DPAD Yogyakarta



INTRODUCTION This publication was prepared for, and under the guidance of, the Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People. Covering the years 1989 through 2000, it updates the publication “The origins and evolution of the Palestine problem” previously prepared for the Committee. During the 1990s intense diplomatic efforts to solve the Palestine problem took place in unprecedented bilateral and multilateral peace negotiations as well as at the United Nations and elsewhere. The Middle East peace conference that was convened in Madrid in 1991 brought together for the first time all the parties to the Arab‐Israeli conflict, the core of which is the question of Palestine, to seek a comprehensive negotiated settlement based on Security Council resolutions 242 (1967) and 338 (1973) and predicated on the principle of “land for peace”. At the beginning, progress in what was soon termed the “peace process” was extremely slow for the Palestinians, who were compelled to negotiate without the presence of a Palestinian representative at the table. Only the mutual recognition of Israel and the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) and their agreement reached at Oslo in 1993, the Declaration of Principles, sustained hope that a permanent settlement of the Palestine problem may for the first time be within reach to end decades of hostilities, occupation and violation of the rights of the Palestinian people. In December 1994, the Prime Minister of Israel, Yitzhak Rabin, and the Chairman of the Executive Committee of the PLO, Yasser Arafat, shared, together with the Foreign Minister of Israel, Shimon Peres, the Nobel Peace Prize. Under the peace process of the 1990s, an entirely new, complex peacemaking framework was created to guide and encourage peace efforts without prejudging details of the envisaged results under negotiation, especially with regard to the various “multilateral” issues that would have required the sustained participation of all the important countries in the region, and the resolution of the Israeli and Palestinian “permanent status” issues such as Jerusalem, refugees, settlements, security arrangements, borders, and water. For various reasons, the peace process of the 1990s was subject to unilateral suspensions of the negotiations, undermining peacemaking efforts. Following the signing of the Declaration of Principles in 1993 and successive bilateral agreements between Israel and PLO, tangible progress was made on the ground, including the redeployment of Israeli forces from some Palestinian areas occupied since 1967, commonly known as the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem; the establishment of Palestinian self‐government, the Palestinian National Authority; the holding of democratic elections for the Presidency of the Palestinian Authority and for the Palestinian Legislative Council; the release by Israel of Palestinian prisoners; the opening of a Palestinian international airport and a land corridor connecting the West Bank and Gaza Strip. Furthermore, unwavering international assistance and foreign investment, reflecting increased confidence in efforts towards a final peace settlement, benefited the living conditions of the Palestinian civilian population. Since 1992, the United Nations participated in the multilateral negotiations as a “full extraregional participant”. In support of the peace process, the United Nations established the Office of the United Nations Special Coordinator in the Occupied Territories (UNSCO) in 1994 to coordinate the assistance to the Palestinian people. It also continued to seek actively a negotiated solution to the Arab‐Israeli conflict through the good offices of the Secretary‐General. In 1999, building on the existing mandate of the Special Coordinator, the Secretary‐General appointed the Special Coordinator for the Middle East Peace Process and Personal Representative to the Palestine Liberation Organization and the Palestinian Authority. The occupation by Israel of the Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, continued, however. In violation of applicable international law, specifically humanitarian and customary law, Israel, the occupying Power, expanded the settler population in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including through the construction of numerous new settlements and the expansion of the already established settlements. Strict closure policies widely regarded as collective punishment were implemented by Israel, the occupying Power, in the 1990s, along with other harsh measures against the Palestinian civilian population, which were taken in the context of maintaining the occupation, many in clear violation of international humanitarian and human rights law. The plight of the Palestine refugees, who in the 1990s numbered more than 3.7 million people, also continued. The refugee issue was addressed in intermittent multilateral negotiations, until these thoroughly stalled in 2000. It was also broached in the bilateral permanent status talks between Israel and the Palestinians at the end of the same year. On its part, each year, the General Assembly continued to recall the refugees’ right of return and compensation in accordance with the General Assembly resolution 194 (III). As mandated by the General Assembly, the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA) remained the largest ` 2 provider of crucial humanitarian and emergency assistance to the Palestine refugees. This period also witnessed certain milestones for UNRWA, such as its commemoration of 50 years of operation and the return of its headquarters to the region, for the first time located in the Occupied Palestinian Territory in Gaza City. Around these and other issues, deep differences and a vast asymmetry of power persisted between Israel and the Palestinians, hampering progress in their negotiations and slowing down the implementation of the various bilateral agreements reached. As a result, outstanding commitments under the agreements signed, particularly by the occupying Power, accumulated during the second half of the 1990s, and themselves became the focus of negotiations. Frequently, the bilateral negotiations ground to a halt, resuscitated only by third‐party mediation that would ensure their continuation and yield further negotiated results. At a time when the political will for painful compromises and a “peace of the brave” was needed, mutual distrust and recriminations began to set in, which contributed to a growing crisis of confidence between Israel and the Palestinians. The assassination of Prime Minister Rabin in 1995 by an Israeli extremist also negatively impacted the peace process. By the end of 2000, the search for a peaceful settlement had come full circle, from hopeful exhilaration in the early 1990s to near despair, hamstrung by the aforementioned and numerous other factors. Many of the positive developments on the ground had stalled, if not actually been undone and reversed, in particular as a result of the reoccupation of Palestinian population centres by Israel in September 2000 with the outbreak of the second Palestinian intifada. The lack of progress in the peace negotiations, notably on the permanent status issues, was epitomized by the inconclusive Camp David Summit held in July 2000 between the Prime Minister of Israel, Ehud Barak, and the Palestinian President, Yasser Arafat, mediated by the President of the United States, Bill Clinton. Subsequently, the deadline passed to achieve a permanent status agreement not later than 13 September 2000 and the Declaration of Principles, and interim transitional agreement remained unfulfilled. In the midst of an already precarious and volatile atmosphere, the demonstrative visit on 28 September 2000 by Israel’s opposition party leader to the Al‐Haram Al‐Sharif, a sanctuary in the occupied East Jerusalem housing the Al‐Aqsa Mosque, provoked an outbreak of violence between Israelis and Palestinians that escalated into what came to be known as the “Al‐Aqsa intifada” or second intifada. Israel’s response to the second Palestinian uprising in less than a decade (the first intifada was launched in December 1987), in particular the excessive use of force, led to growing loss of Palestinian life, including many casualties among Palestinian children. The international community, the Palestinian Authority and others immediately urged Israel, the occupying Power, without success, to provide protection for the Palestinian civilian population. Instead, a cycle of violence and political entrenchment ensued that was soon to put any hope of peace further out of reach for years to come, sinking the Occupied Palestinian Territory into yet another period of confrontation and aggravating the plight, sense of insecurity and despair of the Palestinian people. In the years to come, Israel’s policies during the second intifada would result in a sharp deterioration of the Palestinian humanitarian and economic situation. From 1989 to 2000, the evolution of the Palestine question at the United Nations was a delicate balancing act of supporting the Middle East peace process, while upholding the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people, including the right to return and to self‐determination, national independence and statehood. The General Assembly determined in annual resolutions since 1992 that the United Nations had a permanent responsibility with respect to the Palestine question in all its aspects until its satisfactory resolution in accordance with international law. The principal organs of the United Nations, as well as the Main Committees of the General Assembly, the Economic and Social Commission for Western Asia, the Commission on Human Rights, the Commission on the Status of Women and human rights treaty bodies continued to address aspects of the Palestine question in their respective areas of competence. From 1989 to 2000, resolutions concerning the Palestine problem received at the General Assembly a solid majority of support from Member States. From 1993 onward, a resolution entitled “Peaceful settlement of the question of Palestine” reaffirmed the requirements of parameters for a just peace settlement, annually expressed the support of the Assembly for the peace process. The same year, Norway, together with the Russian Federation and the United States, and on behalf of more than 100 additional sponsors, introduced a resolution entitled “Middle East peace process”, which was adopted annually by a large, almost unanimous majority, until it was withdrawn by the co‐ sponsors in 1997. Since 1993, successive resolutions on assistance to the Palestinian people were adopted by consensus, as were the resolutions regarding the millennium celebrations in 2000 in the Palestinian city of Bethlehem. ` 3 Furthermore, since 1994, in an annual resolution under the item entitled “Situation in the Middle East”, the General Assembly has annually reiterated that the decision by Israel to impose its laws, jurisdiction and administration on the holy city of Jerusalem was illegal and therefore null, void and without validity. The Assembly also deplored the transfer by some States of their diplomatic missions to Jerusalem in violation of Security Council resolution 478 (1980) and called upon those States to abide by the provisions of the resolution. In view of the inability of the Security Council to act on certain important developments in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, which were regarded as being in contravention of international law and as violations of Palestinian rights, the General Assembly, under its “uniting for peace” mechanism, convened in 1997 the tenth emergency special session to address “Illegal Israeli actions in Occupied East Jerusalem and the rest of the Occupied Palestinian Territory”, the first such session in 15 years. In 1999, the first conference of the High Contracting Parties to the Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949, on measures to enforce the Convention in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, was convened pursuant to the relevant recommendation made by the tenth emergency special session. At the same time, the United Nations responded repeatedly to violations by Israel, the occupying Power, of applicable international humanitarian and human rights law, notably the Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949 and relevant United Nations resolutions. Information on such violations was annually recorded in the report prepared by the Special Committee to Investigate Israeli Practices Affecting the Human Rights of the Palestinian People and Other Arabs of the Occupied Territories (Special Committee on Israeli Practices), which was established by the General Assembly in 1968. On its part, in 1993, the Commission on Human Rights appointed a Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Palestinian territories occupied since 1967, who annually has examined the human rights situation of the Palestinian people under Israeli occupation. Starting in the 1990s, the Economic and Social Council considered, under annual resolutions, the economic and social repercussions of the Israeli occupation, particularly that of the Israeli settlements, on the Palestinian people as well as the situation of and assistance to Palestinian women in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, as did the Commission on the Status of Women. Furthermore, the General Assembly adopted annually a resolution reaffirming the permanent sovereignty of the Palestinian people in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, over their natural resources, including land and water, and recognizing the right of the Palestinian people to claim restitution as a result of any exploitation, loss or depletion of their natural resources. This publication reflects the position of the United Nations that a negotiated solution to the Palestine question must be based on the principles embodied in Security Council resolutions 242 (1967), and 338 (1973), reflecting the longstanding position of the international community and the basis for the Middle East peace process. A solution, as annually set forth in the General Assembly resolution entitled “Peaceful settlement of the question of Palestine”, would comprise the withdrawal of Israel from the Palestinian territory occupied since June 1967, including East Jerusalem; the exercise of the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people, primarily their right to self‐determination and statehood; a just settlement of the Palestine refugee problem that has remained unresolved since 1948, and the respect for the right of all States in the region to live in peace within secure and internationally recognized boundaries.

 20 November 2023  224 download

10 Years of Indonesian`s Independence

10 Years of Indonesian`s Independence

 29 August 2023

The Importance of AIPA for ASEAN

The Importance of AIPA forASEAN


Hendrikus Franz Josef, M.Si

(Subject Specialist Librarian in History and International Relations,

CEO The Hendrikus Center)

The 44th ASEAN Inter-Parliamentary Assembly (AIPA) General Assembly was held in Jakarta, Indonesia from August 5-10, 2023. The theme of the assembly was "ASEAN in the Post-Pandemic Era: Building Resilience and Sustainability for the Future."

The AIPA is the highest decision-making body of the ASEAN Inter-Parliamentary Organization (AIPO), which is the intergovernmental organization of the parliaments of the 10 ASEAN Member States (AMS). The AIPA General Assembly is held every year in the country that holds the ASEAN Chairmanship.

The 44th AIPA General Assembly was attended by over 500 parliamentarians from the AMS, as well as representatives from observer countries and international organizations. The assembly was opened by the Speaker of the Indonesian House of Representatives, Puan Maharani.

The assembly adopted a number of resolutions, including on the following topics:

  • The situation in Myanmar
  • The Rohingya refugee crisis
  • The COVID-19 pandemic
  • Climate change
  • Sustainable development

The assembly also held a number of side events, including a conference on the role of parliaments in the post-pandemic era, a workshop on women's empowerment, and a youth forum.

The 44th AIPA General Assembly was an important opportunity for parliamentarians from the AMS to discuss and debate the challenges facing the region. The resolutions adopted by the assembly will guide the work of the AIPO in the coming year.

The assembly also highlighted the importance of cooperation between parliaments in the region. The AIPA is a valuable forum for parliamentarians to share experiences and ideas, and to build consensus on common issues. The assembly reaffirmed the commitment of the AMS to work together to build a more prosperous and sustainable future for the region.

Here are some of the specific benefits of the 44th AIPA General Assembly in Jakarta:

  • It provided a platform for parliamentarians from the AMS to discuss and debate the challenges facing the region, such as the situation in Myanmar, the Rohingya refugee crisis, the COVID-19 pandemic, and climate change.
  • It helped to build consensus on common issues and to develop strategies for addressing them.
  • It strengthened cooperation between parliaments in the region.
  • It raised awareness of the role of parliaments in the post-pandemic era.
  • It promoted women's empowerment and youth participation in politics.

The 44th AIPA General Assembly was a successful event that made a significant contribution to the development of the ASEAN region. It is expected that the resolutions adopted by the assembly will guide the work of the AIPO in the coming year and help to make the region a more prosperous and sustainable place for all.

 10 August 2023  225 download

Dunia Film-Tahun I No.4. 25 Djuli 1952

download di:


 23 July 2023  217 download

LAPORAN Perusahaan Perkebunan “Medarie” 1933

Berkembangnya perdagangan gula di dunia menjadikan VOC ikut berdagang yaitu dengan melakukan ekspor komoditi gula ke Eropa. Pada awalnya berhasil ekspor gula kira-kira 10 ribu pikul atau setara 625 ribu kg per tahun. Perdagangan gula itu terus berkembang dan justru kemudian berbanding terbalik dengan kondisi kongsi dagangnya (VOC) yang terus mengalami kemerosotan dan bangkrut pada tahun 1799 M. Bangkrutnya kongsi dagang tersebut menjadikan kendali dagang dan penguasaan wilayah diambil alih oleh pemerintah Hindia Belanda. Pada saat Jawa digoncang konflik yaitu dengan adanya Perang Dipanegara atau Perang Jawa (1825 M–1830 M), Hindia Belanda di bawah van der Capellen mengalami defisit anggaran yang sangat parah. Kondisi uang habis karena digunakan untuk perang, yaitu mengatasi perlawanan Dipanegara. Kondisi itu akhirnya menjadikan Gubernur Jenderal Johanes van den Bosch berusaha mengatasi kebangkrutan dengan menjalankan kebijakan Tanam Paksa (cultuurstelsel) pada 1830–1870 M (Niel, 2003: 77). Di samping itu, melakukan pengambilalihan tanah di beberapa kabupaten wilayah Kedu, Magelang, dan sebagian Banyumas dari Kasultanan Yogyakarta.

 27 June 2023  228 download


Full text klik di bawah ini:


Latar belakang masalah Irian Barat berkaitan dengan sejarah dan konflik politik yang terjadi di wilayah tersebut. Irian Barat, yang saat ini dikenal sebagai Provinsi Papua dan Papua Barat, adalah bagian dari pulau Papua yang terletak di bagian timur Indonesia.

Pada awal abad ke-20, Irian Barat berada di bawah pemerintahan kolonial Belanda. Setelah proklamasi kemerdekaan Indonesia pada tahun 1945, Indonesia berusaha untuk mengklaim wilayah tersebut sebagai bagian dari negaranya. Namun, Belanda tidak segera menyerahkan kendali penuh atas Irian Barat kepada Indonesia, dan wilayah ini tetap menjadi sengketa antara kedua negara.

Pada tahun 1961, Belanda setuju untuk memberikan otonomi sementara kepada Irian Barat dengan tujuan untuk mempersiapkannya menjadi negara yang merdeka. Namun, pada tahun yang sama, Indonesia mengirim pasukan ke wilayah tersebut dan mendeklarasikan Irian Barat sebagai bagian dari wilayah Republik Indonesia. Tindakan ini memicu konflik dan ketegangan antara Indonesia dan Belanda.

Pada tahun 1962, melalui mediasi Perserikatan Bangsa-Bangsa (PBB), disepakati agar Irian Barat dikelola oleh PBB selama enam tahun sebagai "Wilayah Otonom Sementara". Setelah masa transisi, pada tahun 1969, dilaksanakan "Plebisit Irian Barat" yang dikenal sebagai "Pepera" (Penentuan Pendapat Rakyat). Namun, plebisit ini telah menjadi sumber kontroversi, dengan banyak pihak yang meragukan keabsahannya dan merasa bahwa kehendak asli masyarakat Papua tidak terwakili dengan adil.

Sejak itu, gerakan separatis dan konflik bersenjata di Irian Barat terus berlanjut. Beberapa kelompok di wilayah tersebut menginginkan kemerdekaan atau otonomi yang lebih besar daripada yang diberikan oleh pemerintah Indonesia. Konflik tersebut telah menimbulkan masalah keamanan, pelanggaran hak asasi manusia, dan ketegangan antara pemerintah Indonesia dan sebagian masyarakat Papua.

Pemerintah Indonesia telah berupaya untuk menyelesaikan masalah di Irian Barat melalui pendekatan pembangunan ekonomi dan sosial, serta memberikan otonomi khusus kepada provinsi tersebut. Namun, tantangan yang kompleks terus muncul, termasuk tuntutan untuk mengadakan dialog politik yang lebih inklusif, penyelesaian sengketa tanah, dan perlindungan hak asasi manusia masyarakat Papua.

Permasalahan di Irian Barat sangat kompleks dan membutuhkan pendekatan yang beragam, termasuk dialog, rekonsiliasi, dan partisipasi aktif dari semua pihak yang terlibat, agar dapat mencapai solusi yang berkelanjutan dan adil bagi masyarakat Papua.

 24 June 2023  195 download

Eurozone Recession

Eurozone Recession


The Eurozone, comprising 19 European countries sharing the euro as their common currency, is currently facing a significant economic challenge. The region is experiencing a recession, primarily driven by the impact of rising prices on consumer spending. This article explores the causes and consequences of this recession, analyzes its potential long-term effects on the Eurozone, and suggests possible strategies to mitigate the crisis.

 9 June 2023  155 download

Eurozone Recession

Eurozone Recession


The Eurozone, comprising 19 European countries sharing the euro as their common currency, is currently facing a significant economic challenge. The region is experiencing a recession, primarily driven by the impact of rising prices on consumer spending. This article explores the causes and consequences of this recession, analyzes its potential long-term effects on the Eurozone, and suggests possible strategies to mitigate the crisis.

 9 June 2023

5 Menit Teachir dari Hindia-Belanda

Silahkan downloadi di link berikut ini:


 29 May 2023  126 download

Present-Day Russia-China Diplomatic Relations

Present-Day Russia-China Diplomatic Relations


Hendrikus Franz Josef, M.Si\

(International Relations Observer, CEO The Hendrikus Center,


Russia and China are two of the world's largest countries with vast resources, strategic geopolitical locations, and significant global influence. The relationship between Russia and China has been complex and dynamic, evolving from being rivals during the Cold War to strategic partners in recent years. This article examines the current state of Russia-China relations, including the factors that shape their relationship, their areas of cooperation, and the challenges that they face.

Factors Shaping Russia-China Relations

The relationship between Russia and China is shaped by a combination of factors, including their shared geopolitical interests, economic interdependence, and shared opposition to the United States. Both countries are members of the BRICS group, which also includes Brazil, India, and South Africa, and they share similar views on global governance, the role of the United Nations, and multipolarity. Their economic interdependence is growing, with increasing trade and investment between the two countries, and joint infrastructure and energy projects.

In recent years, Russia and China have also been driven closer together by their shared opposition to the United States. Both countries have been subject to US sanctions, and they see the US as a threat to their interests and global stability. They have been working together to challenge US dominance in areas such as international trade, technology, and military power.

Areas of Cooperation

Russia and China have been cooperating in various areas, including trade and investment, military, and diplomacy. In the economic sphere, China is Russia's largest trading partner, and their trade volume has increased significantly in recent years. They are also cooperating on infrastructure projects, such as the Belt and Road Initiative, which aims to connect Asia, Europe, and Africa through a network of infrastructure projects.

In the military sphere, Russia and China have been conducting joint military exercises and sharing military technology. They are also cooperating on regional security issues, such as the North Korean nuclear issue and the conflicts in Syria and Afghanistan.

In the diplomatic sphere, Russia and China have been working together to promote their shared vision of global governance, which includes greater respect for state sovereignty, multipolarity, and a more equitable international order. They have been coordinating their positions on issues such as the Iran nuclear deal, climate change, and the South China Sea.

Challenges to Russia-China Relations

Despite the growing cooperation between Russia and China, there are also challenges to their relationship. One challenge is the potential for competition in areas such as energy and military technology. Another challenge is the potential for disagreements on regional issues, such as the conflict in Ukraine or territorial disputes in the South China Sea.

There is also the question of whether the Russia-China relationship is truly a strategic partnership or a tactical alignment based on shared interests. There are differences in their political systems, cultural traditions, and historical experiences that could limit the depth of their cooperation.


The relationship between Russia and China is complex and dynamic, shaped by a combination of factors such as geopolitical interests, economic interdependence, and shared opposition to the United States. While there are challenges to their relationship, such as potential competition and differences in political systems, their cooperation is growing in areas such as trade and investment, military, and diplomacy. The future of the Russia-China relationship will depend on how they navigate these challenges and opportunities, and whether their relationship evolves into a true strategic partnership.

 21 March 2023  143 download