Is Indonesia's fear of communism still relevant?<\/p>\n
JAKARTA (JP): Today, for the 30th year, Indonesians are
\nmarking Pancasila Commemorative Day, the victory of Pancasila
\nover communism.<\/p>\n
The triumph followed the Sept. 30, 1965, bloody coup attempt
\nblamed on the Indonesian Communist Party (PKI). Since then, the
\ncountry has been gripped by a phobia about communism although the
\nPKI was outlawed that same year.<\/p>\n
As always, the commemoration, a solemn one, brings back
\nmemories too painful for many to want to recall. But for those
\nborn after 1965, the commemoration is something they cannot
\nconnect with.<\/p>\n
This may make it difficult for the younger segment of this
\nsociety to understand why those involved in the crushing of the
\nPKI, the Armed Forces in particular, continue to adhere to their
\nvow to not let this bleak part in the nation's history repeat
\nitself. Such vows are understandable given the existing phobia
\nthat the communists may regain power here.<\/p>\n
Early this month Armed Forces Chief Gen. Feisal Tanjung
\nadvised all regional military commanders to increase their
\nalertness against what he calls increasing communist and leftist
\nactivities in Indonesia.<\/p>\n
\"There are signs indicating an increase in their activities,\"
\nFeisal was quoted by Antara as saying in Bandung on Sept. 7.<\/p>\n
One indication, according to the authorities, are the efforts
\nby former party members to disconnect themselves from their
\ninvolvement in the PKI through their memoirs. The government has
\nbanned such memoirs, including those of Oei Tjoe Tat, one of the
\ncabinet members under Sukarno rounded up by the military when
\nSukarno's government was dissolved in 1966. Oei was tried and
\nconvicted by a court of law for playing a role in the abortive
\ncoup. He was released in December 1977.<\/p>\n
Maj. Gen. Syarwan Hamid, assistant to ABRI's (Armed Forces)
\nchief for socio-political affairs, says a ban is inevitable if
\nthe memoirs contain misleading and potentially perverting
\ninformation.<\/p>\n
\"They can mislead the future generations,\" Syarwan was quoted
\nas saying by Gatra magazine.<\/p>\n
Syarwan also stressed that the elimination of the \"ET\" (eks
\ntapol -- former political prisoner) stamp on the ID cards of
\npeople convicted of political offenses should not be interpreted
\nas an indication \"that we have forgiven them for what they did\".<\/p>\n
\"The thing is, we simply believe the direct danger (of
\ncommunism) may have somewhat diminished,\" Syarwan argued.<\/p>\n
The question remains as to how long it takes to forget and to
\nget around to burying our hatchets. No answer to this question is
\napparent given the adage that history tends to repeat itself.<\/p>\n
The Jakarta Post interviewed a number of people on the issue.
\nThe following are their comments.<\/p>\n
Taufiq Ismail, prominent poet and scholar:<\/p>\n
\"I truly believe that communism still exists in the country
\nalthough it comes in different forms. I call it neo-communism,\"
\nTaufiq said.<\/p>\n
The new-style communism, he explained, looms as a potential
\nthreat to the Pancasila state ideology and therefore to the
\ncountry.<\/p>\n
The almost 30 years since the l965 abortive communist coup
\nattempt have provided enough time for former members of the
\nbanned Indonesian Communist Party and their followers to re-
\nestablish their power. But due to changing times, the techniques
\nand methods they use have changed, to appear more \"legal\",
\nconstitutional and peaceful, Taufiq maintained.<\/p>\n
Taufiq said that communist sympathizers will no longer build
\npower from the bottom, through workers and farmers. Instead they
\nwill build their base from the top through the bureaucracy, the
\ntechnocracy and capitalism by supporting the new-feudalism which
\nhas stretched the gap between the rich and the poor.<\/p>\n
The neo-communists base their activities on \"globalization,
\nnationalism and Marxism\", which are more realistic in this age,
\nhe argued. They infiltrate the country through more sophisticated
\nareas such as culture, religion and the sociopolitical system,
\nTaufiq said.<\/p>\n
To counter this new communism, a genuine democratic system
\nmust be implemented. \"The present government must be clean,
\nstrong and honest,\" insisted the poet.<\/p>\n
He warned that as long as there is still economic and legal
\ninjustice, communism will have the potential to regain power.<\/p>\n
Corruption, collusion and other social ills are potential
\nholes the communists can infiltrate, Taufiq added.<\/p>\n
Asked how dangerous the communist threat is in Indonesia,
\nTaufiq said that it should be viewed from the degree of
\ncomparison -- the most dangerous, dangerous, slightly dangerous
\n-- in portraying the current situation.<\/p>\n
\"I say at present the communist threat has reached the
\ndangerous level. Therefore we should be watchful.\"<\/p>\n
Taufiq cited the trend in the local literary communities as an
\nexample.<\/p>\n
\"There is a strong indication that many literary figures
\nformerly linked with the communist party are trying to clean
\ntheir bleak history,\" he stated.<\/p>\n
In order to counter these attempts, Taufiq and senior
\njournalist D.S. Moelyanto published a book, Prahara Kebudayaan
\n(Cultural Calamity). The book discusses the political rivalries
\nbetween Indonesia's pro and anti-communist intellectuals during
\nthe l959 to l965 period of Guided Democracy under President
\nSukarno.<\/p>\n
The book compiles raw documents on the political differences
\nbetween the pro-communist literary group under LEKRA (People's
\nCultural Institute) and the anti-communist individuals associated
\nwith the concept of Manikebu (Cultural Manifesto). Both Taufiq
\nand Moelyanto belonged to the Manikebu camp.<\/p>\n
Prominent LEKRA members included Pramoedya Ananta Toer, Joebar
\nAjoeb and Bakri Siregar. Sitor Situmorang was chairman of Lembaga
\nKebudayaan Nasional (the National Cultural Agency\/LKN), a very
\nclose partner of LEKRA.<\/p>\n
Manikebu adherents included Wiratmo Sukito, H.B. Jassin,
\nGoenawan Mohamad and N. Bokor Hutsuhut.<\/p>\n
The two camps had their own cultural concepts. The left-wing
\nLEKRA believed in \"humanism-realism or realism-socialism\", while
\nthe manifestants backed \"humanism-universalism\".<\/p>\n
Taufiq says that he and Moelyanto wrote the book because they
\nwere concerned about the development of politics in Indonesia.<\/p>\n
\"We found that some LEKRA members are trying to clean their
\nnames by saying that the organization did not support socialism.
\nSecondly, we fear that Marxism-socialism could take root again. I
\noften meet young people who eagerly discuss Marxism and
\nsocialism,\" Taufiq said.<\/p>\n
One attempt at name clearing was made by Magsaysay Award
\nwinner Pramoedya who said that he was only pupuk bawang, a low-
\nranking official in LEKRA and LESTRA (the literary section of
\nLEKRA), Taufiq said.<\/p>\n
\"How could he have been a pupuk bawang? Many documents show
\nthat he was vice-chairman of LEKRA and chairman of LESTRA,\"
\nTaufiq argued.<\/p>\n
He said his book is aimed at straightening out history since
\nthere have been strong attempts by a certain group of people to
\ndeny that socialistic realism is related to communism.<\/p>\n
\"If that is true, then (former) LEKRA members have a proper
\njustification to claim that the organization had no link with the
\ncommunists, which is really not true,\" Taufiq insisted.<\/p>\n
\"I'm only straightening out the facts. I don't like lies,\" he
\nadded.<\/p>\n
While some critics praise the book as \"very balanced\", others
\nsay it has opened up old wounds and that the authors are \"seeking
\nrevenge\".<\/p>\n
\"It is too long past to take any revenge. I am saying that
\nMoelyanto and I considered it our obligation to reveal the
\ntruth.\"<\/p>\n
He hopes the cultural calamity of the 1060s will never occur
\nagain.<\/p>\n
\"At present, almost half of our entire population are people
\nborn after l965, who have no experience whatsoever with either
\nthe PKI or communism. We should remain on the alert and must not
\nbelittle the danger of communism.\"<\/p>\n
\"The theory of Marxism-socialism is often a fascinating
\nsubject for people to study. Many young students are found
\nreading such books, although the works are banned here,\" Taufiq
\nsaid.<\/p>\n
He recalled a day when still a lecturer at the Bogor Institute
\nof Agriculture.<\/p>\n
\"I often met other scholars who seemed to master all the
\ntheory. At that time, scholars and students in particular, who
\ndid not read the theory were considered out of fashion,\" Taufiq
\nsaid.<\/p>\n
\"Later I discovered that when the theory was applied in real
\nlife, it became a furious ideology. Therefore, we should remind
\nour younger generation about the danger of communism,\" he
\nconcluded.<\/p>\n
Abdul Hakim Garuda Nusantara, executive director of the
\nInstitute of Policy Research and Advocacy: The statement that
\npeople should be cautious about the latent danger of communism is
\nnot relevant at all.<\/p>\n
Just look at developments in the world: the Soviet Union has
\ncollapsed, the Cold War is over and socialism has tumbled. East
\nEuropean countries are moving toward capitalism and democracy
\nwhile China and Vietnam are moving toward market economies.<\/p>\n
Now, let's look inside our country, what is our problem? It is
\nnot communism. We have problems relating to poverty, hunger and
\nfear. The gap between the rich and the poor is widening due to
\nthe economic development which is not in accordance with social
\njustice. Workers are exploited. There is great fear because of
\nthe deteriorating environment. There is also fear because of
\npolitical repression.<\/p>\n
Communism is out-of-date. It is not selling. People do not
\nbelieve that communism can be an alternative system.<\/p>\n
Why do the authorities tell people to be on the alert against
\nthe danger of communism? I think this is part of the propagation
\nof the authorities to scare people because the authorities are
\nexperiencing a crisis of legitimation. The authorities are
\nimplementing repressive policies and they need to legitimize the
\nimplementation of such policies.<\/p>\n
The government has banned some books which are said to bear
\ncommunist elements. But which parts of the books have the
\nelements of communism? There has never been an explanation about
\nthis.<\/p>\n
Marzuki Darusman, member of the National Commission for Human
\nRights:<\/p>\n
People of today prefer to see communism from a humanitarian
\npoint of view, while the government is locked in its ideological
\nperspective. Thus, there is a difference in perception.<\/p>\n
It's true that communism is not yet finished. In East Europe
\nthere is now Neo-Communism, in Germany there are Neo-Nazis. Thus,
\npractically and academically, communism may come back.<\/p>\n
Yet in Indonesia the situation is different. Communism was
\nabandoned 30 years ago, too long a period for a comeback.
\nMoreover, the winning issues of the communists, such as the gap
\nbetween the haves and haves-not and injustice, are being
\naddressed by the government and other political parties.<\/p>\n
Theoretically, communism is likely to come back. We have to be
\ncautious, but there's no need to so exaggerate that people become
\nparanoid. It is understandable why ABRI is overcautious because
\nthe (defunct) Indonesian Communists Party would view ABRI as
\ntheir only obstacle.<\/p>\n
ABRI's allegation that public demand for the release of all
\npolitical prisoners was masterminded by Indonesian Communist
\nParty (PKI) is more a stigmatization, scapegoatism. This is an
\nobsolete technique of politics. This was often exercised in the
\npast in many places in the world, including Eastern Europe and
\nour country, when the term \"counter-revolutionary\" was used (by
\nthe communists).<\/p>\n
This technique is effective in times of crisis, but not under
\nnormal conditions. We are now in a normal condition, where people
\ndemand more openness.<\/p>\n
Communication between civilians and ABRI is not based on an
\nintellectual framework. ABRI focuses on empirical things and does
\nnot understand \"inner\" things. In comparison, if someone is only
\nequipped with a hammer, all things are seen as nails. More open
\ndialog between ABRI, intellectuals and politicians is then called
\nfor to clear away the impression that the only thing ABRI does is
\ndisrupt munas (political gatherings).<\/p>\n
Today, some top ABRI officers are aware of this. But it's not
\nenough. This awareness must permanently stay with ABRI as an
\ninstitution so that it doesn't change with the change in
\nleadership.<\/p>\n
Thus, ABRI needs to renew its process of education to attune
\nit to new political discourse. They shouldn't only study such
\nthings as patriotism, but also the understanding of the essence
\nof politics.<\/p>\n
Hilmar Farid, a researcher of the Sosial, Politik dan Ekonomi
\nStudi research institute:<\/p>\n
What we need today is actual clarity and a complete
\nexplanation, not wariness. There must be an explanation on what
\nthe so-called latent danger is and why it is very dangerous.
\nEverything is kind of mixed up today due to this lack of clarity.
\nA movement in Purwokerto, Central Java, which tried to establish
\nan Islamic state was said to be masterminded by those of the
\nextreme left. How could that happen?<\/p>\n
Books on the Sept. 30, 1965 ordeal exist, but to many the
\nincident somehow remains unclear and closed. The state secretary
\nin 1994 published a book, entitled September 30th Movement,
\nIndonesian Communist Party's rebellion, background, action and
\nits extermination, aimed at clarifying the incident. But the book
\ncontains a lot of factual mistakes. For example, it is said that
\nAsmu (a PKI member) is a Batak man while in fact he is Javanese.<\/p>\n
Therefore, we should make it clear what we want to emphasize
\nwhen we talk about the G30S: As a tragedy or to educate people
\nthat communism is still dangerous? If it is the tragedy that we
\nwant to focus on, it's OK. But if it is for education, it's not
\ntoo effective. People are forced to believe (in the danger of
\ncommunism), but some just cannot believe it. Some people may not
\nunderstand why it is dangerous, and if they're asked to be on the
\nalert, they don't know against what. It is only said that
\ncommunism is still alive. Well, if that refers to those who were
\ninvolved in the outlawed PKI, yes, some of them are still alive.
\nBut physically they are not capable of doing anything. Some of
\nthem are as old as 90 now.<\/p>\n
If we wish to talk about the tragedy of it, everyone who was
\ninvolved or saw with their own eyes what happened at the time
\nshould tell the truth. For me, the incident is not yet clear. If
\nit is true that the PKI was so powerful at that time, why should
\nthey have attempted a coup? If it is true that PKI's people had
\npenetrated the ruling government at the time, isn't it illogical
\nthat they would overthrow their own people?<\/p>\n
I don't know why the Armed Forces is still raising the issue
\nof communism nowadays. It is also my question why they keep doing
\nso.<\/p>\n
Juwono Sudarsono, lecturer of politics at the University of
\nIndonesia, Deputy Governor of the National Resilience Body,<\/p>\n
There is now some kind of backlash in society. There's
\nantiestablishment, anti-ABRI and antigovernment. It reflects
\nboredom in society. There is some sympathy towards what is
\nconsidered government enemies, including, unfortunately, Marxism
\nand communism. (The sympathy is from) youngsters who did not
\nexperience the crisis in the transitory period of 1965 to 1969.<\/p>\n
This is an interesting and understandable phenomenon. Thus,
\n(General) Feisal (Tanjung) views it as sympathy towards the PKI.
\nAs a matter of fact, it is not. What is born is actually the
\ninstinct of antiestablishment, anti-ABRI, antigovernment, which
\nis expressed in the form of sympathy for the PKI.<\/p>\n
This (perception) is understandable, seeing that today's
\nsenior officers, from brigadier generals up, handled the case 25
\nto 30 years ago as lieutenants and captains. Thus, it is
\nimprinted in their minds.<\/p>\n
I think a discussion is necessary between ABRI senior officers
\nand today's youngsters because both are children of two different
\nperceptions, and as such their differences are understandable. On
\none side are ABRI senior officers who were involved in dealing
\nwith communists, risking their lives in the act. The youngsters
\nborn after 1965 were raised in the New Order era and had their
\npersonalities molded in an atmosphere of openness. The
\nyoungsters, therefore, have this inborn habit of questioning
\neverything, including the current situation. Thus everything in
\nconflict with the government wins their sympathy.<\/p>\n
Meanwhile, ABRI is not using the communist issue as an excuse
\nfor its behavior. They are honestly worried that youngsters will
\nbe devoured by an ideology whose danger they don't understand.
\nThe youngsters by default have sympathy for the communists just
\nbecause they are fed up with what they see as avarice and
\nhypocrisy existing in society and in the government. It is
\nregrettable. But I can understand it. The danger comes when they
\nare exploited by people who want to use them as weapons.<\/p>\n
The PKI will benefit from the mistakes of the party which beat
\nthem in the past. The danger is not the PKI as such, but our
\nmistakes and recklessness. We don't like the discrepancies and
\nmistakes of today, which could explain the revival of such
\nmovements as the PKI.<\/p>\n
The ex-political prisoners experienced being detained for more
\nthan 20 years. From the humanitarian point of view, we must
\nsympathize with them. It's time for them to be released. From
\nanother humanitarian point of view, it is possible that they may
\nwant revenge after 15 years of imprisonment. Thus there are two
\ndifferent humanitarian points of view. (als\/jsk\/raw\/sim)<\/p>",
"url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/is-indonesias-fear-of-communism-still-relevant-1447893297",
"image": ""
},
"sponsor": "Okusi Associates",
"sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com"
}