Implement targetted and context-specific models

The majority of participants criticised the way the current development system did not take account of Indigenous East Timorese knowledge, cultural and governance practices. They stated that development in Timor-Leste was less productive because the models used did not fit the local context and were not targeted to meet the needs of each different community. Participants equated this as a development systems issue perpetrated by, but not necessarily the fault of,

international practitioners. A development practitioner explained that poor untargeted development is widespread, perpetrated by many international actors:

“More of the programs are not going to the right sites. [International practitioners are] choosing the wrong places, the wrong people, the wrong groups” (TF-0900-140910). A government adviser confirmed that the majority of development decisions are made by outsiders:

“[Development] is carried out by internationals most of the time. All the planning was carried out by internationals. They are the ones that are writing the reports, the

recommendations, they are the ones that are creating the national plan. Local ideas are undervalued” (TG-1500-140910).

A development analyst saw that many outsiders come to Timor-Leste with unrealistic expectations about their ability to transform the situation. He stressed that international

practitioners working in Timor-Leste regularly implement programs that are designed for other country contexts:

“[International practitioners type] ‘Control F Afghanistan, replace all with Timor- Leste’. Development partners are too lazy to sit down and talk to people who have been working in country for a long time, they just skip that dialogue and go in and find the closest country with a similar history and just copy that model” (TD-1700-130910). An academic explained that international practitioners bring a “one size fits all” approach, but that they need to first learn about the history and context of Timor-Leste before they start to make decisions (TU-1230-240910). An NGO peacebuilder concluded that learning from other contexts is important, but that ultimately the Timor-Leste context should be used to find solutions:

“You need to learn from another country but if you want to implement something you cannot take everything from another nation and then implement it in this country. It does not work” (TX-1600-260910).

A senior public servant explained that while outside concepts and practices work well in other contexts, they often do not work well in Timor-Leste:

“Many people are thinking, especially those from outside, that peacebuilding or conflict could be solved by using [outside] methodologies. In Timor-Leste that is not the case, Timor-Leste has our own culture of solving these conflicts” (TL-1300-170910). A government adviser clarified that there is, “resistance coming from the inside” to a lot of development interventions as “most of it is very patronising” (TG-1500-140910). He linked the

“Everyone coming in here has a fixed agenda. Often they will say we will civilise the uncivilised. Most people have worked somewhere else, and they think that this has the same problems. People are dark and black, and it must be the same. Most of the time development practitioners forgot about local contexts, because they have too little time. That is one of the failings of development” (TG-1500-140910).

Practitioners recognised that many international practitioners did attempt to contextualise their work by consulting with local people, however consultations were often done poorly. A senior UN adviser said that international practitioners should never assume they know what

communities want. She suggested that the onus is on practitioners to seek this crucial

information: “[otherwise] you are just wasting your money and your time” (TA-1100-090910). Ultimately participants suggested that international practitioners must be more flexible and understand that a different approach will be needed for each context (TJ-1500-150910). As one development analyst explained:

“You have to be flexible, and understand that in the community you will find elements that will respond to things in one way, and then something completely different might not respond to change” (TD-1700-130910).

An academic pronounced that development interventions do not effectively target vulnerable groups or meet community needs. He suggested that fewer interventions with more targeted assistance from international practitioners and greater ownership by communities are needed:

“When people do it themselves they do it better. We are driven by models that do not apply here…People are not critical about it, they accept it because they need jobs and they need money. There are too many interventions. So much confusion…They just need a little bit of assistance and they will do so much better” (TU-1230-240910). A senior public servant advocated that development practitioners need to find ways of creatively combining approaches using both ‘Western’ and East Timorese knowledge systems:

“International agencies and the community need to improve how to combine these two ideas, Western perspectives of development and [the] Timor-Leste context. Some people, they need to try [harder] because we come from different histories, different backgrounds and climate, and it is not easy” (TL-1300-170910).

7.2.7

Summary: Lulik

My research reveals many different perspectives on the use of Indigenous East Timorese culture to achieve development and peacebuilding goals. There are distinct, complex and overlapping differences in the way in which Indigenous East Timorese culture is respected, acknowledged or used. Principally, the divisions indicated by my research are among citizens, elites and

international practitioners. There are also divisions between those who live in rural or remote Timor-Leste or urban areas, men and women, older people and youth, those who fought in the resistance, were involved in the clandestine movement or were Indonesian collaborators. The plural identities of most East Timorese mean that few individuals are easily categorised. My research shows that differing historical experiences under Portuguese colonialism and

Indonesian occupation have left many East Timorese with very different perspectives, respect for, understanding or use of Indigenous East Timorese knowledge systems and cultures.

Participants stressed the importance of prioritising Indigenous peacebuilding practices; the need to recognise and value complex and diverse Indigenous knowledge systems; and understanding that East Timorese identities are plural and localised. They argued that it is important that decision-makers prioritise customary links to land and place, and the importance of land and place to community kinship networks and belonging, and food sovereignty. Participants also emphasised the importance of teaching and using local languages and Tetum to facilitate greater participation and consultation with East Timorese communities. Equal access to education for all citizens is viewed as fundamental to inclusive and informed decision-making. Finally, participants emphasised the importance of working with local contexts to target development and peacebuilding.

The movement towards a revival of cultural practices is crucial and is supported by some elements of the Government and international practitioners. This active support, coupled with greater use of Indigenous knowledge and lulik practice at a rural level provides a potential base for elites and international practitioners to learn more. To support these changes, international practitioners will need to undertake attitudinal changes that enable individual and organisational openness to learn about Indigenous East Timorese knowledge systems. To facilitate this change, East Timorese will also need to be open to sharing elements of their Indigenous knowledge systems with outsiders. This process of sharing knowledge and listening is and will be challenging for all pracititioners.

Support for Indigenous knowledge exchange must entail more than rebuilding physical structures, such as uma lulik, or practicing customary dances or weaving. Revitalising

Indigenous knowledge practices entails exploration into alternative perspectives on leadership and decision-making, conflict transformation and economic exchange, as I described in Chapter Six. These efforts will be complex because different communities across Timor-Leste hold very different Indigenous knowledge and practices but this living diversity underlines the importance of this endeavour.