The task of moulding opinion and perspectives on decolonisation in the south-west Pacific is difficult.

The movement for Papuan nationalism in 21st Century has consolidated as the ULMWP has stepped up focus on the roadmap to freedom.

The roadmap seeks the rectification of the history that has caused West Papua’s integration into Indonesia.

Papuan nationalists dismiss Uti Possidetis Juris as irrelevant. They argue that Indonesia has a weak case.

They argue that so long as West Papua remains part of the republic rule by the sword will continue.

They argue that the roadmap is the decolonisation process and that ULMWP is the vehicle of political culture to prepare West Papua for independence.

The tide of 60,000 years of Indigenous Papuan history will carry West Papua’s decolonisation to completion under international law.

Since 2014, ULMWP has constantly and forcefully put the case for West Papua and its inalienable right to self-determination.

The Pacific Islands Forum and Melanesian Spearhead Group have deliberated on the West Papua issue.

The roadmap to freedom for West Papua through diplomatic action has been the subject of much consideration, in particular global conflict resolution research done by Warwick University in the United Kingdom.

Fourteen recommendations have been made for the international community to take heed of the situation in West Papua.

In 2014, Papua New Guinea’s then prime minister, Peter O'Neill, announced for the first time an insight on the way forward for the West Papua issue.

And the people of West Papua are indebted to other Melanesian Spearhead Group leaders for their past commitment to the Indigenous peoples of the Pacific.

They have demonstrated a commitment to the people of West Papua and Kanaky in New Caledonia having an inalienable right to self-determination.

The ULMWP takes the view that the situation in West Papua is a ' frozen conflict' that is subject to international law and arbitration.

In recent years, the roadmap to freedom for West Papua has become illuminated.

While the institutional context of foreign policy in PNG remains weak and personalised in individual political leaders, significant changes took place in PNG’s policy on West Papua over the period 2003–2015.

In the case of West Papua there has been a subtle change in PNG’s foreign policy development.

PNG has departed from a traditionally reactive position to a more strategic approach to foreign policy.

The issue of human rights in West Papua has been a concern for PNG, but successive governments have refrained from condemning human rights abuses and have often claimed these to be Indonesia’s domestic problem.

In 2015, PNG departed from the non-interference policy and spoke openly against the human rights abuses in West Papua.

This happened against a backdrop of PNG strengthening and consolidating its position in the region.

It then pushed the issue of human rights through the sub-regional Melanesian Spearhead Group.

This was a significant development in the evolution of PNG’s foreign policy.

West Papua’s advocacy in PNG is very strong because it is home soil. The Biblical question, 'Am I my brother's keeper?' has been revisited to become, 'I am my brother's keeper’.

It is this anthropologic glue and kindred spirit of the Papuan race that troubles Indonesia.

It comes under intense scrutiny each time cracks appear in the Indonesian version of its claim to sovereignty over West Papua.

It is the Plato's Cave Syndrome - the truth inside the cave is shielded by a bodyguard of lies.

For Indonesia, its national interest is to be promoted include shutting out any discussion on West Papua.

The advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice in 2019 on the Chagos Archipelago brings into question the correct application of Uti Possidetis Juris legal doctrine in both the Chagos and West Papua scenarios.

The justices ruled in their wisdom that “the process of decolonisation of Mauritius was not lawfully completed when that country acceded to independence”.

Indonesia is disturbed by the ICJ advisory opinion on Chagos. It is likely the Uti Possidetis Juris principle of international law impairs its claim to sovereignty over West Papua.

Uti Possidetis Juris provides that newly-formed sovereign states should retain the internal borders that had prevailed before their independence.

The ICJ advisory opinion on Chagos case caused ripples that were noted by Indonesia.

West Papua, that pebble in Jakarta's shoes, its long-term restive eastern province since 1960s, was not yet an issue that had been absorbed into history.

This essay by Boniface Kaiyo is to be continued