Are there alternatives to ABRI's dual function?

Are there alternatives to ABRI's dual function?

By Aleksius Jemadu

BANDUNG (JP): As public criticism mounts against the Armed
Forces' (ABRI) socio-political role, it is worth looking into
alternatives to its current dual function policy.

In celebrating its 53th anniversary on Monday, ABRI is
particularly challenged to rethink its political role so that it
might not appear as an obstacle to the overall process of
democratization.

Compared to the progress of democracy in some Latin American
countries which used to be under military regimes, Indonesia lags
far behind because of a significant military presence in its
politics and its failure to establish a strong civilian
government.

It is widely believed that civilian supremacy is imperative
for the healthy growth of democracy. No matter how sincere and
nationalistic a military is in politics, it cannot deny the fact
that upon the absence of strong public control, military
resources can be misused to perpetuate power.

Moreover, sustainable political power can only be based on
people's consent and not on military resources. This is precisely
the reason why the military should stick to their traditional
function of maintaining national security. Indonesian civilians
will never mature politically as long as the military continues
to intervene in politics.

The exclusion of the military from politics may not
necessarily mean that they should be prohibited from contributing
to the growth of healthy politics in the country.

While the doctrine of dwifungsi, or dual function which is the
philosophy behind ABRI's socio-political and defense roles, tends
to be obsolete and indefensible in the new era of
democratization, and taking into account the vulnerability of
Indonesian unity, there is a need to change "political function"
into "political commitment".

Under such a new concept, the military could have members in
the House of Representatives to channel its political aspirations
but it should stay away from executive positions at all levels of
government.

We could learn a good lesson from the Turkish experience.
Today, the Turkish military always espouses the supremacy of
civilian government, although it remains committed to the basic
values and ideological orientations proposed by the nation's
founding father Kemal Attaturk.

Whenever the ruling party shows any indication of deviating or
betraying this fundamental denominator, the military steps in to
make corrections and facilitate the emergence of a new
government.

Thus, when the Refah (Welfare) Party led by prime minister
Necmetin Erbakan showed tendencies of tilting the nation to the
far right while putting aside long-held secular traditions, the
military strongly opposed his policies and then helped to
establish a more moderate government.

It is interesting to note that there is a significant
difference in political orientation and approaches between ABRI's
current leadership and its predecessors of the 1945 generation.

Young generals like Wiranto, Bambang Susilo Yudhoyono and Agum
Gumelar, just to name a few, who hold the top positions in ABRI
today represent more accommodative personalities and are willing
to hold dialogs with civilian political groups even if the latter
disagree with military policies. They seem to be indifferent as
to whether they hold power or not -- being more concerned with
the future of the nation-state as a whole.

Their apparent goal is to create a modern and democratic
Indonesia capable of competing with other nations in the 21st
century. They know very well that establishing military rule is
no longer a popular choice and even considered a setback.

There are at least three reasons why the abolition of
dwifungsi could be good for the military itself.

First, by turning its attention back to military affairs full-
time, ABRI could concentrate on improving its defensive
capabilities. In addition, the motivation to join ABRI would be
only to become a professional soldier.

Second, dwifungsi has traditionally served the Army well in
that more its officers than officers from any other branch have
enjoyed the privilege of obtaining top governmental positions.
The Navy, Air Force and National Police have shown some
indications of being envious of their Army colleagues for this
very reason. Thus, by abolishing the doctrine, unity among
military units could be strengthened.

Third, the military could have more opportunities to serve as
a state instrument instead of becoming merely a political tool of
a certain political regime.

At the age of 53, the Indonesian Armed Forces is mature enough
to make a wise decision regarding its future role. Let us hope
that it will make a good decision for the benefit of the country
as a whole.

The writer is the head of the school of international
relations at the University of Parahyangan, Bandung. He is also a
researcher at the Parahyangan Center for International Studies at
the same university.