Aceh: Focus on people

The reconstruction of Aceh moved into a new stage this week with the completion of military-style barracks to shelter victims of the Dec. 26 tsunami. Not all the barracks have been completed but some 3,281 families, or more than 11,000 people, have now moved from their tents -- that had been their home since the Dec. 26 disaster -- to the more substantial constructions.

More and more of them will be moved out of their tents over the coming days and weeks as more barracks are completed. The government estimates that some 100,000 of the estimated 500,000 displaced people will be accommodated in these new facilities. Others will probably have to linger on in their tents for the time being, and some will continue living with their relatives who were not directly affected by the disaster.

As much as we'd like to laud this as a significant development in the government's program to rebuild Aceh, the barracks are only marginally better as a place of abode than the tents. Physically, they are certainly much better, especially since rain often makes the depressing life inside tents even more miserable. But as a place to rebuild family and community life, the barracks, at least the way that they have been designed and constructed, are unlikely to be much better than the tents.

The barracks provide very little privacy, and this is absolutely necessary for normal family life to function. The partitions separating one family from another inside the building are quite inadequate. Families also have to share amenities, such as bathrooms and kitchen, with other families in the barracks.

Any joy that the barracks bring to relocated families is likely to be short-lived once the reality of barracks life sinks in. Depression, so common in the camps over the past few weeks, will continue to haunt them.

The government's Aceh reconstruction program puts too much emphasis on physical aspects and not nearly enough on psychological aspects. Rebuilding Aceh must ultimately be about rebuilding the lives of its people. And where better to start than rebuilding the life of every family in Aceh that has been shattered by the disaster.

The decision to build the barracks was taken somewhat hastily when other options, including some that took into consideration matters of privacy, were clearly available at the time. The Alumni Association of Gadjah Mada University (KAGAMA), for example, came up with a proposal to design shelters in clusters of small houses that give both privacy and a sense of community. Its proposal was turned down in favor of standardized military- style barracks, although the KAGAMA plan was as doable and inexpensive as the barracks.

While it is now too late to change, the lesson from this episode is that the government's program to rebuild Aceh must focus on people. Physical constructions must be adapted to the needs of people, not vice versa. Given the scale of the destruction, rebuilding Aceh will be a very costly and time consuming project. But the place to start should be with the family, then the community, then the entire province.

The barracks are merely very temporary shelters for the tsunami victims. They are not designed as places for people to rebuild family life, let alone rebuild communities.

The government must now set itself a deadline as to how long these people will be expected to live in these military-style barracks before they are moved to proper places in order to rebuild their families and communities.