Peace versus sovereignty<\/p>\n
Which do we love more, peace or sovereignty?<\/p>\n
This question came up when Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono addressed
\nthe problem of Aceh last week. The chief security minister
\nreportedly said: "Indonesians love peace, but Indonesians value
\ntheir sovereignty and territorial integrity even more."<\/p>\n
In the context of the current Aceh crisis, this statement is a
\npretext to the government's military campaign against the
\nseparatist movement. There is nothing wrong with this
\npresupposition except that we know that historically, no military
\noperation in Aceh has ever succeeded.<\/p>\n
If this had been the 1940s, when the nation fought for
\nindependence from the Dutch, this argument -- that sovereignty is
\nmore important than peace -- would certainly hold true.<\/p>\n
In today's context, this statement sends shivers down our
\nspine. It tells us of the prevailing attitude in government: that
\nit is prepared to defend its "sovereignty" over Aceh at all
\ncosts, including at the cost of the peace of the people there.<\/p>\n
This is the line of thinking which launched many military
\noperations in the past in Aceh, Papua and East Timor, with untold
\nmiseries endured by their civilians. This is the line of thinking
\nthat caused massive deaths and destruction, disrupted people's
\nlives, if not dislocating them altogether. This is the line of
\nthinking that encouraged our military to commit all kind of
\natrocities against our own people, all in the name of defending
\nour "sovereignty" and territorial integrity.<\/p>\n
While we know that it is the peace in Aceh that people like
\nSusilo is willing to disrupt, it is also clear that he is not
\nconcerned so much about the sovereignty of the people of Aceh. He
\nis far more concerned about the "sovereignty" of Jakarta over the
\nterritory, in other words, Jakarta's rule over Aceh.<\/p>\n
This is pure arrogance. This is the kind of attitude of the
\nrulers in Jakarta that has fueled strong resentment among the
\npeople in many regions, and to cause some of them later to demand
\nseparation, and to fight for their own "sovereignty".<\/p>\n
Indonesia, lest we forget, is a common project in which the
\npeople of various regions, originally from Aceh to Maluku, and
\nlater to include Papua (albeit under controversial
\ncircumstances), decided to take part in.<\/p>\n
Each region volunteered to join in this project not solely
\nbecause of their shared history and cultures, but also because of
\ntheir belief in a common destiny: together as one nation, rather
\nthan individually, we progress and prosper.<\/p>\n
The basis of this Negara Kesatuan Republik Indonesia, has been
\nand will always be voluntary. Indonesia was not a project that
\nwas imposed on these regions. At least, that was how it started
\nin 1945, and this is how it should be today.<\/p>\n
Although this 58-year project has not really produced the
\nmaximum desired results, many people continue to believe in its
\nfuture enough to sustain it.<\/p>\n
Problems always started when some of us tried to impose our
\n"sovereignty" over the other regions for this usually means the
\nuse of force.<\/p>\n
The people of East Timor, who never shared a common history
\nwith the rest of Indonesia in the first place, saw Indonesia as
\nsimply another colonizer. Papuans have been critical over what
\nthey perceive as the "Javanization" of their land.<\/p>\n
And the people of Aceh, who made significant contributions to
\nIndonesia's independence struggle in the late 1940s, have long
\ncomplained about the raw deal and unfair treatment they have been
\ngetting from the central government in Jakarta.<\/p>\n
We lost East Timor through our own arrogance. Surely, we
\nshould have learned something from that episode and not want to
\ncommit the same mistakes in our dealings with Papua and in Aceh.
\nYou do not keep people in the republic by force. You keep them by
\nmaking them feel part of the republic.<\/p>\n
As much as we wish that the Aceh people remain in the fold of
\nthe republic, no one should ever impose that will on them for
\nthat decision should be in the hands of the people of Aceh, and
\nnobody else. We in Jakarta can only try to make the people of
\nAceh feel at home with the republic so that they will stay.<\/p>\n
Pak Susilo was way out of line in claiming to speak on behalf
\nof all Indonesians to suggest that, today, we love sovereignty
\nmore than we love peace. And he is even more wrong in suggesting
\nthat Jakarta could impose its sovereignty over the people of
\nAceh, at all costs.<\/p>\n
The government should make peace in Aceh its overriding
\nconcern. In other words, peace at all costs.<\/p>\n
It should give the existing peace process in Aceh, brokered by
\nthe Geneva-based Henry Dunant Centre, another chance to work.
\nBecause for most of the people in Aceh, as it is for most
\nIndonesians, peace is not negotiable.<\/p>",
"url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/peace-versus-sovereignty-1447893297",
"image": ""
},
"sponsor": "Okusi Associates",
"sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com"
}