Indonesia's political, social and economic turmoil continues apace, as parliamentary and presidential elections are planned for later in the year and President B. J. Habibie's government struggles to maintain control over the vast archipelago which contains the fifth most populous state in the world. The most important indication of this turmoil so far was last week's government statement that if East Timor rejects Jakarta's offer of autonomy and international recognition for Indonesian rule, rapid independence would be the only option.
Although it raises just as many questions as it answers, this is undoubtedly one of the most important developments in East Timor's history since it was brutally occupied by Indonesia in 1975 and annexed from Portugal the following year with major loss of life. It is best understood as part and parcel of the historic transition under way in Indonesia. The powerful new democratic movement erupting in the months since the departure of ex-president Suharto has sympathised increasingly with the case for East Timor's independence. The territory's plight is seen as symptomatic of all that was wrong politically and morally with Suharto's rule.
Mr Habibie's government has to respond to that sentiment, which represents a sea-change in attitudes compared to the autocratic and de-politicised nature of Suharto's rule. It also has to respond much more sensitively to international opinion, which has at last become adequately aware of the justice of East Timor's case. An important straw in the wind was the recent letter from the Australian Prime Minister, Mr John Howard, calling for autonomy followed by an act of self-determination - a significant change of policy by the hitherto most important regional supporter of Indonesia's stance.
Observers note the peevish tone in Jakarta's response to such demands, exemplified in the threat by the veteran Foreign Minister, Mr Ali Alatas, of immediate withdrawal. Its ambiguity has to do not only with the sudden profound change in Indonesia's foreign policy stance and circumstances, but with the continuing military role in its affairs. There are many credible reports that pro-Indonesian militias have been given arms by the government, so that precipitate withdrawal could trigger a civil war. It is not at all clear that the armed forces have in fact withdrawn, as Mr Habibie pledged they would. Conflicting interests among the occupation forces, which have profited from controlling exports of tea, tissues, coffee and marble, administrators and teachers loyal to Jakarta and an estimated 300,000 immigrants to the territory, one third of its present population, all play a role, as against the indigenous population.
Thus, it is not at all surprising that East Timorese leaders have been tentative and sceptical as well as enthusiastic in their responses to last week's announcement. They had been willing to consider a relatively long period of autonomy before a referendum on independence and are now confronted with an immediate proposal. The need for established and firm political leadership is central. The leader of Fretelin, their independence movement, Mr Xanana Gusmao, must be given full freedom of movement and Indonesian troops withdrawn under UN supervision if a satisfactory formula is to be arrived at for the transition to East Timor's independence.