Conflict in diversity<\/p>\n
The government of President Abdurrahman Wahid faces an acute
\ndilemma in dealing with the aftermath of violence in Sampit and
\nother Central Kalimantan towns in the vicinity. More than 50,000
\nsettlers from Madura have been forced to flee the area in the
\nwake of ethnic cleansing by the local Dayak people.<\/p>\n
The government now has to decide whether to send the Madurese
\nback to Central Kalimantan, or to resettle them, either in their
\noriginal home villages on Madura island or elsewhere in the
\narchipelago. Either option has risks, not only for the refugees
\nthemselves, but more importantly, for the future of this nation.<\/p>\n
Sending the refugees back to Central Kalimantan would almost
\nguarantee genocide of horrific proportions. That was also the
\nreason why they were evacuated by Navy ships in the first place.
\nThe Dayak people, having carried out an effective campaign to
\ndrive the Madurese settlers out, have vowed never to accept them
\non their land again. The Dayaks made clear their contempt for the
\nMadurese during their campaign -- beheading Madurese and parading
\ntheir heads in the streets before the hordes of Indonesian and
\nforeign journalists. No guarantee from the military or police
\nwould be sufficient to ensure that the Madurese would be
\ncompletely protected if they ever returned to Sampit.<\/p>\n
But not sending the Madurese back would not only be
\nlogistically challenging, it would also send the wrong signal to
\nthe hundreds of ethnic groups across the archipelago.<\/p>\n
Logistically, the government will have difficulty in quickly
\nfinding new homes for these refugees. They join hundreds of
\nthousands of other people who have been displaced by violent
\nconflicts which erupted in various provinces over the last three
\nyears, including East Timor (now an independent state), Maluku
\nand North Maluku, Aceh, Central Sulawesi and West Kalimantan. If
\nanyone should be resettled, these longtime refugees should have
\nfirst claim before the fresh batch of Madurese from Central
\nKalimantan.<\/p>\n
A far more serious problem to this option of resettling the
\nMadurese rather than sending them back is that it is making a
\ncomplete mockery of the concept of Indonesia as a nation state,
\nand particularly of the state logo Bhinneka Tunggal Ika (Unity in
\nDiversity). In fact, this option, if carried out, would only
\nencourage other ethnic groups who, like the Dayaks, may have an
\naxe to grind, to launch their own ethnic cleansing campaign.<\/p>\n
We have already seen various ethnic groups, who like the
\nDayaks feel they have been marginalized by the economic progress
\nof the past 50 years or so, asserting themselves politically.<\/p>\n
Areas that have been the target of the past transmigration
\n(resettlement) policy are particularly prone to ethnic conflict.
\nLike the Madurese in Central Kalimantan, transmigrants were given
\nland and generous government funding to start a new life in the
\nsettlements. Many eventually succeeded in business and in jobs to
\nthe point of edging out the local people. These settlers also
\noccupy land which many local people still claim as theirs. This
\ncondition does not bode well for cultural and ethnical harmony.<\/p>\n
One columnist in this paper aptly describes transmigration as
\ninternal colonization with all the potential for conflicts
\nbetween settlers and the original inhabitants. That makes
\nvirtually all provinces outside Java vulnerable to the kind of
\nconflicts we have just witnessed in Sampit.<\/p>\n
But even in Java there are ethnic groups who feel they too
\nhave been left out of the country's economic progress, like the
\nBanten people, who have now won their own province separate from
\nWest Java. Here in Jakarta, the Betawi have been pushed further
\nand further out of the ever-booming capital city.<\/p>\n
What we see in Sampit is only one of many illustrations of
\nwhat 50 years of misrule can do to a nation. While politicians
\nand experts seem to have an explanation about why the violence
\nerupted, no one has any real practical solution. There is no fast
\nand easy answer to the problem. We cannot undo 50 years of
\nmismanagement, or of our failure in nation building, in one day.<\/p>\n
Yet, the future of the concept of Indonesia as a state hinges
\non how the government resolves the aftermath of the Sampit
\nviolence. A single wrong move from the government could turn the
\nstate motto from \"unity in diversity\" into \"conflict in
\ndiversity\". If that happens, Indonesia's days are numbered.<\/p>",
"url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/conflict-in-diversity-1447893297",
"image": ""
},
"sponsor": "Okusi Associates",
"sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com"
}