Aceh, Nias and Foreigners

Aceh, Nias and Foreigners

The herculean task of reconstructing Aceh had not even begun
when another catastrophe struck again on Monday in the same area
of northern Sumatra.

More than 200,000 Indonesians perished in the Dec. 26 tsunami
and it is estimated that at least 1,000 more died this week as
local and foreign volunteers search for survivors on Nias Island.
About half a million people lost their homes in Aceh and
thousands out of a population of 400,000 in Nias are now
homeless.

The generosity of neighboring countries is very touching with
many people flocking to Nias to help just three months after the
Dec. 26 disaster. Some of those good people were on their way out
of Aceh or nearing the completion of their humanitarian work in
devastated Aceh, when they found themselves badly needed again in
nearby Nias. Notable among them is Malaysia, and despite its
ongoing dispute with Indonesia over two oil blocks off Borneo
island, the Malaysians are sending hundreds of volunteers and
medical personnel at this very moment.

Although it could be considered a lesser disaster relative to
the apocalyptic tsunami, the Nias earthquake will nevertheless
have an affect on the recently issued blueprint for
reconstructing Aceh. Although the blueprint did include Nias,
which was affected somewhat by the first catastrophe, the
government promptly announced its decision to review its
blueprint on reconstructing Aceh to also include the latest
devastation on Nias.

It is not clear at the moment whether the time frame in the
blueprint -- rehabilitation work from April 2005 to April 2006
and reconstruction work up to 2009 -- will also be changed. The
same question can be posed for the total cost of reconstruction,
which exceeds Rp 40 trillion (US$4.2 billion), mainly funded by
international donations.

While we commend the blueprint, which is now being
disseminated around Aceh to allow public input, the
reconstruction of Aceh still appears to be problematic. There
were problems prior to these two disasters, occurring the day
after Christmas and the day after Easter, respectively. The
government has been focused on trying to deal with a dilemma on
reconstructing Aceh. This is not to ignore the need to look
beyond physical reconstruction or the need to heal the massive
psychological wounds suffered by the Acehnese.

One of the key questions concerning the reconstruction of Aceh
will be, whether or not the government should allow the
reconstruction work to carried out by foreigners as demanded by
the Acehnese, or take on the task wholly on its own?

Apart from their inherent distrust of the government, the
Acehnese are well aware that Indonesia is one of the most corrupt
countries in the world. It would be unfair to the Acehnese,
however, to say that other provinces do not harbor the same
distrust toward Jakarta; the sentiment seems to be quite similar
throughout the nation. The difference is, with its separatist
history, the Acehnese can afford to say so more openly where
other provinces cannot. Other provinces seem to have less
alternatives when it comes to development in their respective
provinces directed from Jakarta.

Without belittling any effort forged by the government in
reconstructing Aceh -- some agencies like the social affairs
ministry are taking care of thousands of orphaned Acehnese
children -- the government would do well to accommodate the
aspirations of the people of Aceh.

There are two key reasons why this should be so. One, Aceh is
not a typical Indonesian province. It is a special case. Its deep
distrust toward the central government is not without
justification. A foremost and staunch supporter of a free
Indonesia in 1945, Aceh has since been disappointed by Jakarta
too many times to count.

This is partly because of a flurry of broken promises by the
government since day one of the nation's independence. Two, there
is still an armed conflict going on between Aceh separatists and
government troops. Aceh is one of two provinces in the country
with a significant separatist problem.

This does not mean that the government should stand back and
let the foreigners do their work together with the Acehnese. It
is not a viable option as the Acehnese are likely to be less than
equipped to do the massive reconstruction work. On the other
hand, the foreigners need a capable partner in the field. A
middle way has to be found out where all parties, including the
Acehnese, the foreigners and the government, have a stake in the
work. The government may well do the planning while the Acehnese
could be given access to monitor the use of the funding.