To the Editor:

Richard Oppel's recent Freeport scorecard (AAS 2/4/96) begins: "Alleged human rights abuses. This would appear to be no longer an issue." Not so fast. If Freeport seems in the clear, it is largely by virtue of lack of investigation.

Yes, the Munninghoff report and the Indonesian National Human Rights Commission report solely blame the Indonesian military for the abuses that have been documented. But these reports were not intended to determine the the involvement of Freeport. As Kompas, an Indonesian newspaper, reported on October 2, 1995, "Asmara Naban [of the Indonesian Human Rights Commission] said that the findings confirmed by the commission only went as far as obtaining proof of the human rights violations and did not include any investigation of the involvement of Freeport." Likewise, Bishop Muninghoff's statement, "My report is not a report about Freeport and does not contain accusations about Freeport" begs the larger question: why hasn't Freeport's alleged role been fully and independently investigated?

Additionally, we should remember the statement of the Amungme Council in response to the Indonesian National Human Rights Commission report. "For us, the Amungme people, the root cause of the human rights violations is Freeport..." The Amungme claim, and Freeport admits, that the company provides logistical and material support for the military. And the reports above document how Freeport facilities were involved in the transport, detention and torture of some of the vicitms. Even from these minimal facts citizens of conscience can only conclude that Freeport must bear its measure of responsibility for the violence and abuse that has occurred in its midst. When all is said and done, the military is there to protect Freeport, and that means to protect Freeport's profitability, its secrecy, its basic collaboration with the Indonesian dictatorship against colonized West Papuans.

Steven Feld, Prof. of Anthropology, University of California, Santa Cruz