Wednesday, August 15, 2012
Rare golden mongoose found in Aceh
Aug 14, Biology/Plants & Animals
Collared mongoose Credit:FFI
A recent short training session for community rangers conducted by Fauna & Flora International (FFI) in the Jantho Wildlife Reserve, Aceh, produced a surprise result.
During a three-day camera trapping workshop the team photographed an unusual mammal not recognised by any of the local rangers. Looking like an oversized ginger weasel, this bright-coloured animal appears to be a rare colour morph of the collared mongoose Herpestes semitorquatus.
This species has been recorded in Sumatra only occasionally and is noted as Data Deficient by IUCN. In neighbouring Borneo, they are usually a dark brown colour, but a recent paper published in the Small Carnivore Conservation Journal also reported instances of this peculiar colour phase.
Dr Matthew Linkie, FFI’s Aceh Programme Manager noted, “FFI has been using camera traps in Sumatra for over a decade and accumulated hundreds of thousands of days of trapping time. It is ironic that the first image we get of collared mongoose should be made during a brief training workshop.”
This latest record adds to the archive of scarce and endemic species camera trapped by FFI in Sumatra, including the Sumatran ground cuckoo, Sumatran striped rabbit and Sumatran muntjac.
Monday, August 13, 2012
It’s Either Orangutans or Cheap Palm Oil: Analysts
August 12, 2012
Orangutan survival is seriously threatened by palm oil plantations. (IPS Photo/Kafil Yamin)
When four men were sentenced to eight months in jail in March for the “murder” of orangutans, it was the first time that people associated with Indonesia’s booming palm oil industry were convicted for killing man’s close relations in the primate family.
Conservationists were not happy with the “light” sentences handed down by the court in Kutai Kertanegara district, East Kalimantan, on March 18, to Imam Muktarom, Mujianto, Widiantoro and Malaysian national Phuah Cuan Pun.
“As expected, the sentences were light, much lighter than what the prosecutors demanded. Such punishments will not bring any change to the situation of orangutans,” Fian Khairunnissa, an activist of the Centre for Orangutan Protection, told IPS.
Indonesia’s courts have generally looked the other way as the palm oil industry relentlessly decimated orangutans by destroying vast swathes of Southeast Asia’s rainforests to convert them into oil palm plantations.
In April, a court in Banda Aceh dismissed a case filed by the Indonesia Environmental Forum (Walhi) against Kallista Alam, one of five palm oil firms operating in Tripa, and Irwandi Yusuf, the former governor of Aceh, for the conversion of 1,600 hectares of carbon-rich peat forests into palm oil plantations.
The court admonished Walhi, saying it should have sought an out-of-court settlement with Kallista Alam — which never paused clearing its 1,600-hectare concession, granted in August 2011.
Mysteriously, just before the Walhi case was to be heard in court, numerous fires broke out in the Tripa peat swamps, including in the concession granted to Kallista Alam.
Community leaders in Tripa point out that the concessions fly in the face of a presidential moratorium on new permits to clear primary forests, effective in Indonesia since last year as part of a billion dollar deal with Norway to cut greenhouse gas emissions.
“The issuance of a license to Kallista is a crime, because it changes the Leuser ecosystem and peat land forests into business concessions,” said Kamarudin, a Tripa community spokesman
The Leuser Ecosystem, in the provinces of Aceh and North Sumatra, covers more than 2.6 million hectares of prime tropical rain forest and is the last place on earth where Sumatran sub-species of elephants, rhinoceros, tigers and orangutans coexist.
The survival of orangutans, a “keystone species,” is critical for the well-being of other animals and plants with which they coexist in a habitat.
A statement released in June by the Sumatran Orangutan Conservation Programme estimated that there are now only 200 of the red-haired great apes left in Tripa compared to about 2,000 in 1990 and said their situation was now ‘desperate’ as result of the fires and clearing operations carried out by palm oil companies.
During the last five years, the oil palm business has emerged as a major force in the Indonesian economy, with an investment value of close five billion dollars on eight million hectares.
Indonesia plans to increase crude palm oil production from the current 23.2 million tons this year to 28.4 million tons by 2014. This calls for an 18.7 percent increase in plantation area, according to Indonesia’s agriculture ministry.
But the price of the planned expansion would be further shrinkage of orangutan habitat by 1.6 million hectares because oil companies find it cheaper to burn forests and chase away or kill the orangutans.
“If you find orangutans in palm oil plantations, they are not coming there from somewhere else… they are in their own homes that have been changed into plantations,” said Linda Yuliani, a researcher at the Center for International Forestry Research.
“But plantation company people see the orangutans as the encroachers,” she said. “Confused orangutans can often be seen wandering in plantations, and with their habitat gone, they forage on young palm trees,” she said.
A joint survey by 19 organizations, including The Nature Conservancy, WWF and the Association of Primate Experts, found that some 750 orangutans died during 2008-2009, mostly because of conflict with human beings.
It has not mattered that Indonesia is one of the signatories to the Convention on Illegal Trade and Endangered Species, which classifies orangutans under Appendix I, which lists species identified as currently endangered, or in danger of extinction.
“Clearing peat land also releases huge volumes of carbon dioxide, similar to amounts released during volcanic eruptions,” Willie Smits, a Dutch conservationist who works on orangutan protection, told IPS.
Reckless clearing of peat swamp forests has already turned Indonesia into the world’s largest emitter of carbon dioxide, after the United States and China.
“The government may earn some money from oil palm investment, but there are far bigger losses from environmental destruction,” said Elfian Effendi, director of Greenomics Indonesia. “There is a multiplied effect on the local economy and loss of biodiversity.”
But, even to some conservationists, stopping the oil palm business in Indonesia — which feeds a vast range of industries from fast food and cosmetics to biodiesel — is impractical.
“What is needed is enforcement of schemes that allow the palm oil business and orangutans to co-exist,” Resit Rozer, a Dutch conservationist who runs a sanctuary for rescued orangutans, told IPS.
Palm oil companies that are members of the Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil, a convention to encourage importers to buy only RSPO-certified CPO, see no advantage in the scheme that requires them to set aside a forest block for orangutans within plantations and provide safe corridors for the apes to move from one spot to another.
“US. and several European countries still buy non-certified CPO as the RSPO certificate does not guarantee purchase,” Rozer told IPS. “The West told us to practice environmentally-sound business, but they do not buy RSPO-certified CPO because implementation has been delayed till 2015,” Rozer said.
“For companies that have invested in RSPO certification, the delay has been a heavy blow. They feel cheated,” said Rozer who helps palm oil companies in creating orangutan refuges and corridors.
Inter Press Service
1
MOST READ
Kalla Offers a History Lesson to Show Support for Jokowi-Ahok
Indonesia ‘Too Fragile’ for Police, Military Vote: Defense Ministry
PKS Throws Support Behind Fauzi for Runoff
It’s Either Orangutans or Cheap Palm Oil: Analysts
Tracing the Cause of Political Failures in Jakarta
KPK-Police Conflict Continues to Escalate
Asylum Boats from Indonesia Land in Australia Before Policy Showdown
Bandung’s One-Stop Shop for Everything Delicious
Indonesia Looking to 2016 Games
So Hip to Be a Nationalist
Post a comment
Please login to post comment
Comments
jchay5:12pm Aug 13, 2012
That four men sentenced to eight months in jail for killing orangutans got slightly 'heavier' sentence than FPI sentenced to just six months in jail for killing three Ahmadis in Cikeusik..
Indonesia, the world's example of intolerance. Thanks for the legacies, Mr SBY!
DasMonk11:52am Aug 13, 2012
goodbye orangutans
JohnGalt8:13am Aug 13, 2012
“But plantation company people see the orangutans as the encroachers,” --- Says it all really doesn't it.... the childish blame the victim mentality that runs through almost every part of what is mislabeled the "justice" system.
didikarjadi7:33am Aug 13, 2012
The palm oil companies, the government, and all the corrupt officials, and sadly many ordinary Indonesian's also, dont give a damn about Orangutan's, or any other animals, nor forests either. Even the animals in zoos are not safe here.
The Orangutan is doomed. Sadly its habitat is not in the hands of responsible, caring human beings.
nugwump11:12pm Aug 12, 2012
As long as the regional heads can rake in money from the deelopers of mining amnd palm oil concessions everything else will be considered of no importance.
Indonesia has always been the land of nepotism and corruption where he who can extort the greatest amount will always be President.
Friday, August 10, 2012
Tuesday, August 7, 2012
Tuesday, July 17, 2012
Indonesia: Will The Jakarta-Papua Dialogue Be Fruitful? – OpEd
By: IPCS
July 17, 2012
By Navrekha Sharma
International pressure is growing on Indonesian Government over its human rights record in Papua. A remote island one-fifth Indonesia’s size, Papua is unbelievably rich in natural resources but its one million people, mainly tribal Christians, are abysmally poor. Over three decades of its rule, Suharto’s military killed hundreds of tribals demanding rights to land and clean water etc, in low intensity conflicts in forested areas. But during the 14 years of democractic rule peoples ’disappointment with the Center has increased as conflict has expanded into urban areas too. Unfortunately, the Autonomy law of 2001 which provides for the bulk of locally generated revenues to be retained for local use, has seen its benefits cornered almost exclusively by a privileged few.
Since 2009, 43 people have been killed. The government claimed that some of those declared dead were security forces and at a UNHRCS quadrennial Review meeting last May, described Papua as “stable”. However, the capital Jayapura has witnessed sixteen shootings since then, in mysterious circumstances reminiscent of East Timor where the military acted with impunity. President Yudhoyono’s dubbing of the deaths as “small scale” was unhelpful and evoked angry reactions. A Presidential dialogue with Church leaders and developmental agencies initiated four months ago is going nowhere. Important sections of public opinion are pessimistic about Papua’s future.
East Timor’s Christian population, supported by well heeled international NGOs and media, had successfully swayed public opinion against Indonesia, culminating in a breakaway referendum in 1998/9 which took the Government by surprise. OPM leaders’ calls for freedom are similarly supported by NGOs, foreign and Indigenous. But before concluding that Papua will go the East Timor way, in Indonesia one can always expects the unexpected! Aceh, remote and resource-rich like Papua (but devoutly Muslim), saw longer years of neglect – of open war between the people and the State –ending peacefully after the tsunami hit in December 2004. The crisis was turned into an opportunity by Indonesia’s Government, assisted by International mediation and funding. In 2007, a former rebel leader was elected Aceh’s Governor!
Which of the two examples, East Timor or Aceh, is relevant to Papua? The answer lies in another question: why did the Government hold a referendum with secession as an option in East Timor but not in Aceh? Understanding the country’s political culture and the role of history and International law therein is vital.
The problem in East Timor coincided with ASEAN’s economic crisis of 1997/8 which got fully blown in Indonesia. Secondly, Indonesia’s accession of Portugal’s erstwhile colony in 1975 was not recognized by the UN under whom, Indonesia’s boundaries are limited to those of former Dutch East Indies. It was in these vulnerable circumstances, one economic and the other political, that President Habibie took the all- or -nothing gamble of a Referendum in East Timor. In contrast, Indonesia’s claim to Aceh, despite its longer and more violent secessionist struggle, was clear and unambiguous.
Some have tried contesting Indonesia’s hold on Papua on grounds of the “dodgy” Referendum of 1969, but its prompt endorsement by the UN had confirmed Indonesia’s right of possession. Moreover it took Indonesia’s first President and “political father” Sukarno, 13 years of protracted diplomatic and military struggle to retrieve Papua from Holland in 1962: since then, Papua lies at the core of Indonesia’s identity as a modern Nation. An Archipelagic State of 17000 separate Islands finds its main bulwark against disintegration in the law: neither President Yudhoyono nor any successor to him can surrender Papua without committing political hara kiri.
If political status is not negotiable, hence succession improbable, the possibility of Papua remaining indefinitely neglected and marginalized is real. Papuans are most backward people but their land is rich in gold, copper and hydro carbons, fisheries and forests. From early 1970s, international exploration was welcomed by Jakarta’s Government and its powerful but ill paid, military. The world’s largest gold mine and its second largest copper mine are in Papua, run by Freeport Mc Moran with 10 per cent Indonesian shareholding. Offshore oil and gas deposits are also plentiful. According to reliable reports (“Below a Mountain of Wealth, a River of Waste,” New York Times, 27 December 2005) over a billion tons of mineral waste and copper tailings have already been dumped directly into Papua’s rivers and 3 to 6 billion tons more waste is expected with consequent ill effects. Australia, with its interests in neighbouring PNG, some European countries and Canada challenge Papua’s human rights record, but the USA is careful to distance itself, declaring Papua as Indonesia’s “internal affair.”
Democracy has truncated the political role of Indonesia’s Armed Forces but in remote areas, the Territorial Command Structure, a Suharto era inheritance under which 70 per cent military funding is off-budget, remains intact. The new democratic dispensation puts police in charge of law and order and only secessionist violence (“treason”) justifies army’s presence. But with dismantling of operations in East Timor/Aceh, military’s strength in Papua has increased. Corruption here is endemic and increasingly well paid and the two arms are vying for a role in collusion with a tiny political elite.
Democracy has changed the form of exploitation in Indonesia but not its substance. In the absence of an act of God such as a tsunami (!) lip service by Jakarta to Dialogue with Papua will probably continue indefinitely.
Navrekha Sharma
Former Ambassador to Indonesia
About the author:
IPCS
IPCS (Institute for Peace and Conflict Studies) conducts independent research on conventional and non-conventional security issues in the region and shares its findings with policy makers and the public. It provides a forum for discussion with the strategic community on strategic issues and strives to explore alternatives. Moreover, it works towards building capacity among young scholars for greater refinement of their analyses of South Asian security.
July 17, 2012
By Navrekha Sharma
International pressure is growing on Indonesian Government over its human rights record in Papua. A remote island one-fifth Indonesia’s size, Papua is unbelievably rich in natural resources but its one million people, mainly tribal Christians, are abysmally poor. Over three decades of its rule, Suharto’s military killed hundreds of tribals demanding rights to land and clean water etc, in low intensity conflicts in forested areas. But during the 14 years of democractic rule peoples ’disappointment with the Center has increased as conflict has expanded into urban areas too. Unfortunately, the Autonomy law of 2001 which provides for the bulk of locally generated revenues to be retained for local use, has seen its benefits cornered almost exclusively by a privileged few.
Since 2009, 43 people have been killed. The government claimed that some of those declared dead were security forces and at a UNHRCS quadrennial Review meeting last May, described Papua as “stable”. However, the capital Jayapura has witnessed sixteen shootings since then, in mysterious circumstances reminiscent of East Timor where the military acted with impunity. President Yudhoyono’s dubbing of the deaths as “small scale” was unhelpful and evoked angry reactions. A Presidential dialogue with Church leaders and developmental agencies initiated four months ago is going nowhere. Important sections of public opinion are pessimistic about Papua’s future.
East Timor’s Christian population, supported by well heeled international NGOs and media, had successfully swayed public opinion against Indonesia, culminating in a breakaway referendum in 1998/9 which took the Government by surprise. OPM leaders’ calls for freedom are similarly supported by NGOs, foreign and Indigenous. But before concluding that Papua will go the East Timor way, in Indonesia one can always expects the unexpected! Aceh, remote and resource-rich like Papua (but devoutly Muslim), saw longer years of neglect – of open war between the people and the State –ending peacefully after the tsunami hit in December 2004. The crisis was turned into an opportunity by Indonesia’s Government, assisted by International mediation and funding. In 2007, a former rebel leader was elected Aceh’s Governor!
Which of the two examples, East Timor or Aceh, is relevant to Papua? The answer lies in another question: why did the Government hold a referendum with secession as an option in East Timor but not in Aceh? Understanding the country’s political culture and the role of history and International law therein is vital.
The problem in East Timor coincided with ASEAN’s economic crisis of 1997/8 which got fully blown in Indonesia. Secondly, Indonesia’s accession of Portugal’s erstwhile colony in 1975 was not recognized by the UN under whom, Indonesia’s boundaries are limited to those of former Dutch East Indies. It was in these vulnerable circumstances, one economic and the other political, that President Habibie took the all- or -nothing gamble of a Referendum in East Timor. In contrast, Indonesia’s claim to Aceh, despite its longer and more violent secessionist struggle, was clear and unambiguous.
Some have tried contesting Indonesia’s hold on Papua on grounds of the “dodgy” Referendum of 1969, but its prompt endorsement by the UN had confirmed Indonesia’s right of possession. Moreover it took Indonesia’s first President and “political father” Sukarno, 13 years of protracted diplomatic and military struggle to retrieve Papua from Holland in 1962: since then, Papua lies at the core of Indonesia’s identity as a modern Nation. An Archipelagic State of 17000 separate Islands finds its main bulwark against disintegration in the law: neither President Yudhoyono nor any successor to him can surrender Papua without committing political hara kiri.
If political status is not negotiable, hence succession improbable, the possibility of Papua remaining indefinitely neglected and marginalized is real. Papuans are most backward people but their land is rich in gold, copper and hydro carbons, fisheries and forests. From early 1970s, international exploration was welcomed by Jakarta’s Government and its powerful but ill paid, military. The world’s largest gold mine and its second largest copper mine are in Papua, run by Freeport Mc Moran with 10 per cent Indonesian shareholding. Offshore oil and gas deposits are also plentiful. According to reliable reports (“Below a Mountain of Wealth, a River of Waste,” New York Times, 27 December 2005) over a billion tons of mineral waste and copper tailings have already been dumped directly into Papua’s rivers and 3 to 6 billion tons more waste is expected with consequent ill effects. Australia, with its interests in neighbouring PNG, some European countries and Canada challenge Papua’s human rights record, but the USA is careful to distance itself, declaring Papua as Indonesia’s “internal affair.”
Democracy has truncated the political role of Indonesia’s Armed Forces but in remote areas, the Territorial Command Structure, a Suharto era inheritance under which 70 per cent military funding is off-budget, remains intact. The new democratic dispensation puts police in charge of law and order and only secessionist violence (“treason”) justifies army’s presence. But with dismantling of operations in East Timor/Aceh, military’s strength in Papua has increased. Corruption here is endemic and increasingly well paid and the two arms are vying for a role in collusion with a tiny political elite.
Democracy has changed the form of exploitation in Indonesia but not its substance. In the absence of an act of God such as a tsunami (!) lip service by Jakarta to Dialogue with Papua will probably continue indefinitely.
Navrekha Sharma
Former Ambassador to Indonesia
About the author:
IPCS
IPCS (Institute for Peace and Conflict Studies) conducts independent research on conventional and non-conventional security issues in the region and shares its findings with policy makers and the public. It provides a forum for discussion with the strategic community on strategic issues and strives to explore alternatives. Moreover, it works towards building capacity among young scholars for greater refinement of their analyses of South Asian security.
Saturday, July 7, 2012
Former Governor of Aceh Beaten Up Irwandi got hit in the face and head. Like
Irwandi Yusuf
Aries Setiawan | Selasa, 26 Juni 2012, 10:27 WIB
VIVAnews – Former governor of Nanggroe Aceh Darussalam, Irwandi Yusuf, was beaten up by some supporters of the Aceh Party following the inauguration of the new governor, Zaini Abdullah, and the deputy governor, Muzakir Manaf, on Monday, June 25.
Irwandi said the intimidation over him had been displayed earlier by Aceh Party's supporters since he arrived at the provincial parliamentary complex of Aceh.
“Words of insults were shouted by members of the Aceh Party as my name was being mentioned by the Minister of Home Affairs,” said Irwandi in a press statement received by VIVAnews on Tuesday.
As the event ended, he was glad that the new leadership in Aceh was officially established.
Seconds after, he greeted the crowd, who were mostly members of the Aceh Party. However, the greeting was not welcomed. The crowd yelled at him, saying that he had been a traitor.
“Unexpectedly, I was surrounded and attacked by a group of supporters of the Aceh Party. Some wore the uniform of the party’s task force,” he said.
He was beaten for a few minutes. He said that he got hit in the face and head.
Irwandi's bodyguards and the building's security guards got him out of the crowd and escorted him into a police car. He was then taken to a hospital.
“Even after the security guards took me to the emergency room in Zainoel Abidin Hospital, we were still being followed by the party’s supporters,” he said.
Prior to the inauguration, he said, the intelligence had specifically asked the elected deputy governor, Muzakkir Manaf, of Irwandi's safety. “Muzakir Manaf responded that my safety would be guaranteed,” he said.
Irwandi called for the Aceh Party to be responsible of the incident.
Indonesia and Australia's Relationship Has Room to Grow
Junianto James Losari and Santo Darmosumarto | July 06, 2012
'On investment cooperation, Indonesia remains Australia's biggest blind spot.'
Indonesia-Australia relations have grown steadily since their lowest point in the late 1990s. We have matured in our appreciation of one another as regional powers in this Asia-Pacific Century.
And tragedies like the Bali bombing and the Aceh tsunami have brought us closer as neighbors.
A recent survey by Australia’s Lowy Institute pointed out that most Indonesians rated Australia as one of the most trusted countries to act responsibly at the international stage.
However, as much as these conditions have augured better feelings of closeness, it is not difficult to see that bilateral cooperation has been overshadowed by issues in the political and security fields. While economic opportunities are abundant, Indonesia and Australia have yet to maximize on this potential.
This appears to be the message that President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono tried to convey during his visit to Darwin earlier this week, as part of the 2nd Annual Leaders Meeting.
Among the many areas of bilateral cooperation currently existing, Yudhoyono chose to focus on trade, investment, connectivity and tourism.
Indeed, in economic terms, Indonesia and Australia are not minnows. As emerging economies and part of the G-20, the two countries’ economic performance has in recent years commanded the attention of many around the world.
Not only that, there is considerable complement between the two economies, as shown by the differences in goods and services produced and consumed. These conditions should make the Indonesia-Australia economic partnership matter significantly. But the truth is that trade growth remains sluggish.
In 2011, the two countries recorded total trade of $10.75 billion. This is an increase compared to previous years’ numbers. But if we were to compare them against Australia’s trade with Malaysia ($13 billion), Thailand ($15.3 billion) or Singapore ($20.7 billion), then Indonesians and Australians should expect more from their growing ties.
On investment cooperation, Indonesia remains Australia’s biggest blind spot. Up until 2010, Australian foreign direct investment to Indonesia stands at $3.55 billion, which amounts to 1.4 percent of its total FDI abroad. More concerning, the realization of Australian FDI in Indonesia in 2011 actually decreased about 58 percent from the previous year.
With a population of approximately 240 million, Indonesian consumers and labor resources not only provide a lucrative market, but also tremendous potential for Australian investment.
We see this in Indonesia’s growing demand for beef, which is a result of the Indonesian people’s changing culinary habits and lifestyles.
As the growth of democracy complements economic achievements, the stable social and political conditions have generated a conducive domestic climate for greater foreign investment.
Nevertheless, while the numbers may not reflect Indonesia and Australia’s real economic potential, there are ways to boost this economic cooperation.
Indonesia’s entry-into-force of the Asean-Australia-New Zealand FTA this year is one of these means. Spanning 12 economies, around 600 million people and a combined GDP of $3.1 trillion, the AANZFTA covers the goods, services, investment and intellectual property sectors. While aimed at promoting the economic growth of all countries involved, the agreement should provide channels for enhancing trade and investment ties between Indonesia and Australia, which are by far the two largest economies in the group.
Tariff elimination under the AANZFTA will enable duty-free trade. Indonesian products benefitting from this arrangement include, wood, paper and paperboard, crude oil, plastic pipes and ceramics. Meanwhile, the benefitting Australian products include wheat, aluminum, cotton and fertilizer.
The AANZFTA also liberalizes investment in several areas for Australian companies, while at the same time providing a regime for the legal protection of investors. Such a framework, coupled with Indonesia’s positive investment climate, should provide sufficient reason for Australian companies to join efforts.
In addition, during the visit to Darwin, Yudhoyono welcomed efforts to begin negotiations for an Indonesia-Australia Comprehensive Partnership Agreement. When completed, the agreement will provide a comprehensive, targeted framework for greater overall economic cooperation.
Among these targets would be to enhance connectivity at the national, bilateral and sub-regional levels. The strengthening of connectivity not only creates job opportunities through the investment in infrastructures, but also expands markets, trade flow and people-to-people connections.
Through participation in realizing Indonesia’s Master Plan for Expansion and Acceleration of Economic Development (MP3EI), Australia would not only assist Indonesia’s domestic connectivity, but also open opportunities for greater bilateral connectivity, particularly between Indonesia’s eastern parts and Australia’s Northern Territory.
The 1992 MoU signed between Indonesia and the Northern Territory is a basis for cooperation on primary and tertiary industries, air services, energy, professional services, manufacturing, processing, transport and infrastructure.
Government-to-government efforts will continue to evolve positively, yet the onus falls on the private sector to identify, grasp and maximize on these potential opportunities.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)