The politicization of Freeport intensified after a violent demonstration in Abepura, Papua against the firm, leaving three police officers and an airman dead on March 16...For a long time, the U.S.-based corporation has been considered less responsive to the interests of its surrounding people, especially in matters related to pollution of the environment, which includes a diverse ecosystem that has served as a source of native people's livelihood. On top of this, Freeport is the most obvious irony in Papua. A multinational corporation has the freedom to exploit Papua's natural resources, while some people in the province still virtually live in the "stone age"...The exploitation of Papua's resources has been taking place intensively and extensively amid Papuans' growing poverty and backwardness after decades of integration with Indonesia...Upon a closer look at the issue, one will notice that local protests against Freeport today are not only aimed at the American company, but also meant as a manifestation of Papua's continued resistance to central government policy. Consequently, for Jakarta, resolving the Freeport crisis and satisfying Papuan political aspirations are crucial. The government's attitude toward foreign investment has hitherto been ambivalent. Its attention to foreign investment has not been balanced with proper care about the interests of nearby communities. In the Freeport case, the impression is that the government sides with the multinational companies, while treating locals in an unfair way. The Freeport case is not a specific one. Indonesia is an example where many investors only consider profit accumulation, while neglecting the environment around them, including the rights of local communities. This is widely practiced not only by foreign corporations but also domestic companies, including state-owned enterprises...