What has the Left left abroad?<\/p>\n
By Aboeprijadi Santoso<\/p>\n
AMSTERDAM (JP): Hundreds of Indonesian exiles, scattered
\nacross Europe for decades, are no longer "the pariah of the
\nnation" since President Abdurrahman "Gus Dur" Wahid invited them
\nto return home eight months ago. While this actually confirms the
\nend of the Indonesian left wing movement abroad, some politicians
\nresist the reconciliation.<\/p>\n
In his noble gesture in December, Gus Dur described the exiles
\nas "the wandering independent fighters." That broke the ice and
\nsoon the exiles enthusiastically welcomed the President at the
\nAmbassador's residence in Paris and Wassenaar in the Netherlands.
\nFor the first time, the problem of exiles was seriously addressed
\nand positively responded to.<\/p>\n
The dramatic change was marked by full support for the new
\npresident, cherished hopes for change and dreams of home sweet
\nhome. Most importantly, it is finally recognized that they had
\nunjustly lost their civil rights since their passports were
\nunlawfully revoked in the 1960s.<\/p>\n
"That was clearly reflected when we met with Minister (of Law
\nand Legislation) Yusril (I. Mahendra) in The Hague in January,"
\nsaid exiled Umar Said.<\/p>\n
But the euphoria is short-lived. With strong negative
\nreactions to Gus Dur's proposal to lift a ban on communism and to
\nlook into the mass purge of 1965, the political beleaguering of
\nthe President and the bloody unrest in the regions, many exiles
\nhave started to worry about the new opportunities.<\/p>\n
Last May, some legislators finally struck back, saying Yusril
\nwent "to pick up the communists back home" and as a result the
\nminister postponed further steps.<\/p>\n
Political reconciliation is often accompanied by pain in post-
\ndictatorial transitions. For Indonesia, the specter of 1965-1966,
\nwith outdated Cold War sentiments, will continue to distort the
\nreconciliation as long as these events have not been fully probed
\nand resolved.<\/p>\n
Most of the exiles are former students in Eastern Europe, but
\nmany are ex (party) officials and cadres, who came to China in
\nSeptember 1965 to celebrate the anniversary of the Chinese
\nrevolution. A greater part had been associated with the
\nIndonesian Communist Party (PKI), the radical-nationalist
\nPartindo or the left wing PNI. The 1965 coup attempt caught all
\nby surprise and "hostaged" them abroad.<\/p>\n
Disillusioned, they survived the mid-1960s holocaust only to
\nfind themselves trapped in the agony of "Cold War" between the
\nMoscow and Beijing factions. Worse, a process of disintegration
\nset in as ongoing feuds continued over the 1965 debacle.<\/p>\n
In the end, they left China because under the strict codes of
\nthe "Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution" life took on
\nOrwellian tones and became unbearable. Above all, contact with
\nIndonesia was not possible.<\/p>\n
Having gone through the painful experience of isolation and
\ninternal conflict, being separated or left by their families and
\nlosing comrades at home, they moved to Europe in the mid-1970s,
\nrelocating mostly to the Netherlands and Germany. Fifteen years
\nlater, the Moscow groups followed suit as they lost their
\nprivileges with the rise of Gorbachev.<\/p>\n
Living in exile is a life "born out of blood, pain, sadness,
\nanger and spirit," according to the poet Sobron Aidit, now in
\nParis.<\/p>\n
Once these communities were disarray, however, most exiles
\nseemed alienated from their historic cause and adapted to the
\nlocal welfare system in Europe. There was no common political
\nplatform left on which to build an organized resistance, nor had
\nthey ever succeeded in building one.<\/p>\n
About 150 Indonesian exiles are now left in the Netherlands
\nout of some 250 who lived in Beijing in 1967, including
\nindependent fighters of the 1940s -- the biggest exile phenomenon
\nin Indonesian history.<\/p>\n
Many leaders in the past such as Tjokroaminoto, Soekarno,
\nHatta, Syahrir and Tan Malaka were at one time "long distance
\nrevolutionaries". While in exile, sometimes by choice, they
\ncontributed a vocal resistance from outside Java or abroad. In
\ncontrast, all post-1965 exiles became exiles purely by fait
\nd'accompli. Despite modern communication, "long distance
\nresistance" never came about.<\/p>\n
Many accept their fate. "If Indonesia were the Borobudur
\n(temple) we had become tumbal (the price to be paid) for the sake
\nof progress," reflected a former student in Prague, Siswartono.
\nOthers, like Wardjo, a former member of People's Youth (Pemuda
\nRakyat), take a consistent attitude. "It was my choice, so it's
\nmy risk," he said. So, although respecting Gus Dur, many exiles
\ndo not intend to go home.<\/p>\n
Some have turned to social democracy, religion (Islam) or set
\nup restaurant businesses. Children of exiles, although well aware
\nof their parents' fate, become professionals and generally shy
\naway from politics.<\/p>\n
Very few, indeed, followed the lead of Basuki Resobowo, the
\nforeman of the left wing artists' body Lekra, or former Sarbupri
\nunion leader Suparna Sastradiredja (both deceased) in actively
\njoin anti-New Order protests abroad.<\/p>\n
The lack of a broad resistance overseas is often explained by
\nthe experiences of deep division and trauma. But Soeryono, a
\nformer Harian Rakjat (PKI daily) correspondent in Beijing, offers
\na different view.<\/p>\n
"The PKI leaders are from the priyayi (lower aristocrats
\nturned bureaucrats) class. Not an alternative force. Had PKI won
\nin 1960s, it might have been similar or even worse than Soeharto
\nand Golkar. It was Sudisman (number three in the PKI ranks) who
\nbuilt the structure of intellectually and ideologically bad
\ncadres."<\/p>\n
Soeryono, an independent-minded former Pesindo (socialist
\nyouth) leader, now residing in Amsterdam, is perhaps the only
\nIndonesian ever falling in disgrace with all three communist
\ngiants, PKI, the Chinese CCP and the Soviet CPSU.<\/p>\n
The 1965 mass purge, the lack of popular resistance, deep
\nschisms and the changing world conditions dealt a fatal blow to
\nthe left wing movement at home and abroad.<\/p>\n
The fact that this movement, at least what is left it, now
\nrelies completely on President Wahid, a leader from a distinct
\nnon-Marxist tradition (Nahdlatul Ulama), underlines the fact that
\nthe movement had long been hopelessly disintegrated. Whatever its
\nprospects, if any, future left wing politics could only thrive
\nwith a new generation who have no links to the remaining leftist
\nelements of the 1960s.<\/p>\n
So, the Indonesian left wing movement has finally come full
\ncircle. It has come a long, long way from a respectable tradition
\nof exile -- from the days of Semaoen (in Amsterdam, Moscow, Paris
\n1920s) to Tan Malaka (who left the Netherlands to travel in Asia
\n1920-1940s) -- to the end of the PKI in the late 1960s in
\nIndonesia and between mid-1970s and late 1980s in China, Soviet
\nUnion and West Europe.<\/p>\n
While it all started with unionist activities in Semarang, led
\nby the Dutch Marxist Henk Sneevliet in 1913, and its
\ninternational role came about thanks partly to the former Dutch
\ncommunist party CPN (the only Dutch party supporting full
\nindependence for Indonesia), its struggle at home could only be
\ntransformed into a powerful force because of the mass-based
\nSarekat Islam.<\/p>\n
Ironically, the movement had come to an end as a fin du siecle
\nas Indonesia acquired a Muslim cleric as its first democratically
\nelected president.<\/p>\n
In other words, much of the Indonesian left wing movement's
\nfailure was due to a political course based on a historical
\n(mis)conception, that grossly ignored the Muslim factor. The
\nmovement had in fact been killed three times i.e. by the Soeharto
\nregime, by the "society", and, finally, given the internal
\nschisms, by itself. The late French historian Jacques Leclerc put
\nit slightly differently when he argued that the movement was
\n"killed twice": by the regime and by the historians.<\/p>\n
Now, as its remaining elements in exile support Gus Dur,
\nstrangely, few discords are heard when the President stops short
\nof calling an international tribunal for crimes against humanity
\nby Soeharto, that caused thousands of their comrades' deaths and
\ntheir own sufferings abroad.<\/p>\n
Meanwhile, the decades of exile also meant a considerable loss
\nof human resources for Indonesia as many of the exiles,
\nparticularly those staying in Eastern Europe, were brilliant
\nprofessionals in fields like nuclear technology, engineering,
\nmedicine and so forth.<\/p>\n
All exiles deserve to regain their civil rights. Few will
\nprobably return but, more importantly, the issue is a test case
\nfor reform and reconciliation. It calls all sides involved to
\nredefine their discourse. Instead of condemning compatriots to
\nremain pariahs in a spirit at odds with the Sarekat Islam
\ntradition, some Muslim parties opposing the reconciliation may
\nfind them as partners in a fledging democracy.<\/p>\n
The writer is a journalist based in Amsterdam, the
\nNetherlands.<\/p>",
"url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/what-has-the-left-left-abroad-1447893297",
"image": ""
},
"sponsor": "Okusi Associates",
"sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com"
}