territorial role. This will only undermine the reforms that the U.S. claims to support."

[Team Sergeant]

I was on the second A-Team to work with the Indo's since Vietnam. Was about 93 I think. We went to work with the Indo "Airborne & Rangers" then the Kopassus found out we were coming they joined in on the training.

They do need some direction concerning human rights, I saw a few things that would have gotten a US soldier a few months in jail for picking on the civilians.

There's a reason they are called "third world", some like Indo are 4th maybe 5th world nations and are in need some HR training.

TS

[Marina]

This might be a stupid question. Do SF teach human rights? Or maybe something like a continuum of force. On the civilian side, there is a congressional requirement (the Leahy Amendment). Agencies interpret it differently. I don't know if it applies to SF.

I believe the UK and Australia have rekindled their relationship with Kopassus.

Ahead of visit, Obama reconsiders Indonesia military

. . . Pentagon spokesman Bryan Whitman said that the United States was discussing a re-engagement with Kopassus "that's in accordance with our laws, our values and advances our interests."

"Indonesia's democratic reforms over the past decade have been pretty remarkable and its greatly improved human rights record has enabled us to engage more broadly," Whitman said.

The United States ended overall sanctions on the Indonesian military in 2005, the same year that Australia resumed joint training with Kopassus.

But US rights advocates remain deeply uneasy about Kopassus and few expect a deal before Obama leaves on his trip to Guam, Indonesia and Australia on March 21.

Kopassus spearheaded the anti-communist pogrom in 1965 that killed up to 500,000 people. It was seen as a key force in the 1975 invasion of East Timor and the 1999 violence when the territory voted for independence.

Senator Patrick Leahy, who authored the 1997 law that bears his name, stood firm against training. He said that Indonesia must first bring Kopassus members to justice for past abuses.

"It is important that the people of Indonesia see that justice is possible, and that impunity for committing serious crimes is no longer acceptable," said Leahy, a member of Obama's Democratic Party from Vermont.

[Pete]

Originally Posted by Marina

This might be a stupid question. Do SF teach human rights? Or maybe something like a continuum of force. On the civilian side, there is a congressional requirement (the Leahy Amendment). Agencies interpret it differently. I don't know if it applies to SF.........

I will try not to sound like I'm giving a flip answer.

SF does not decide where it goes and what it teaches. Before any military trainers come in country the agreements as to what is to be taught, who will teach and who will be the students have been worked out.

A few classes may be added, dropped or placed in different tracks but it will still be aimed at the main goal.

Then you have the whole Human Rights vs Law Of Land Warfare. That could be cause for some hair splitting and jaw boning.

It takes a lot of effort to plop an A Team down in somebody's country. They try and get as much bang for the buck as they can.

Then you have the intereting situation where you're telling the troops they can't do something while their leaders say it's OK. People way above the A Team can quickly get involved and like they say "Shit rolls down hill."

Others may wish to expand........

[The Reaper]

As Pete noted, we don't pick where we go. The State Department requests the training from the Theater Commander. They negotiate the location, type, and duration of training, and SF is directed to execute it.

The Host Nation troops being trained are required to be vetted for human rights violations by the State Department and the Host Nation before training occurs.

SF on these sort of missions are required to conduct human rights training as part of their program of instruction.

TR

[Richard]

This might be a stupid question. Do SF teach human rights? Or maybe something like a continuum of force. On the civilian side, there is a congressional requirement (the Leahy Amendment). Agencies interpret it differently. I don't know if it applies to SF.

We spent a great deal of time 'discussing' the concepts of the Law of Land Warfare in connection with a modern military force in a free society when training the BIRI General Ramon Belloso and Liberian commando units.

It goes with the territory.

Richard

Originally Posted by Pete

.

Then you have the whole Human Rights vs Law Of Land Warfare. That could be cause for some hair splitting and jaw boning.


Then you have the intereting situation where you're telling the troops they can't do something while their leaders say it's OK. People way above the A Team can quickly get involved and like they say "Shit rolls down hill."

Others may wish to expand........

I hope this is not sounding argumentative.. just a small question born of curiousity..

Say the above scenario happens. Human Rights violations are norm, you see them happen and are sort of stuck in the middle. How do you guys deal with those issues. Is it a personal approach or something else. It would seem to be catch-22 deal??? To get invovled would or could be a problem with SF and the host nation. But to ignore or pretend you were not aware.........?
AM

[Richard]

Say the above scenario happens. Human Rights violations are norm, you see them happen and are sort of stuck in the middle. How do you guys deal with those issues. Is it a personal approach or something else. It would seem to be catch-22 deal??? To get invovled would or could be a problem with SF and the host nation. But to ignore or pretend you were not aware.........?

That's just one of several issues we used to refer to as a 'moral-ethical' dilemma which was followed with the following - "What now, CPT/LT/Chief/SGT?"

End of comment.

And so it goes...

Richard's $.02

[Team Sergeant]

Originally Posted by Marina

This might be a stupid question. Do SF teach human rights? Or maybe something like a continuum of force. On the civilian side, there is a congressional requirement (the Leahy Amendment). Agencies interpret it differently. I don't know if it applies to SF.

I believe the UK and Australia have rekindled their relationship with Kopassus.

Ahead of visit, Obama reconsiders Indonesia military

. . . Pentagon spokesman Bryan Whitman said that the United States was discussing a re-engagement with Kopassus "that's in accordance with our laws, our values and advances our interests."

"Indonesia's democratic reforms over the past decade have been pretty remarkable and its greatly improved human rights record has enabled us to engage more broadly," Whitman said.

The United States ended overall sanctions on the Indonesian military in 2005, the same year that Australia resumed joint training with Kopassus.

But US rights advocates remain deeply uneasy about Kopassus and few expect a deal before Obama leaves on his trip to Guam, Indonesia and Australia on March 21.

Kopassus spearheaded the anti-communist pogrom in 1965 that killed up to 500,000 people. It was seen as a key force in the 1975 invasion of East Timor and the 1999 violence when the territory voted for independence.

Senator Patrick Leahy, who authored the 1997 law that bears his name, stood firm against training. He said that Indonesia must first bring Kopassus members to justice for past abuses.

"It is important that the people of Indonesia see that justice is possible, and that impunity for committing serious crimes is no longer acceptable," said Leahy, a member of Obama's Democratic Party from Vermont.

Sure, and then we'll teach the saudi's, jordanians, egyptians, yeman's, syrians etc etc etc human rights.
See any connections? These are not considered "free" countries. (If you think I'm wrong go and call allah an asshole in any one of these countries.)

All of these countries are islamic dictatorships.

Sure glad hussain obama is going home, maybe we can pay the indos to keep him?

[echoes]

Originally Posted by Team Sergeant

Sure, and then we'll teach the saudi's, jordanians, egyptians, yeman's, syrians etc etc etc human rights.
See any connections? These are not considered "free" countries. (If you think I'm wrong go and call allah an asshole in any one of these countries.)

All of these countries are islamic dictatorships.

Sure glad hussain obama is going home, maybe we can pay the indos to keep him?

TS Sir,

Very well said Sir, IMHO!!! Wonder what it would take???

Holly

[Marina]

Originally Posted by Pete

SF does not decide where it goes and what it teaches. Before any military trainers come in country the agreements as to what is to be taught, who will teach and who will be the students have been worked out.

Thanks to all for your responses. Sounds like the same SOP used for civilian security assistance programs. We go where and do what we're told and follow all rules in so doing.

What happens after that is a crap shoot.

With Kopassus, I think the cons outweigh the pros. Let the Brits and Aussies train Indonesians in the military arts.

My two cents.

[Team Sergeant]

Originally Posted by Marina

Thanks to all for your responses. Sounds like the same SOP used for civilian security assistance programs. We go where and do what we're told and follow all rules in so doing.

What happens after that is a crap shoot.

With Kopassus, I think the cons outweigh the pros. Let the Brits and Aussies train Indonesians in the military arts.

My two cents.

I will add when we train individuals such as these we do make "suggestions" and trust me, we do make "lasting impressions". So there is an upside when we train.

"Is there a reason you forced that civilian bus off the side of the road?"

"Yes, they would not yeild to our military convoy!"

"Are they not your countrymen in that bus?"

"Yes, but they would not yeild..."

"Isn't your job to defend those civilians, with your lives if necessary?"

These are the sort of conversations that go on while training. And we would take some sort of action if actual lives hung in the balance. FYI

[Marina]

yep, cultural exchange makes lasting impressions - on both sides

[frostfire]

TS,
I was recently in the area perhaps only miles from where you trained them. I spoke to the locals, storeowners, etc. who deal daily with the army (kostrad, TNI, ABRI, usw) and they told me that things have changed. The soldiers are mandated by the higher-ups to treat civilians with respect.

If this training deal happens and as I am going to be stationed at Bragg , I sure like to put job application as a solid, trusworthy interpreter.