印度尼西亚大屠杀 (1965年—1966年)
 | 此條目可参照英語維基百科相應條目来扩充。 (2018年9月30日) |
| 1965年－1966年印度尼西亚大屠杀 | |
|---|---|
| 冷战的一部分 | |
 反印度尼西亚共产党读物 | |
| 位置 |  印度尼西亞 |
| 日期 | 1965年－1966年 |
| 目標 | 印度尼西亞共產黨成员、共产主义同情者、妇女组织格瓦尼（Gerwani）成员、工会会员、爪哇族阿邦甘（Abangan）、印尼華人、無神論者、左翼分子[1][2] |
| 類型 | 政治迫害、滥杀和种族清洗[3] |
| 死亡 | 500,000[4]:3–1,200,000[4]:3[5][6][7] |
| 主謀 | 印度尼西亚军队和各种处决小队，背后有美国、英国和其他西方政府的协助和鼓励[8][9][10][11] [12][13] |
| 印度尼西亚历史 |
|---|
 |
1965-1966年的印度尼西亚大屠杀（印尼语：Pembunuhan Massal Indonesia & Pembersihan G.30.S/PKI），也称为印度尼西亚种族灭绝、印度尼西亚反共大清洗，是指发生在印度尼西亚，在美国以及其它西方国家的支持下，受印尼军队及政府的煽动，针对当地印度尼西亞共產黨成员、共产主义同情者、妇女组织格瓦尼（Gerwani）成员、工会会员、爪哇族阿邦甘（Abangan）、印尼華人、無神論者、左翼分子的大屠杀以及城市暴动。此次大屠杀开始于一次有争议的共产主义者的政变，即九三〇事件后，反共者针对共产主义者的肃清。据估算，事件的受害者约为50万到100万，部分来源的数据高达200到300万。大清洗發生在全球冷战的背景之下，是对共产主义者和亲共者的政治清算，也是印尼政府由旧秩序迈向新秩序的关键推动事件。此次事件导致了苏加诺的下台，开启了苏哈托为期三十多年的威权独裁统治。
政变（即九三〇事件）失败，印尼民众有了释放其压抑许久的反共情绪的出口。他们所支持的印尼陆军随即也走在了清洗印度尼西亞共產黨的路上。除此之外，美国、英国、澳大利亚的情报机构在当地发动了反对印度尼西亞共產黨的黑色宣传。冷战期间，美国政府及其西方集团的盟友的主要目的之一是将各国纳入其势力范围并削弱共产主义在世界各地的影响力。英国则寻求机会，想要参与了印尼 - 马来西亚对抗，卷进与前英帝国殖民地，英联邦成员之一，其邻国马来亚联合邦战争的苏加诺政府下台。
政治、经济和军事领域的共产主义者们被屠戮，印度尼西亞共產黨自身难保，被强行解散。屠杀始于1965年十月，叛乱发生后的数周，由首都雅加达起，扩散到中爪哇省的中东部，直至巴厘省。屠戮事件在1966年年初达到高潮，之后便逐渐平息。数千位当地民兵以及陆军参与了屠杀——无论对象是否为共产党人。全国各地杀戮四起，印尼共在中爪哇省中东部，苏门答腊北部的据点损失殆尽。可能有超过一百万人在一次或数次行动中被监禁。苏加诺在宗教、民族主义和共产主义上实施的“指导式民主”（参见苏加诺 - 执政）被瓦解，他最重要的支持者——印尼共被军队以及伊斯兰主义者清剿，而军队势力此时正如日中天。1967年三月，苏加诺被印度尼西亚临时议会褫夺了他的总统权力，苏哈托被任命为临时总统。1968年三月，苏哈托正式当选总统。
外部勢力介入
[编辑]根据CIA于1962年的一份备忘录，就清算苏加诺这一问题上，美国及英国政府的意见高度一致。当时印尼反共政府与美国陆军的联系相当密切——后者为前者培训了超过1,200名军官，“包括高级军官”，以及相关的武器和经济支持——但CIA否认其参与了屠戮。2017年美國国家安全档案馆与美國国家解密中心（National Declassification Center）解密的政府档案显示，美国对“九三〇事件”屠杀过程知情且暗中支持，并曾向印尼军队提供金钱、武器和印尼共产党官员的名单，却刻意保持沉默，诬陷北京當局。文件更指出，印尼军方编造了中国共产党企图指使印尼共发动政变的谣言[14]。CIA 在1968年一份高度机密的报告中陈述，此次大屠杀“与1930年代的苏联大清洗运动，二战中的纳粹种族大屠杀，1950年代的中国土地改革运动，并列为20世纪最惨无人道的大屠杀”[15][16][4]:183。
被誇大的反華
[编辑]反華事件
[编辑]在一些地区，當地的印尼华人被杀害，他们的财产被抢劫和焚烧，这是反华种族主义的结果，借口是 D. N. 艾迪特让印尼共产党更接近中華人民共和國。印尼华裔历史学家伊塔·法蒂娅·纳迪亚 (Ita Fatia Nadia) 在《雅加达邮报》上表示，她的父亲是一名“帕图克青年”，也是一名印尼社会党党员。1965年10月，她七岁时，印尼陆军士兵来到她位于日惹的家进行检查，随后他便失踪了.她还记得，在上学的路上看到尸体，意识到失踪的家人和邻居都被杀了，后来她母亲告诉她不要管这件事[17]。
20 世纪50年代和60年代初，巴厘岛上也出现了传统种姓制度支持者与反对传统价值观者（尤其是印尼共产党）之间的冲突。印尼共产党被公开指责致力于摧毁该岛的文化、宗教和性格，而巴厘人和爪哇人一样，也被敦促摧毁印尼共产党。巴厘島辛加拉惹和登巴萨镇的所有华人店铺均被摧毁，许多涉嫌为“盖世太保”提供经济支持的店铺业主被杀害。1965年12月至1966年初，估计有8万巴厘族人被杀，约占当时该岛人口的5%，所占比例高于印度尼西亚其他任何地方[18]。
在西加里曼丹，1967年屠杀结束后，当地的达雅克人将45,000名华人从农村地区驱逐出去，造成2,000至5,000人死亡。华人拒绝反击，因为他们认为自己是“别人土地上的客人”，目的只是进行贸易[19][20] 。
以反華之名掩蓋反共
[编辑]加拿大不列颠哥伦比亚大学历史系副教授约翰・鲁萨（John Roosa）向德国之声解释，当年的反共大屠杀是针对印尼共产党而来，并非华人，过去曾有论述将该事件塑造成“反华种族清洗”或“屠华事件”，都是不对的。
对印尼华人的歧视在苏门答腊和加里曼丹]的屠杀中扮演了重要角色，这些屠杀被称为种族灭绝。Charles A. Coppel 对这种说法提出了严厉批评，他认为西方媒体和学者不愿面对他们所支持的反共议程的后果[21] ，而是把印尼种族主义当成替罪羊，并夸大其词地声称有数十万或数百万印尼華人被杀[22] 。Charles A. Coppel 在一篇题为“从未发生过的种族灭绝：解释1965-1966年印尼反华大屠杀的神话”的文章中谈到了这种歪曲的报道。Coppel在1998年5月骚乱的报道中也看到了同样的偏见，当时人道主义志愿者团队指出，非华裔抢劫者占被杀人数的大多数[23] 。他的论点继续引发争论[24]。
据估计，约有2,000名印尼华人被杀害（反共大屠殺总死亡人数估计在50万至300万人之间），有记录显示，在望加锡、棉兰和龙目岛发生了屠杀[25]。Robert Cribb和Charles A. Coppel指出，在清洗期间，实际上只有“相对较少”的华人被杀害，而大多数死者都是印尼原住民[26] 。华人的死亡人数达数千人，而印尼原住民的死亡人数则达数十万。被屠杀的绝大多数人是巴厘人和爪哇人[22]。
新加坡南洋理工大学历史系助理教授周陶沫（Taomo Zhou）向德国之声指出，“九三〇事件”对中共而言，虽然是外交上很大的挫败，但却被中共拿来政治动员文化大革命。當時中華人民共和國许多报刊称印尼反共大屠杀是苏哈托迫害印尼共、华人、华侨的行为，所以“国内群众要继续革命到底”，强烈谴责苏哈托是“法西斯走狗”。[14]。
後續
[编辑]由于苏哈托政权下的镇压，大屠杀并没有被列入印尼的教科书中，也没有对此事做出反省。就意识形态而言，如何为大屠杀事件中所展现的民众暴力做出一个完美的解释，是所有学者所面临的挑战。为避免再次发生类似九三〇事件的动荡，“新秩序”政权采取保守主义，对已有的政治体系做出了严格的控制。在苏哈托一派看来，由于共产主义本身及其所带来的威胁，污名化（参见社会污名）以削减其影响力的手段是必不可少的。这种情况一直持续到了21世纪的今天。
参见
[编辑]参考文献
[编辑]- ^ Ricklefs (1991), p. 288.
- ^ Mechanics of Mass Murder: A Case for Understanding the Indonesian Killings as Genocide. Journal of Genocide Research. [2017-12-22]. （原始内容存档于2022-04-16）.
- ^ Melvin, Jess. Mechanics of Mass Murder: A Case for Understanding the Indonesian Killings as Genocide. Journal of Genocide Research. 2017, 19 (4): 487–511. doi:10.1080/14623528.2017.1393942
.
- ^ 4.0 4.1 4.2 Robinson, Geoffrey B. The Killing Season: A History of the Indonesian Massacres, 1965–66. Princeton University Press. 2018 [2021-11-30]. ISBN 978-1-4008-8886-3. （原始内容存档于2018-08-20）.
- ^ Melvin, Jess. The Army and the Indonesian Genocide: Mechanics of Mass Murder. Routledge. 2018: 1 [2021-11-30]. ISBN 978-1-138-57469-4. （原始内容存档于2019-06-08）.
- ^ Blumenthal, David A.; McCormack, Timothy L. H. The Legacy of Nuremberg: Civilising Influence Or Institutionalised Vengeance?. Martinus Nijhoff Publishers. 2008: 80 [2024-02-22]. ISBN 978-90-04-15691-3. （原始内容存档于2024-01-05） （英语）.
- ^ The Memory of Savage Anticommunist Killings Still Haunts Indonesia, 50 Years On （页面存档备份，存于互联网档案馆）, Time
- ^ Robinson, Geoffrey B. The Killing Season: A History of the Indonesian Massacres, 1965–66. Princeton University Press. 2018: 206–207 [2021-11-30]. ISBN 978-1-4008-8886-3. （原始内容存档于2018-08-20）.
In short, Western states were not innocent bystanders to unfolding domestic political events following the alleged coup, as so often claimed. On the contrary, starting almost immediately after October 1, the United States, the United Kingdom, and several of their allies set in motion a coordinated campaign to assist the Army in the political and physical destruction of the PKI and its affiliates, the removal of Sukarno and his closest associates from political power, their replacement by an Army elite led by Suharto, and the engineering of a seismic shift in Indonesia's foreign policy towards the West. They did this through backdoor political reassurances to Army leaders, a policy of official silence in the face of the mounting violence, a sophisticated international propaganda offensive, and the covert provision of material assistance to the Army and its allies. In all these ways, they helped to ensure that the campaign against the Left would continue unabated and its victims would ultimately number in the hundreds of thousands.
- ^ Melvin, Jess. Telegrams confirm scale of US complicity in 1965 genocide. Indonesia at Melbourne. University of Melbourne. 20 October 2017 [21 October 2017]. （原始内容存档于2021-12-08）.
The new telegrams confirm the US actively encouraged and facilitated genocide in Indonesia to pursue its own political interests in the region, while propagating an explanation of the killings it knew to be untrue.
- ^ Simpson, Bradley. Economists with Guns: Authoritarian Development and U.S.–Indonesian Relations, 1960–1968. Stanford University Press. 2010: 193 [2024-02-22]. ISBN 978-0-8047-7182-5. （原始内容存档于2018-06-25）.
Washington did everything in its power to encourage and facilitate the Army-led massacre of alleged PKI members, and U.S. officials worried only that the killing of the party's unarmed supporters might not go far enough, permitting Sukarno to return to power and frustrate the [Johnson] Administration's emerging plans for a post-Sukarno Indonesia. This was efficacious terror, an essential building block of the neoliberal policies that the West would attempt to impose on Indonesia after Sukarno's ouster.
- ^ Perry, Juliet. Tribunal finds Indonesia guilty of 1965 genocide; US, UK complicit. CNN. 21 July 2016 [5 June 2017]. （原始内容存档于2018-06-13）.
- ^ Bevins, Vincent. The Jakarta Method: Washington's Anticommunist Crusade and the Mass Murder Program that Shaped Our World. PublicAffairs. 2020: 157. ISBN 978-1541742406.
The United States was part and parcel of the operation at every stage, starting well before the killing started, until the last body dropped and the last political prisoner emerged from jail, decades later, tortured, scarred, and bewildered.
- ^ Lashmar, Paul; Gilby, Nicholas; Oliver, James. Revealed: how UK spies incited mass murder of Indonesia's communists. The Observer. 17 October 2021 [2024-02-22]. （原始内容存档于2021-11-22）.
- ^ 14.0 14.1 德国之声. 印尼：共产党与“930事件”为何仍是禁忌话题？. 德国之声. [2024-02-15]. （原始内容存档于2024-02-15）.
- ^ Mark Aarons (2007). "Justice Betrayed: Post-1945 Responses to Genocide （页面存档备份，存于互联网档案馆）." In David A. Blumenthal and Timothy L. H. McCormack (eds). The Legacy of Nuremberg: Civilising Influence or Institutionalised Vengeance? (International Humanitarian Law). 互联网档案馆的存檔，存档日期5 January 2016. Martinus Nijhoff Publishers. ISBN 90-04-15691-7 p. 81 （页面存档备份，存于互联网档案馆）.
- ^ David F. Schmitz. The United States and Right-Wing Dictatorships, 1965–1989. Cambridge University Press. 2006: 48–9. ISBN 978-0-521-67853-7.
- ^ 1965 survivors seek closure as UK documents expose Western complicity in mass killings. The Jakarta Post. [2023-06-28] （英语）.
- ^ Friend (2003), p. 111; Taylor (2003), p. 358; Vickers (2005), p. 159; Robinson (1995), p. ch. 11.
- ^ John Braithwaite. Anomie and violence: non-truth and reconciliation in Indonesian peacebuilding. ANU E Press. 2010: 294 [15 December 2011]. ISBN 978-1-921666-22-3.
In 1967, Dayaks had expelled Chinese from the interior of West Kalimantan. In this Chinese ethnic cleansing, Dayaks were co-opted by the military who wanted to remove those Chinese from the interior who they believed were supporting communists. The most certain way to accomplish this was to drive all Chinese out of the interior of West Kalimantan. Perhaps 2000–5000 people were massacred (Davidson 2002:158) and probably a greater number died from the conditions in overcrowded refugee camps, including 1500 Chinese children aged between one and eight who died of starvation in Pontianak camps (p. 173). The Chinese retreated permanently to the major towns...the Chinese in West Kalimantan rarely resisted (though they had in nineteenth-century conflict with the Dutch, and in 1914). Instead, they fled. One old Chinese man who fled to Pontianak in 1967 said that the Chinese did not even consider or discuss striking back at Dayaks as an option. This was because they were imbued with a philosophy of being a guest on other people's land to become a great trading diaspora.
- ^ Eva-Lotta E. Hedman. Eva-Lotta E. Hedman , 编. Conflict, violence, and displacement in indonesia. SOSEA-45 Series illustrated. SEAP Publications. 2008: 63 [15 December 2011]. ISBN 978-0-87727-745-3.
the role of indigenous Dayak leaders accounted for their "success." Regional officers and interested Dayak leaders helped to translate the virulent anti-community environment locally into an evident anti-Chinese sentiment. In the process, the rural Chinese were constructed as godless communists complicit with members of the local Indonesian Communist Party...In October 1967, the military, with the help of the former Dayak Governor Oevaang Oeray and his Lasykar Pangsuma (Pangsuma Militia) instigated and facilitated a Dayak-led slaughter of ethnic Chinese. Over the next three months, thousands were killed and roughly 75,000 more fled Sambas and northern Pontianak districts to coastal urban centers like Pontianak City and Singkawang to be sheltered in refugee and "detainment" camps. By expelling the "community" Chinese, Oeray and his gang... intended to ingratiate themselves with Suharto's new regime.
- ^ Coppel 2008, p. 122.
- ^ 22.0 22.1 Coppel 2008, p. 118.
- ^ Coppel 2008, p. 119.
- ^ Melvin, Jess (2013), Not Genocide? Anti-Chinese Violence in Aceh, 1965–1966 互联网档案馆的存檔，存档日期8 June 2015., in: Journal of Current Southeast Asian Affairs, 32, 3, 63–91. ISSN 1868-4882 (online), ISSN 1868-1034 (print)
- ^ Tan 2008，第240–242頁.
- ^ Cribb & Coppel 2009.
外部链接
[编辑]- The Indonesia/East Timor Documentation Project （页面存档备份，存于互联网档案馆）. National Security Archive
- Lessons of the 1965 Indonesian Coup Terri Cavanagh, World Socialist Web Site, 1998.
- U.S. Seeks to Keep Lid on Far East Purge Role（页面存档备份，存于互联网档案馆）. The Los Angeles Times. 28 July 2001.
- Accomplices in Atrocity.（页面存档备份，存于互联网档案馆） The Indonesian killings of 1965（页面存档备份，存于互联网档案馆）. Australian Broadcasting Corporation, 7 September 2008
- The Forgotten Massacres （页面存档备份，存于互联网档案馆）. Jacobin. 2 June 2015.
- The Indonesian Massacre: What Did the US Know? （页面存档备份，存于互联网档案馆）. The New York Review of Books. November 2, 1015.
- 50 years ago today, American diplomats endorsed mass killings in Indonesia.（页面存档备份，存于互联网档案馆） Here’s what that means for today.（页面存档备份，存于互联网档案馆） The Washington Post. December 2, 2015.
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
