Is RI set to become a 'junk nation'?<\/p>\n
By Mochtar Buchori<\/p>\n
VANCOUVER (JP): \"Junk nations,\" according to Christopher
\nDickey (Newsweek Nov. 27, 1995), are \"bits and pieces (which) are
\nfalling away from old states without quite managing to form new
\nones.\"<\/p>\n
Bosnia, Croatia and Serbia -- the remnants of Yugoslavia --
\nare among examples he cited in the article along with Kurdistan
\nin Northern Iraq which, according to Massoud Barzuni, a Kurdish
\nleader, is \"part of Iraq on one side, but separate from Iraq on
\nthe other\".<\/p>\n
There is just no known legal status for this kind of
\nsituation. Think of the new republics within the former Soviet
\nUnion -- Ukraine, Cechnya, Georgia and Kazakshtan, among others
\n-- which declared independence after the Soviet Union officially
\ndissolved on Dec. 26 1991. In Dickey's view, these republics are
\nalso \"junk-nations\".<\/p>\n
Is Indonesia undergoing a \"Balkanization process\"? This was a
\nquestion posed to me at a recent lecture here, hence the
\ndisturbing image in my mind of Indonesia disintegrating into a
\nnumber of \"junk nations\".<\/p>\n
Clearly referring to violent cases in East Timor, Aceh, Irian
\nJaya and also Ambon, the audience wondered whether these cases
\nare symptoms of a disintegration process.<\/p>\n
My response outlined that the cases they were referring to do
\nnot signify the breakdown of Indonesia as a state and as a
\nnation. The East Timor problem can indeed be looked upon as a
\ncase of national separatism, but all the other examples are of a
\ndifferent nature altogether.<\/p>\n
Whereas not every person in East Timor has the feeling that he
\nor she is part of the Indonesian nation, people in Aceh, Ambon,
\nand Irian Jaya have always had positive feelings about Indonesian
\nnationhood.<\/p>\n
The protests in Aceh and Irian Jaya are triggered primarily by
\npractices of bad governance perpetrated by the military and
\ncivilian bureaucrats within the central government in Jakarta.<\/p>\n
The riots in Ambon are counterreform acts aimed at aborting
\nthe reform movement. If and when the coming general election
\nsucceeds in generating a legitimate government, I think that the
\ntermination of practices of bad governance will restore a feeling
\nof nationhood among the majority of the Indonesian people.<\/p>\n
Jean-Marie Guehenno (The End of Nation-State, 1995), argued
\nthat \"nation\" and \"state\" are not the same thing and that \"a
\nnation's only definition is historic. It is a place of common
\nhistory, of common happiness and common sadness\".<\/p>\n
Dickey wrote that \"A nation, in a sense, is about romance;
\nsomething you carry in your heart. A state, on the other hand, is
\nabout the passport you carry in your pocket. It is defined by
\nborders and the government within them, with a flag and stamps.
\ntaxes, international recognition and an army\".<\/p>\n
I added that the sense of nationhood among Indonesians was
\ninitiated in 1928, that is when representatives of miscellaneous
\nyouth organizations pledged that they belonged to one nation, the
\nIndonesian nation; that they belong to one country, Indonesia;
\nand that they spoke one language, the Indonesian language. Our
\nnationhood has been cultivated for more than five generations; it
\nhas faced and overcome innumerable critical events in its history
\nand cannot possibly be washed away by government mismanagement
\nperpetrated by one generation.<\/p>\n
But what if the next general election fails to produce a
\ncapable and legitimate government?<\/p>\n
Then, the danger of disintegration will become real, I think.
\nThe danger that the current unitarian state called the Republic
\nof Indonesia will become splintered into a number of \"junk-
\nnations\" is not unimaginable. This possibility is partly a
\nconsequence of the fact that Indonesia is a pluralistic society,
\nin terms of ethnicity, religion and language.<\/p>\n
In this kind of situation, the most effective way to prevent
\nthe breakup of the Indonesian state and nation is, according to
\nSenator Moynihan (Pandaemonium: Ethnicity in International
\nPolitics, 1993), to draw a clear line between matters of
\nethnicity and matters of nationality.<\/p>\n
As long as we are willing to perceive the current chaos and
\nlawlessness as expressions of ethnic and religious discord caused
\nby intolerance and not as manifestations of national conflict, we
\nwill be able to overcome all disturbances in a wise manner.<\/p>\n
We will be able to end all violations of humanity without
\nresorting to violence. But if we see our current problems as a
\nconflict of forces within our nation, then we will be forever
\nentangled in a vicious circle of violence and counterviolence. We
\nwill never find a peaceful solution to our present crisis.<\/p>\n
\"Junk nations\" have no future. Their viability is very low.
\nAccording to Prof. Gidon Gotlieb of the University of Chicago,
\n\"junk states\" are basically \"the conclusions of despair\". In
\nmodern diplomatic lingo they are \"entities\" created to satisfy a
\ngiven set of needs for a short duration and rest on a very shaky
\nsupport system. \"Junk states\" or \"entities\" are created because
\nthey are the only proposition left to save the lives of hundreds
\nof thousands and perhaps millions of human beings.<\/p>\n
Perhaps we should ask ourselves at this juncture whether we
\nare indeed a nation in despair and whether breaking up our
\nnation-state is indeed the only way left to save the lives of
\nhundreds of thousands of our people. I think it is high time our
\npolitical elite pondered this question.<\/p>\n
The writer is an observer of social and cultural affairs based
\nin Jakarta.<\/p>",
"url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/is-ri-set-to-become-a-junk-nation-1447893297",
"image": ""
},
"sponsor": "Okusi Associates",
"sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com"
}