Aid to NGOs in Indonesia

The news report that Surya daily quoted from The New York Times May 20, 1998, which was later denied by Indonesia's non- governmental organizations (NGOs), represented by the Indonesian Environmental Forum and the Indonesian Biodiversity Foundation, and also by Amien Rais, is not completely wrong.

In the present era of reform, it is regrettable if only parties considering themselves disadvantaged by this news voice their denial. In a democratic atmosphere of reform, other parties, particularly NGOs, who know inside out how foreign funds can be channeled, should also help clarify this matter. It would be a pity if only The New York Times and Surya become targets without being allowed to give significant room for explanation, with the exception of an apology.

On the one hand, it is hard for me to fully believe that in this respect Surya and The New York Times, which has gained recognition for its accurate reporting, are in the wrong. On the other hand, I also have my doubts that recipients of foreign funds, particularly those from the U.S. government, have in-depth knowledge about the structure of decisionmaking regarding aid extension.

NGOs receiving the funds may be ignorant of this matter, so much so that when The New York Times exposed the funds, gigantic in amount, this report caught the NGOs by surprise. Small-scale NGOs may be wondering where these huge funds have "landed" because the funds, certainly, have not been intended solely for NGOs but, ultimately, for the people.

From my dealings with a number of NGOs, I have been informed that in Indonesia there are conspiracies recommended by a particular country as a prerequisite to entitle one to receive its financial aid. Indonesian NGOs receive foreign funds from two main sources: the United States and European countries. The government of a country must have its own mechanism or bureaucracy in allocating its budget for this financial aid.

In this respect, we need not feel uncomfortable to learn that the intelligence agency of a donor country is involved in making recommendations. This opinion stems from a premise that no country will give aid free of charge. The political and economic interests of the donor country concerned will be explicitly taken into account in the extension of financial aid. The Indonesian government will also do likewise when extending financial aid to another country.

Things would be different if the forum and the foundation do not know that the extension of funds from the United States through the USAID package involves the CIA, which is a member of the USAID consortium. In various brochures and products of USAID, the CIA is officially mentioned. It is the job of the forum and the foundation to check the statute of USAID.

This, I believe, is the difference between Indonesian NGOs and a newspaper publisher, particularly The New York Times. Therefore, Adnan Buyung Nasution and Amien Rais must check whether they have received financial aid from a party, which, when traced, will turn out to be a USAID donation. Being human, Buyung and Amien have their limitations in this regard.

It is foolish to think that the extension of donation must feature the hidden agenda involved. All can be felt only as the impact of an expected result. It is the proper right of the U.S. government and members of the USAID consortium, for example the CIA, to feel that what has been donated has achieved the expected result, and, also, to make this feeling public. Donation recipients should not waste energy denying the feeling that someone has, let alone waging a fight against facts, while reform work is still piling up.

MULYADI S.

Bogor, West Java