Documents passed anonymously to MintPress News reveal the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), a notorious CIA front, is laying the foundations for a color revolution in Indonesia.
by Kit Klarenberg
Part 4 - ‘Achieved Milestone’
One of the leak’s most tantalizing excerpts is in a briefing note from June 28 this year. It records how IRI representatives met with high-ranking members of the U.S. Embassy in Jakarta, including its Political Officer, Ted Meinhover. He “conveyed U.S. concerns” about the 2024 elections, in particular how Defense Minister Prabowo Subianto’s “electability” had “increased dramatically,” meaning he “stood the highest according to the polls.” Meanwhile, former Jakarta Governor Anies Baswedan’s ratings were “on the decline.”
Meinhover lamented how Indonesian law restricts parties with less than 20% of seats in parliament from fielding Presidential candidates. If that “threshold” were removed, “there will be more candidates in the election, and the U.S. will have more options,” he declared. Still, Washington “needs to maintain friendly relations with all parties to safeguard U.S. interests in Indonesia, no matter how the election plays out.”
Meinhover added the Embassy had “been active in outreaching” leaders of the local Labor party and Indonesia’s Trade Union Confederation “to know about their plans to protest” a law on job creation recently signed by Widodo. Fearing the legislation will “dampen foreign investor enthusiasm” in the country, “the U.S. firmly supports activities opposed to it.”
Meinhover lamented how Indonesian law restricts parties with less than 20% of seats in parliament from fielding Presidential candidates. If that “threshold” were removed, “there will be more candidates in the election, and the U.S. will have more options,” he declared. Still, Washington “needs to maintain friendly relations with all parties to safeguard U.S. interests in Indonesia, no matter how the election plays out.”
Meinhover added the Embassy had “been active in outreaching” leaders of the local Labor party and Indonesia’s Trade Union Confederation “to know about their plans to protest” a law on job creation recently signed by Widodo. Fearing the legislation will “dampen foreign investor enthusiasm” in the country, “the U.S. firmly supports activities opposed to it.”
Accordingly, the Embassy secretly suggested to Labor party chiefs they could exploit “the opportunity” of Indonesia’s Independence Day on August 17 “to launch protests” against the job creation law and Meinhover’s hated “Presidential Threshold.” Strikingly, a U.S. diplomatic apparatchik present mentioned Jakarta’s State Intelligence Agency (BIN) had “recently warned” the Embassy “not to interfere” in the 2024 elections.
Meinhover said this had motivated the Embassy to “continuously support” IRI’s cloak-and-dagger activities to “further implement U.S. policies while avoiding Indonesian regulations.” So it was, a July 8 – 14 briefing noted, the Institute contacted Labor party leaders and a welter of Indonesian labor organizations – to which IRI “continuously provide small grants” – and discussed “plans to organize protests” against the job creation and Presidential threshold laws “in late July or early August.”
Meinhover said this had motivated the Embassy to “continuously support” IRI’s cloak-and-dagger activities to “further implement U.S. policies while avoiding Indonesian regulations.” So it was, a July 8 – 14 briefing noted, the Institute contacted Labor party leaders and a welter of Indonesian labor organizations – to which IRI “continuously provide small grants” – and discussed “plans to organize protests” against the job creation and Presidential threshold laws “in late July or early August.”
Those protests went ahead on August 9 at Jakarta’s Constitutional Court and State Palace. Local media coverage of the events was duly recorded in an IRI briefing, which also noted that the Institute “provided a third grant” of 1,000,000 Rupiah to the Pandeglang Labor party’s executive chair for the effort. They reportedly “appreciated IRI’s support for their activities.” The briefing added, “The protests went well and [were] brought to a successful close.”
A week later, Institute staffers again provided “support” to the Labor Party’s Pandeglang chapter to “successfully” protest against the two laws. The executive chair received a further personal grant of 5,000,000 Rupiahs “for this achieved milestone.” While this amounts to $330, it can hardly be considered an insubstantial sum in local terms, given that 50% of Indonesia’s population earns less than $800 monthly.
A week later, Institute staffers again provided “support” to the Labor Party’s Pandeglang chapter to “successfully” protest against the two laws. The executive chair received a further personal grant of 5,000,000 Rupiahs “for this achieved milestone.” While this amounts to $330, it can hardly be considered an insubstantial sum in local terms, given that 50% of Indonesia’s population earns less than $800 monthly.
Other briefings indicate several Indonesian organizations and individuals receive direct payments from IRI for achieving specific “milestones,” Perludem among them. In a perverse irony, the February 2021 edition of the organization’s journal featured essays on topics including “political financing and its impact on the quality of democracy,”; “the urgency of preventing illicit political party fundraising,”; “a disproportionately unequal playing field: challenges to and prospects for campaign finance law”; and “accountability and transparency of political party financing” across Asia Pacific.
Eighteen months later, Perludem launched an app helping Indonesians “understand how electoral boundaries are drawn” and allowing users to “create their own versions of boundary delimitation or drawing/redrawing of electoral districts as they deem appropriate by universal standards and principles.” Who or what funded this seditious venture wasn’t stated.
Eighteen months later, Perludem launched an app helping Indonesians “understand how electoral boundaries are drawn” and allowing users to “create their own versions of boundary delimitation or drawing/redrawing of electoral districts as they deem appropriate by universal standards and principles.” Who or what funded this seditious venture wasn’t stated.
Source. links:
Comments
Post a Comment