Network
The released documents were pamphlets written by British propagandists, impersonating Indonesian patriots living abroad, urging Indonesia to eliminate PKI, which was deemed to be a ‘dangerous cancer’ in Indonesia’s body, which would pose a major threat if being kept alive. Professor Scott Lucas of the University of Birmingham argued that these documents demonstrated “Britain was prepared to engage in dirty deeds which ran contrary to its purported values”.
He also mentioned that it revealed “how important black propaganda was to provide the illusion that Britain could wield global power – even if many people might be killed for that illusion”, suggesting that Britain was also responsible for the mass murder that occurred.
This was not the first notion on the involvement of the foreign parties in the tragedy, however, the previous claims were often being refuted by the involved governments. For example, Professor Geoffrey B. Robinson from UCLA claimed that based on documentary evidence, foreign states such as the United States and Great Britain were influential in providing support to the Indonesian Army during the mass killings, and without those supports, the killings would not have happened.
Some others argued that the United States was directly involved up to the degree that they assisted the Indonesian Army in facilitating the mass killings, such as by providing small arms, monetary assistance, communications equipment, medicine, and a range of other items.
However, the United States and its allies have denied any responsibility for the tragedy. CIA also tried to conceal United States involvement, which can be seen from their attempts to suppress the release of “State Department volume Foreign Relations of the United States, 1964–1968” in 2001, which acknowledged the involvement of the U.S. embassy in providing the list of PKI communist leaders for the Indonesian Army to be prosecuted. Still, because previously there was a lack of clear evidence pointing to the involvement of a foreign party, the responsibility of the tragedy was often assigned to the Indonesian.
The release of documents by the British Foreign Office provided grounds to claim that the responsibility of the massacre did not solely belong to the Indonesians, but there were foreign influences that played an important role in exacerbating the incident.
Without foreign influences, there was still a possibility for a riot to occur, however, it would not be as brutal as what happened in 1965-1966. Compared to the previous coup d’état by PKI in 1948 centred in Madiun, East Java, during this attempt, PKI also committed some atrocities, such as the brutal assassination of Ario Soerjo, the first governor of East Java, together with two police guards.
However, even though the Indonesian Government moved to counter the insurgency, there was no extreme massacre in the scale of 1965-1966 mass killing took place as retaliation.
This suggested that without external provocation from foreign party, the possibility of the brutal massacre was very unlikely. Furthermore, separate interviews with the family of the assassinated generals during the 1965 coup d’état showed that they have already forgiven those who committed those atrocities.
Catherine Pandjaitan and Hendrianti Sahara Nasution, the daughter of Donal Isaac Pandjaitan and Abdul Haris Nasution, respectively, said that they had forgiven them a long time ago.
