Virtual address by H.E. Ambassador Dionisio Babo Soares, Permanent Representative of the Democratic Republic of Timor-Leste to the United Nations, to graduate students from the School of Diplomacy and International Relations, Seton Hall University
8 October 2026, 5:30 PM
Distinguished Dean, Esteemed Faculty Members, Dear Students, Ladies and Gentlemen,
It is an honour and privilege to address the students and scholars of Seton Hall University, a leading institution dedicated to diplomacy, international relations, and global governance.
I am particularly pleased to engage with future diplomats, policymakers, scholars, negotiators, and international civil servants. The world you are preparing to serve is increasingly complex. We face geopolitical competition, armed conflict, climate change, technological disruption, growing inequality, and mounting challenges to multilateral institutions. Yet the fundamental challenge remains unchanged: how can humanity organise international relations to promote peace, justice, dignity, and cooperation?
Today, I wish to share with you the experience of Timor-Leste and examine a question that lies at the heart of diplomacy itself:
How did international negotiations assist Timor-Leste in restoring its independence, and what lessons does that experience offer for the future of international diplomacy?
This is not simply the story of a small nation achieving independence. It is a story about how international law, diplomacy, decolonisation, human rights, political leadership, and multilateral cooperation interact. It shows how the principles embodied in the Charter of the United Nations can transform a seemingly intractable conflict into a peaceful, legitimate political outcome.
More fundamentally, the Timor-Leste experience offers one of the most instructive case studies of successful international negotiations in the contemporary international system.
From Empire to the International Order of Sovereign Equality
To understand the significance of Timor-Leste’s journey, we must first place it within the broader historical evolution of international order.
For centuries, empires organised international order. Colonised peoples were generally viewed not as subjects of rights but as objects of administration. Political authority flowed from imperial power rather than from peoples’ consent.
The creation of the United Nations in 1945 profoundly transformed that system.
The UN Charter established new principles that challenged the foundations of colonial rule. Among its purposes was to develop friendly relations among nations based on respect for the principle of equal rights and the self-determination of peoples.
For the first time in history, an international organisation explicitly recognised that peoples possessed rights that power could not simply override.
The 1960 Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples further strengthened these principles. It accelerated one of the twentieth century’s most significant transformations: the global process of decolonisation.
Theories of decolonisation help us understand this transformation’s significance.
Frantz Fanon argued that decolonisation restored human dignity. Amílcar Cabral viewed liberation as both a political and cultural process. Anti-colonial thinkers across Africa, Asia, Latin America, and the Pacific understood that true independence required not merely political freedom but also the recovery of identity, agency, and control over national destiny.
Timor-Leste emerged within this broader historical movement.
For over four centuries, Portugal administered Timor-Leste as a colony. Following political changes in Portugal, Timor-Leste proclaimed independence on 28 November 1975.
Only nine days later, Indonesia invaded the territory.
The Timorese people would subsequently endure twenty-four years of occupation, conflict, displacement, and hardship.
Yet throughout this period, one crucial fact remained unchanged: the United Nations never recognised Indonesia’s incorporation of Timor-Leste. The General Assembly and Security Council continued to reaffirm the Timorese people’s right to self-determination.
This was not simply a legal technicality.
It preserved international legitimacy.
The Timor-Leste question became a test of whether the post-1945 international order was genuinely committed to the principles it proclaimed.
Would power prevail over law?
Would strategic interests override self-determination?
Would the international system protect the rights of a small people?
These questions placed Timor-Leste at the intersection of diplomacy, international law, and the evolving norms of international order.
Understanding Timor-Leste Through International Relations Theory
For international relations students, Timor-Leste offers an illuminating case study because no single theory adequately explains the outcome.
Realists would emphasise power and shifting geopolitical circumstances. They would point to the end of the Cold War, shifts in regional politics, and Indonesia’s political transition.
Liberals would focus on international institutions, the United Nations, multilateral cooperation, diplomacy, and international law.
Constructivists would emphasise the growing influence of international norms, human rights advocacy, global solidarity movements, and the increasing legitimacy of self-determination.
Each perspective captures part of the story.
Independence became possible because shifts in power relations coincided with legal principles, normative legitimacy, institutional engagement, and diplomatic opportunity.
The lesson is significant.
Major diplomatic successes rarely emerge from a single source.
Rather, they occur when power, legitimacy, institutions, law, and political leadership converge around a common objective.
Decolonisation as Both a National and International Process
The Timor-Leste experience also illustrates an important theoretical insight regarding decolonisation.
Decolonisation is often misunderstood as purely a domestic struggle. In reality, it is both national and international.
National resistance creates political agency.
International recognition creates legitimacy.
Neither alone is usually sufficient.
A people may resist but remain internationally isolated.
Alternatively, international support may exist, but without domestic commitment it rarely produces sustainable political transformation.
Timor-Leste succeeded because these two dimensions reinforced one another.
Inside the country, the Timorese people preserved their identity, aspirations, and determination.
Outside the country, diplomats, advocates, governments, religious leaders, and international organisations kept the question alive within the United Nations system.
The central lesson is that self-determination succeeds most effectively when domestic resilience converges with international legitimacy.
International Negotiations and the Road to Independence
Restoring Timor-Leste’s independence was fundamentally a diplomatic achievement.
Military resistance alone did not secure independence.
International sympathy alone did not secure independence.
Independence was ultimately achieved through a carefully negotiated political process.
For many years, successive Secretaries-General of the United Nations facilitated negotiations between Portugal and Indonesia.
Progress was often painfully slow.
At times, negotiations appeared stalled and political circumstances seemed unfavourable.
Yet diplomatic channels remained open.
This illustrates one of the most important principles of negotiation theory:
Successful negotiations are rarely events. They are processes.
Diplomacy frequently operates through patient engagement rather than dramatic breakthroughs.
The opportunity for progress emerged in the late 1990s when geopolitical and domestic conditions created a new political environment.
Under United Nations auspices, Indonesia and Portugal reached agreements that enabled the Timorese people to determine their political future.
The Popular Consultation of 30 August 1999 represented one of the clearest expressions of self-determination in contemporary history.
The result overwhelmingly favoured independence.
Violence followed the announcement of the results, creating a grave humanitarian crisis.
Once again, diplomacy proved indispensable.
The Security Council authorised a multinational force to restore security, and the United Nations Transitional Administration in East Timor assumed responsibility for preparing the territory for sovereign statehood.
The process involved constitutional development, institution-building, elections, public administration, judicial structures, police development, governance systems, and capacity building.
On 20 May 2002, Timor-Leste formally restored its independence.
What Constitutes Successful International Negotiations?
For students of diplomacy, however, the most important question is not merely how negotiations occurred.
The deeper question is this:
Why did the negotiations succeed when so many international negotiations fail?
Many conflicts remain unresolved.
Many peace agreements collapse.
Many negotiated settlements prove unsustainable.
The Timor-Leste experience provides a valuable analytical framework for understanding successful international negotiations.
First, successful negotiations require legitimacy.
Negotiations anchored exclusively in power are often unstable.
Durable agreements require legitimacy derived from recognised principles.
In the Timor-Leste case, legitimacy emerged from international law, particularly the principle of self-determination embodied in the UN Charter.
This demonstrates a critical lesson:
The strongest negotiating position is not always the most powerful; often it is the most legitimate.
International law strengthened diplomacy by providing a shared normative framework for negotiations.
Second, successful negotiations require political ripeness.
Conflict resolution scholars often speak of a “mutually hurting stalemate,” a situation in which the costs of maintaining the status quo outweigh the costs of seeking compromise.
By the late 1990s, important political conditions had changed.
Regional dynamics evolved.
The Cold War had ended.
Indonesia entered a period of political transition.
International attention increased.
A window of opportunity emerged.
Negotiators were prepared to seize it.
This teaches an important lesson:
Timing matters in diplomacy.
Successful negotiators recognise moments when previously impossible solutions become politically achievable.
Third, successful negotiations require inclusivity and ownership.
Agreements imposed upon people rarely endure.
The Popular Consultation gave the Timorese people ownership of the outcome.
Governments and international organisations did not decide the question of sovereignty alone.
It was ultimately determined by the people whose future was at stake.
This principle remains essential in contemporary peacebuilding and mediation efforts.
Sustainable peace requires local ownership.
Fourth, successful negotiations require credible implementation mechanisms.
Many agreements fail not because they are poorly negotiated but because they are poorly implemented.
Words alone do not create peace.
Institutions do.
The success of the Timor-Leste process depended upon international guarantees, peacekeeping operations, electoral assistance, institution-building, transitional governance arrangements, and long-term international commitment.
Implementation transformed aspiration into reality.
Fifth, successful negotiations require balancing justice and pragmatism.
One of diplomacy’s most difficult challenges is reconciling principles with political reality.
Excessive idealism can make negotiations impossible.
Excessive pragmatism can make outcomes illegitimate.
The Timor-Leste process succeeded because it preserved the principle of self-determination while pursuing a peaceful, negotiated path to implement it.
Justice and pragmatism reinforced rather than contradicted one another.
Sixth, successful negotiations require courageous leadership.
Institutions matter.
Processes matter.
But leadership matters as well.
The Timor-Leste process required courage from negotiators, political leaders, resistance figures, mediators, religious leaders, and members of the international community.
Compromise often carries political risks.
Yet diplomacy cannot succeed without leaders willing to accept those risks in pursuit of peace.
Finally, successful negotiations transform relationships.
The ultimate purpose of diplomacy is not merely ending disputes.
It is building a different future.
Today, Timor-Leste enjoys productive relations with Indonesia, Portugal, Australia, ASEAN Member States, and partners worldwide.
This transformation from conflict to cooperation represents the highest measure of diplomatic success.
Human Rights and the Meaning of Independence
The Timorese struggle was fundamentally a human rights struggle.
At its core was the right of self-determination, widely recognised as a foundational collective right from which many other rights flow.
Restoring independence enabled the exercise of civil and political rights, including freedom of expression, freedom of association, democratic participation, representative government, and electoral choice.
Yet the Timorese experience also demonstrates that political rights alone are insufficient.
Modern understandings of human rights recognise the interdependence of civil, political, economic, social, and cultural rights.
Freedom without opportunity is incomplete.
Political sovereignty without economic sovereignty is fragile.
For newly independent states, development itself becomes a dimension of freedom.
The right to education.
The right to health.
The right to development.
The right to cultural preservation.
The right to decent livelihoods.
And importantly, the right of peoples to exercise permanent sovereignty over their natural resources.
For Timor-Leste, independence created the opportunity not only to exercise political self-government but also to manage national resources for the benefit of present and future generations.
This broader conception of human rights aligns with contemporary approaches to human security and sustainable development.
The Importance of Multilateralism
The Timor-Leste experience also underlines the power of multilateralism.
No single state could have delivered this outcome alone.
The process involved:
The United Nations;
Regional actors;
Member States;
Peacekeeping forces;
Civil society organisations;
Religious institutions;
Human rights advocates; and
International development partners.
Multilateralism is often criticised as slow and cumbersome.
Yet complex international problems require collective solutions.
For small states in particular, multilateral institutions serve as essential safeguards against the arbitrary exercise of power.
Timor-Leste’s experience demonstrates that multilateral institutions, while imperfect, can help convert legal principles into practical outcomes.
Achievements and Continuing Challenges
Since restoring independence in 2002, Timor-Leste has established democratic institutions, conducted peaceful elections, strengthened constitutional governance, promoted reconciliation, expanded international partnerships, and become an active participant in global affairs.
These accomplishments deserve recognition.
At the same time, state-building remains an ongoing project.
Challenges persist, including economic diversification, youth employment, educational development, infrastructure, food security, climate resilience, and sustainable economic growth.
The lesson is clear.
Independence is not the end of history.
It is the beginning of responsibility.
The struggle for self-determination evolves into the challenge of nation-building.
Conclusion: The Enduring Lessons of Timor-Leste
Dear Students,
The restoration of Timor-Leste’s independence stands as one of the most compelling examples of successful international negotiation in the contemporary era.
It demonstrates that diplomacy can achieve outcomes that force alone cannot.
It demonstrates that international law can influence political realities.
It demonstrates that multilateral institutions can facilitate peaceful change.
It also shows that even small nations can shape history when their aspirations align with the enduring principles of justice, legitimacy, and human dignity.
The central lesson of Timor-Leste is that successful international negotiations occur when power, legitimacy, law, institutions, and leadership converge around a shared vision of peace.
Realists are correct that power matters.
Liberals are correct that institutions matter.
Constructivists are correct that norms and ideas matter.
The Timor-Leste experience teaches us that enduring diplomatic success emerges from the interaction of all three.
If you’re preparing for a career in diplomacy or international relations, remember this lesson.
Diplomacy is not merely managing relationships between states.
At its highest purpose, diplomacy converts conflict into cooperation, rights into reality, and aspirations into institutions.
The story of Timor-Leste reminds us that an international order founded upon the principles of the United Nations Charter remains both possible and necessary.
An order based not upon domination, but cooperation.
Not upon exclusion, but dignity.
Not upon force alone, but law, legitimacy, justice, and our common humanity.
Thank you very much.
Obrigadu barak. God bless you all.