Acehnese are giving Susilo another chance

Saiful Mahdi Ithaca, New York

The people have high expectations of the popular president-in-waiting Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono, although some are skeptical of his capabilities. It is expected that he will wage an all-out war against corruption -- as he promised -- and bring about economic reform.

Foreign analysts, like Jeffrey Winters of Northwestern University, have put together a must-do agenda for Susilo. Topping their list is that he should "speak clearly about terrorists operating in Indonesia" (AP, Sept. 21). Indeed, he has battles to fight on many fronts.

For the Acehnese, however, the presence of the Indonesian Military (TNI) in Aceh since May 19, 2003, is not a war that they want to see continued. The so-termed integrated operation has been implemented for 16 months in Aceh, and has not won the confidence of the Acehnese.

Still, with no exit strategy, the operation has been mainly militaristic. The casualties includes 1,164 victims of violence or human rights abuses -- but, only 662 civilian casualties, according to the TNI.

This figure does not include the deaths of 2,879 people, the detention of 1,798, or the surrender of 1,954 people, whom the TNI claims are members of GAM, or sympathizers.

Those figures, interestingly, add up to more than 5,000, the number of armed GAM members the TNI set out to crush at the beginning of martial law. In addition, there are at least 159 casualties on the TNI side.

For the Acehnese, especially civilians, the conflict is an unbearable one. The economic and humanitarian operations that were supposed to be "integrated" into overall operations were not effective, or have been crippled by corruption.

Poverty levels have worsened in Aceh, despite trillions of rupiah budgeted under the special autonomy scheme and poured in through the integrated operation. In 2001, the poverty level was around 30.43 percent, or 1.2 million out of about 4.1 million people in the province. Before the conflict, the poverty level was "only" 26.50 percent.

Through the first and second rounds of the presidential election, the Acehnese have sent a clear message: They want drastic change in their region. They want the conflict to be settled through dialog and the rule of law, and they want the shameful corruption of local bureaucrats to be seriously addressed.

In the first round, the Acehnese voted overwhelmingly for Amien Rais, a civilian candidate whom the Acehnese may have considered reformist and less likely to resort to militaristic ways of bringing peace to Aceh. More than 56 percent of ballots cast in the province were for Amien, far more than for the incumbent, President Megawati Soekarnoputri, who received just 5.6 percent of the vote.

Megawati once pledged, in front of thousands of Acehnese, that she would not let any more blood spill in Aceh, but eventually she was the one who imposed martial law -- which for the Acehnese was but another name for war.

Curiously, she received half the votes of Wiranto (9.6 percent), a supposedly more hostile candidate for the Acehnese, due to his past in the military.

In the second round, it was also no surprise that Susilo garnered an overwhelming 80 percent of the vote in the province, compared to his returns of 24 percent in the first round.

Apart from the Acehnese people's disappointment in Megawati, Susilo's popularity is rooted in his reputation as a moderate general in his time. The Acehnese may believe there is still hope with Susilo, no matter how slim.

Already, Susilo has sent positive signals for a return to dialog in Aceh. Two days after the election, he was widely quoted by the media as saying, (the conflict) "must be resolved in a fair manner and as peacefully as possibly".

His commitment, however, remains to be seen. One of his main challenges will come from a hostile legislature, in which his party, the Democratic Party, only control about 8 percent of seats. Also, as a retired military man, he faces a potentially difficult relationship with the military, due to a possible conflict of interests.

The breakdown of the peace accord between Indonesia and GAM is yet another problem. It is understandable, therefore, if GAM appears to be skeptical about the leadership change in Indonesia. But, the people of Aceh in general, as proven by their votes on election day, seem to be looking for any path toward peace in Aceh. Although not as convinced, civil society groups and non- governmental organizations are showing similar feelings.

For changes to be made through dialog, public input is necessary. But, the public must also respect whatever decisions are made and the process of the dialog itself.

The involvement of the international community is unavoidable if the dialog is to be decisive. A foreign country with limited interests perhaps, such as New Zealand, the Scandinavian countries or UN bodies, could make for a good mediator.

This is not to undermine, for example, the United States' efforts for peace in Aceh, as conveyed by its ambassador designate to Indonesia B. Lynn Pascoe in front of the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations. But some factions would be less receptive to the U.S. Nevertheless, as the single superpower in the world, the U.S. role remains vital in mobilizing resources for peace and democracy in Aceh and Indonesia.

All in all, Susilo has the necessary tools to realize his commitment to a peaceful resolution in Aceh. With a popular mandate in his hands, it is up to him to prove his commitment. He also has to prove whether he is a "moderate general", as suggested by his supporters; or the real architect of martial law, which justified violence in Aceh, as alleged by some rights groups.

One thing is for sure, the Acehnese are always ready to give their leaders a chance. They gave Sukarno, Soeharto, and Megawati a chance. But once promises are broken, the Acehnese will not only lose faith, but take up arms in revolt. In the case of Susilo, given his background, the Acehnese are indeed giving him a second chance.

The writer is the Acehnese Institute coordinator, and is currently studying Policy Analysis and Modeling at Cornell University.