CIDES's proposed affirmative action not racist

CIDES's proposed affirmative action not racist

By Irman G. Lanti

JAKARTA (JP): The problem with indigenous and non-indigenous
relations in Indonesia is evidently present and it should become
the commitment of intellectuals to address the problems of the
nation with sound reasoning, fairness and openness.

Benny Subianto, a Jakarta-based political observer, asserted
in his article published in The Jakarta Post on Nov. 14 that
economic disparity was not the sole factor behind the numerous
recent riots in Indonesia. However, he failed to appreciate the
extent of such disparity.

Benny prepared the article to comment about a dialog held by
the Center for Information and Development Studies (CIDES) on
indigenous and non-indigenous relations. The idea behind the
dialog was to observe and analyze the problem of such relations
in Indonesia, as well as to attempt to find a solution to the
problem. It was a constructive idea and certainly far from racial
tenets.

According to CIDES research, there were two types of cause to
the riots -- the structural cause and the trigger.

The trigger might be unrelated to economic disparity or racial
relations but the pattern of target for destruction during the
riots showed that economic disparity, especially that between
groups in the society, occupied a very significant part of the
cause.

During many of the riots, the shops of ethnic Chinese traders
and churches (where many ethnic Chinese Christians go to worship)
were always targeted by the rioters.

The incidents were cause for great remorse but it was
understandable why ordinary people in small cities aimed at those
specific targets. As far as CIDES was concerned, economic
disparity among ethnic groups both at local and national levels
was one of the most compelling reasons.

While economic distribution data in Indonesia varies, it is
safe to say, as quoted by speaker A. Dahana at the dialog, that
ethnic Chinese in Indonesia comprise only around 4 percent of the
whole Indonesian population, but they control around 50 percent
of the nation's economic assets and money in circulation. Benny
even came up with a figure of 60 percent. Even among
conglomerates that dominate the private sector economy, ethnic
Chinese conglomerates have assets amounting to US$25.88 billion
(80 percent), while the indigenous ones control only $6.48
billion or 20 percent of the whole conglomeration (as reported by
Info Bisnis on Jan. 14, 1997).

This is an unhealthy condition and greatly weakens Indonesia's
competitive advantage as it is approaching the era of economic
globalization. Furthermore, accumulation of economic resources
within such a small group is dangerous because the group then has
tremendous leverage on governance and possesses the ability to
disrupt the whole economy. Hence without regard to any specific
ethnic group, this structure is perilous, undesirable and
critically needs to be corrected.

Benny was correct in asserting that it was government policies
that had created this problem. In his words, "Indeed, the New
Order government's economic development policies have thus far
marginalized small and medium-scale businesses owned or
controlled by Indonesians who are not of Chinese descent." But he
failed to follow up on his own logic when he stated his
disagreement with CIDES's proposed affirmative action policies.
He said that it "would... intensify government intervention in
the economic and business sectors".

The function of government everywhere is to govern. Some do it
directly with their own apparatus, some regulate through
policies. The wave of deregulations in Indonesia during the last
decade aimed at minimizing the government's direct role in the
economy and at loosening up the tight control of the economy.
Needless to say, even in the most open economy, the role of the
government remains to regulate the economy through policies.
CIDES's proposed affirmative action advised on such a mechanism.

Bearing in mind the fact of economic possession across the
groups above, CIDES's proposed affirmative action will certainly
benefit indigenous Indonesians. This is not a racist approach due
to the fact that most small and medium entrepreneurs fall within
that group.

At the same time to most ethnic Chinese public offices seem to
be off limits. In the Old Order era, there were some ministers of
Chinese descent. The mistakes of the Chinese-dominated Baperki
organization which affiliated itself with the Indonesian
Communist Party (PKI) in the 1960s seemed to cut off ethnic
Chinese aspiration to public office.

This was also an equally undesirable situation. It suggested
that there were no equal rights among citizens of Indonesia
regardless of ethnicity. Furthermore, it put one or more ethnic
group in a difficult position when they tried to articulate their
public interests.

In Malaysia, whose affirmative action policies were declared
by Benny as "racist", for example, the Chinese and Indians own
institutions to channel their political aspirations (Malaysian
Chinese Association and Malaysian Indian Association).

In Indonesia, the political party system is not arranged
according to primordial attributes and a relatively small number
of ethnic Chinese are involved. This condition also needs change.
In order to balance the development equity side of its proposed
affirmative action policies, CIDES also proposed social
integration through the opening up of public offices for non-
indigenous Indonesians, especially those of ethnic Chinese
background.

As a rejoinder, it is true that there is no easy answer to
racial issues. But instead of sitting idle fearing to disrupt the
status quo, Indonesia must strive to address the problems in a
consistent manner.

CIDES is committed to a planned change in Indonesia and never
pretends to have an easy answer for any developmental issues. But
it remains CIDES philosophy that an open, unobstructed dialog
among development actors that includes the government, business
community, academics and nongovernmental organizations must be
initiated.

Through such an approach radical measures should be avoided
for change that will only sacrifice the interests of ordinary
people.

The writer is head of the Research Department at the Center
for Information and Development Studies, Jakarta.