Autonomy-seekers should keep focused

Autonomy-seekers should keep focused

I Wayan Ananta Wijaya, Contributor, Denpasar, Bali

The demand for special autonomy is by no means new, particularly
for the island's intellectuals and scholars.

It is a recurring theme, a discourse that continues to attract
fresh supporters, new ground or a new context every time the
island enters a period of uncertainty.

The last time the debate made an appearance was during the
early days of reform from 1997 through 1999. It was a period of
economic upheaval and political uncertainty marked with much
social unrest and violent interethnic clashes, which took place
across the country.

The disorder provided fertile ground for those who wanted to
question the ability of the monolithic, centralized government to
hold the vast archipelago together.

In respond to that period of uncertainty, Balinese
intellectuals reviewed the island's relationship with the central
government and came out with four political designs to replace
the existing province: an independent state, a federal state, a
special region or a region with special autonomy status.

Toward the end of 1999, the Denpasar-based Institute for
Development and Information Assessment (LPIP) Forum at Udayana
University organized a two-month survey to gauge the perception
of the middle class toward these four political designs.

The survey targeted a specific group of respondents: adult
individuals (21 to 51 years of age) from a high educational
background and on medium-to-high personal income.

The survey showed that special autonomy status was popular
among Denpasar's middle class, with over 62 percents of the
respondents opting for this alternative.

Interestingly, more than 14 percents of respondents thought
that the existing provincial government structure was already
correct and should not be replaced by any of the four
alternatives.

Meanwhile, the idea of a special region attracted only around
10 percent support, while the federal state concept received a
paltry 7 percent. The option of becoming an independent state
turned out to be the least popular idea of all, garnering only
3.57 percent.

Glaring gap in perception

Early in 2000, LPIP organized another poll with a wider sample
of respondents in terms of geographic and demographic coverage.
It was an attempt to ascertain whether grassroots Balinese shared
similar aspirations to those of their middle-class brethren.

The 321 people from nine regencies in Bali who responded were
asked to list up to 10 issues they believed to be crucial and
important to the future of the island.

Curiously, none mentioned the need to substitute the existing
province with a special autonomy region in their wish lists.

Instead, they identified more tangible problems, ranging from
population control, the empowerment of traditional institutions
and unemployment to the wealth gap and illegal drugs, as issues
that should immediately be addressed by the Balinese.

The results of these two surveys illustrated a glaring gap in
perception between Denpasar's middle class and the remainder of
the Balinese people, particularly on the importance of
restructuring the island's relationship with Jakarta.

Another survey, conducted in April 2000 by the Institute for
Social and Economic Information, Education and Research (LP3S),
further confirmed the gap in perception. The survey, aimed at
identifying important local issues, involved 500 respondents from
all over the island.

A mere 1 percent of respondents identified special autonomy
status as an important issue. The remainder identified economic
improvements, construction of public facilities, security, job
opportunities, law enforcement and community empowerment as the
most pressing problems.

The ongoing political movement, launched by some of the
island's top politicians and intellectuals to push the central
government for special autonomy status for the island, should
therefore pay careful attention to this gap in perception.

So far, politicians and intellectuals have not given the
public a clear enough idea of the nature and content of the
special autonomy they are trying to achieve for the island.

The ability of this pro-autonomy group to accommodate and
integrate the previously mentioned issues -- believed by
grassroots Balinese to be crucial -- into a special autonomy
blueprint will determine the ultimate outcome.

Failure to do so will certainly alienate grassroots Balinese
from this political pursuit, robbing the politicians and
intellectuals of the public support they desperately need to
convince Jakarta about the importance of the issue.

Lastly, it would likely turn the whole movement into a
detached struggle of the elite, which would constitute a
premature political defeat for the movement itself.