Aceh enigma: Old sins with long shadows

By Johannes Nugroho

SURABAYA (JP): The saying "Old sins have long shadows" seems to be reverberating in the country's westernmost province Aceh, materializing in the mounting pressure for a self-determination referendum. In the face of damning evidence of human rights violations in Aceh perpetrated by the Indonesian Military (TNI) during Soeharto's regime, coupled with the incessant milking and draining of the region's resources, Aceh has become a vexed dilemma for the incipient administration.

Aceh and the recently seceded East Timor are arguably two divergent issues. While historically as well as culturally Indonesia has remote ties with the former Portuguese colony, it is almost the opposite when it comes to Aceh.

Being one of the last conquests of the colonial Dutch Indies government, Aceh has come to symbolize the most resilient struggle against colonialism through its 1873-1904 war. The Sultanate of Aceh was still fighting when its Javanese counterparts had long bowed to the Dutch Crown. The Acehnese names Teuku Umar, Commander Polim and Cut Nya Dien -- declared national heroes by Soeharto, inspire visions of valor amongst Indonesian history students.

What has been forgotten, however, is that those "national" heroes were first Acehnese and were, strictly speaking, never Indonesians. They waged their battles against the Dutch encroachment on their sultanate as they have been for the last decades against what they, presumably, see as the Javanese usurpation of their rights.

There's no denying that Soeharto's regime was Java-centric, while the fact that military's non-organic troops stationed in Aceh were probably mostly Javanese did not help to dispel the perception that Aceh was being overrun by Javanese. The fact that arguably most Javanese people themselves were kept in the dark about the military's atrocities in Aceh does not appear to matter.

As if to add insult to injury, while Acehnese were being massacred and raped by Javanese soldiers, more and more Javanese transmigrants were being settled across Sumatra under Soeharto's once lauded transmigration policy.

The policy was implemented supposedly to even out population distribution in the country and to relieve the island of Java of its overcrowding by relocating whole villages to underpopulated regions throughout the country. This imposed, as well as engineered, movement of people was most unnatural and has brought about ethnic tensions between the Javanese transmigrants and the non-Javanese indigenous people.

The resettlement policy has arguably been deemed by the locals as yet another attempt at "Javanization" by Jakarta. Most of the ethnic clashes in recent years, such as the Dayak-Madurese incidents in Kalimantan, have arisen from the local's resentment against the new comers. Indeed, had it not been for this policy, the refugee problem besetting East Timor now would probably be minimal. Consequently, referring to the East Timorese debacle, if Aceh were to secede from Indonesia, it would certainly result in another wave of refugees.

Conjointly, the loss of Aceh would inevitably become a cataclysmic precedent and omen for the probable disintegration of the country. Hence, it is imperative that the present government strive at all costs to prevent Aceh from breaking away without military might or further insult and condescension towards the Acehnese.

If the Acehnese were vehemently resentful of the attempt by the Dutch to curb their sovereignty then, now they are ostensibly incensed by the unavenged murders and rapes. To top it all, their natural resources have been exploited without their having a say in it or receiving an overdue slice of the cake.

In due course, it is only fair that the government should grant full autonomy to Aceh, with prerogatives like those of a state within a federation: To manage its own internal affairs, including a separate legal and educational system, police force and so on. Aceh should be offered the status of a self-governing integral territory of Indonesia, as Greenland is to Denmark.

However, the gift of autonomy would understandably be insufficient to soothe Aceh's long-borne pain. Thus, it will be necessary to accord the Acehnese the justice to which they have been denied, in the form of punishment for those responsible for atrocities committed against them.

Yet, this might prove to be complex, considering the powers that be in this country still rely on the goodwill of the military for stability. Should it refuse to have its former officers charged with crimes against humanity, it should at least consider a public apology to the Acehnese.

It is also of paramount importance that the government designating financial retribution and compensation for the victims or their relatives. The scheme could either involve one- off payments or lifetime contributions. Furthermore, the rape victims of Aceh should be entitled to psychological counseling to better equip them to recover from their traumatic experiences.

Most important of all, Indonesians as a nation must not forget the crimes against human dignity that have taken place in Aceh. The nation must not commit the same mistake as the post-World War II German and Japanese governments were guilty of: historical censorship and a "shame-burying" sham.

Future generations of Indonesians must not be deluded into ignorance of what occurred in Aceh, nor should they be deprived of the painful chapter of atrocities and subjugation. They must not be led into recoiling in shame and denial, while proclaiming," Those things never happened. Those things were only fabricated to discredit my country," as the neo-Nazis are now saying about the Third Reich's genocide against the Jewish people.

Already we have been culpable for this timorous act in the East Timorese case. There are those of us who would rather believe that East Timor was never annexed by Indonesia, that the alleged genocide there was trumped-up by foreign governments and so on. If Indonesia could pinpoint Australia's own attempt at the ethnic cleansing of the Aborigines, then why can't we just say, "Mea culpa. We've been guilty of what other nations have also been guilty of and we are prepared to address it."

Transparently, the separatism rampant in Aceh derives from the government's dogged reluctance to pursue and administer justice until pressurized to do so. The Oriental culture of "saving face" is arguably evident in the improbability of bringing the military generals responsible for atrocities in Aceh to justice as it is palpable in Gus Dur's "political" solution to Soeharto's crimes.

The Aceh question may well be the first stumbling block for President Abdurrahman Wahid's administration. It is tempting to suggest that the administration's tackling of the issue will determine its own survival as any further disintegration of Indonesia, after the loss of East Timor, might render the new administration, in the eyes of the people, incapable of guiding this nation to a better future.

The writer works at the International Language Program, Surabaya.