Autonomy-seekers should keep focused<\/p>\n
I Wayan Ananta Wijaya, Contributor, Denpasar, Bali<\/p>\n
The demand for special autonomy is by no means new, particularly
\nfor the island's intellectuals and scholars.<\/p>\n
It is a recurring theme, a discourse that continues to attract
\nfresh supporters, new ground or a new context every time the
\nisland enters a period of uncertainty.<\/p>\n
The last time the debate made an appearance was during the
\nearly days of reform from 1997 through 1999. It was a period of
\neconomic upheaval and political uncertainty marked with much
\nsocial unrest and violent interethnic clashes, which took place
\nacross the country.<\/p>\n
The disorder provided fertile ground for those who wanted to
\nquestion the ability of the monolithic, centralized government to
\nhold the vast archipelago together.<\/p>\n
In respond to that period of uncertainty, Balinese
\nintellectuals reviewed the island's relationship with the central
\ngovernment and came out with four political designs to replace
\nthe existing province: an independent state, a federal state, a
\nspecial region or a region with special autonomy status.<\/p>\n
Toward the end of 1999, the Denpasar-based Institute for
\nDevelopment and Information Assessment (LPIP) Forum at Udayana
\nUniversity organized a two-month survey to gauge the perception
\nof the middle class toward these four political designs.<\/p>\n
The survey targeted a specific group of respondents: adult
\nindividuals (21 to 51 years of age) from a high educational
\nbackground and on medium-to-high personal income.<\/p>\n
The survey showed that special autonomy status was popular
\namong Denpasar's middle class, with over 62 percents of the
\nrespondents opting for this alternative.<\/p>\n
Interestingly, more than 14 percents of respondents thought
\nthat the existing provincial government structure was already
\ncorrect and should not be replaced by any of the four
\nalternatives.<\/p>\n
Meanwhile, the idea of a special region attracted only around
\n10 percent support, while the federal state concept received a
\npaltry 7 percent. The option of becoming an independent state
\nturned out to be the least popular idea of all, garnering only
\n3.57 percent.<\/p>\n
Glaring gap in perception<\/p>\n
Early in 2000, LPIP organized another poll with a wider sample
\nof respondents in terms of geographic and demographic coverage.
\nIt was an attempt to ascertain whether grassroots Balinese shared
\nsimilar aspirations to those of their middle-class brethren.<\/p>\n
The 321 people from nine regencies in Bali who responded were
\nasked to list up to 10 issues they believed to be crucial and
\nimportant to the future of the island.<\/p>\n
Curiously, none mentioned the need to substitute the existing
\nprovince with a special autonomy region in their wish lists.<\/p>\n
Instead, they identified more tangible problems, ranging from
\npopulation control, the empowerment of traditional institutions
\nand unemployment to the wealth gap and illegal drugs, as issues
\nthat should immediately be addressed by the Balinese.<\/p>\n
The results of these two surveys illustrated a glaring gap in
\nperception between Denpasar's middle class and the remainder of
\nthe Balinese people, particularly on the importance of
\nrestructuring the island's relationship with Jakarta.<\/p>\n
Another survey, conducted in April 2000 by the Institute for
\nSocial and Economic Information, Education and Research (LP3S),
\nfurther confirmed the gap in perception. The survey, aimed at
\nidentifying important local issues, involved 500 respondents from
\nall over the island.<\/p>\n
A mere 1 percent of respondents identified special autonomy
\nstatus as an important issue. The remainder identified economic
\nimprovements, construction of public facilities, security, job
\nopportunities, law enforcement and community empowerment as the
\nmost pressing problems.<\/p>\n
The ongoing political movement, launched by some of the
\nisland's top politicians and intellectuals to push the central
\ngovernment for special autonomy status for the island, should
\ntherefore pay careful attention to this gap in perception.<\/p>\n
So far, politicians and intellectuals have not given the
\npublic a clear enough idea of the nature and content of the
\nspecial autonomy they are trying to achieve for the island.<\/p>\n
The ability of this pro-autonomy group to accommodate and
\nintegrate the previously mentioned issues -- believed by
\ngrassroots Balinese to be crucial -- into a special autonomy
\nblueprint will determine the ultimate outcome.<\/p>\n
Failure to do so will certainly alienate grassroots Balinese
\nfrom this political pursuit, robbing the politicians and
\nintellectuals of the public support they desperately need to
\nconvince Jakarta about the importance of the issue.<\/p>\n
Lastly, it would likely turn the whole movement into a
\ndetached struggle of the elite, which would constitute a
\npremature political defeat for the movement itself.<\/p>",
"url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/autonomy-seekers-should-keep-focused-1447893297",
"image": ""
},
"sponsor": "Okusi Associates",
"sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com"
}