Search

This study explores theoretically the problems of Papua in the perspective of nationalism, identity politics, and national integration of Indonesia. In the context of Papua, the problems of nationalism and integration is a sensitive issue both historically and realistically. This creates a dilemmatic situation to understanding the Papuan nationalism. This article used descriptive qualitative approach with library research. The sources of data are paper that consist books, scientific journals, and mass media which gathered through documentation techniques and discourse identification. While the data analysis techniques used content analysis techniques. This study shows that: first, the emergence of aspirations about Papuan justice and independence is an attempt to maintain the autonomy, identity, and unity of Papuans, so that nationalism is a sentiment and a movement. The construction of Papuan nationalism tends to be oriented towards the ethnocultural nationalism that constructed as identity politics, so that the development of Papuan identity leads to the construction of a resistant identity. Therefore, nationalism needs to be constructed through nation-building efforts. Second, political reasoning to affirm the integration of Papua and NKRI includes: (1) building a catalyst for conflict and intensive communication; (2) implementing the politics of recognition; (3) accelerated development based on local understanding and identity of indigenous Papuans; (4) changing the way the state views the Indonesian nationalism in Papua; (5) establishing the control of violence through strengthening the role of civil society.

This research was aimed to (1) Know how identity politics of Papua indigenious ethnics of Papua contested to seize structural positions of the OPD (Regional Apparatus Organization) in the governmental organization (2) Know identity politics of Papua indigenous ethnics collaborated with identity politics of non-Papuan ethnics in filling structural position of the OPD in the governmental bureaucracy. The research method used was qualitative i.e. describe, record, analyze, interpret conditions occur today. While data gathering used an observation technique, photos and also interview technique. The research results showed (1) Identity politics practice implemented in the governmental bureaucracy shown along with the existence of dominance of office chief, secretary, structural position and also office with much financial were mostly dominated by MT ethnics. MT ethnics marginalized other Papuan ethnics in positions of office chief, agency, district, secretary, structural position. From the process of marginalized Papuan ethnics were affected by ethnics egoism from village, clans, family, one ethnic and other Papuan ethnics emerge other Papuan ethnics prefer non-Papuan ethnics to collaborate in power in the governmental bureaucrcy. Various powers in the filling of the OPD structural positions in the governmental bureaucracy. The bureaucracy of Papuan governmental bureaucracy was still thick with a cultural primordial, familism, tribalism and margaism. The purpose of ethnics identity politics applied in the governmental bureaucracy include to dominate economic resources that are much such as: Otsus Fund, APBD, PAD, DAK, DAU, governmental projects and programs for self ethnic interest and political groups in the governmental bureaucracy. (2) The filling of the OPD structural position of the governmental bureaucracy. The whole of position percentage data result available in filling the OPD structural position of the governmental bureaucracy, MT ethnics dominate all of positions available. And is followed by non-Papuan ethnics (BS, BN, MR, AN, and TA) that collaborated with MT ethnics in seizing number one and number two chairs in the governmental bureaucracy. Team baperjakat has selected officers who are skilled, good career, professional suitable with country’s civil apparatus. However, all decision to promote officials in the OPD structural position, that guard ethnic contestation in the governmental bureaucracy, in overall policy based on number one and number two persons in the governmental bureaucracy. The purpose of collaboration was to dominate jointly economics resources that are much in the governemntal bureaucracy such as: Otsus Fund, APBD, PAD, DAK, DAU, governmental projects and programs for ther ethnic’s interest and their politics group interest.