Communication is vital in inter-ethnic relations

By A.G. Wenats and S.M. Niken Restaty

JAKARTA (JP): While claiming large numbers of victims, huge losses and the deep trauma of racism, the May riots still left many questions unanswered. They are:

* What actual condition was the main cause of the riots?

* Was it a mere economic gap or an accumulation of high-level political problems?

* Who were the perpetrators and the instigators of the riots? A group of Chinese Indonesians or a group of Indonesians frustrated due to the economic downturn?

* Is it true that the riots edged on racism? Or were they politically motivated by exploiting the sensitive issue of ethnicity, religion, racism and intergroup relations?

Masli Arman tried to provide the answers in an article in The Jakarta Post of July 30, 1998. This article attempts to put Arman's ideas in a critical light.

In his first assumption in his article "Ethnic Chinese at fault for riots", Arman says that the riots were not the result of economic disparity. He thinks that economic inequity played only a small role in the outbreak of the riots.

Arman's second assumption is that the arrogance of ethnic Chinese in daily life is the root of the problem, an attitude which is even imbued within the community system.

His third assumption, is that the arrogance of ethnic Chinese damages and obstructs the process of acculturation and assimilation between the indigenous and non-indigenous. This, he says, is strikingly apparent in the economic, social and cultural fields and is shattering the communication system in the community.

"Exclusivism" on the part of the ethnic Chinese, Arman says, impedes the process of social, economic and cultural assimilation with the indigenous population. The combination of arrogance and a discriminative attitude on behalf of the ethnic Chinese in the social and economic sectors irritates and angers the indigenous people. These anger and frustrations are easily vented on the ethnic Chinese during riots.

The people's assumption has been formed irreversibly on the arrogance and greed of the ethnic Chinese in the economy and as the primary cause of the decline of the Indonesian economy. Thus, the ethnic Chinese are seen as an exclusive, greedy and self- righteous group, Arman says. It is therefore not surprising that they have to bear the biggest responsibility in the deterioration of Indonesia's economy.

In his fourth assumption Arman says that the May riots would not have happened if the assimilation process had succeeded. The ones who should have started the assimilation process are the ethnic Chinese. The ethnic Chinese, he says, must work hard in the assimilation process although the government also needs to improve its policies of assimilation.

Arman's four assumptions are interrelated. They constitute a series of a causality of two cultures that have failed to assimilate. In short, Arman wishes to show that the May riots were caused by the total failure of the process of cultural assimilation.

One could perhaps agree with Arman's view on the failure of cultural assimilation in Indonesia. However, why does Arman only point to the ethnic Chinese as the cause of the failure of assimilation by their excessive arrogance? He does not refer to the government's assimilation policy or that of the indigenous community.

Cultural assimilation cannot be demanded from one ethnic group only. Arman wants to show the importance of a communication culture in the assimilation process, but in his assumptions he is less than communicative.

The policies on assimilation so far have formed patterns of usage and participation in the mass communication of the indigenous population. Such usage and participation indicates unbalanced cultural characteristics and patterns.

Unbalanced in the sense that the indigenous communication pattern heavily emphasizes the bad aspects of the ethnic Chinese. This activity contributes to bad communication. The accumulation of unbalanced and disproportionate images has played a part in shaping the resistance of the indigenous community. It is hard for the indigenous population to communicate openly with ethnic Chinese. In its final instance it slows down the ideal assimilation process of the ethnic Chinese in Indonesia.

Arman does not take into account the New Order's artificial policy on assimilation. He sees the communication culture process among ethnic groups as too conflicting. In his examples, Arman takes many factual controversies without going deeper into the facts. How can inter-ethnic communication be built based on controversies and conflicts?

He wishes to communicate but he shows a conflicting attitude himself. It is clear that communication is not feasible. The shaping of Arman's conflicting assumptions will form and consolidate in-groups and out-groups and cause a polarization of confronting ideologies. If this happens a process of barriers of communication will occur and impede the communication process among cultures. It will lead to difficulties in the process of acculturation and assimilation.

Since Arman takes a conflicting attitude in his approach to the mid-May riots, the solution he is offering is not clear-cut. It means that the mentality of the integration is not clear. It can be said that Arman's offer is naive politically. His approach is far from strategic. Political solutions and social generosity do not solve the problems. The biggest problem to solve is the continuum of acculturation and assimilation.

The continuum of acculturation and assimilation has to comply with a number of conditions. The first one is the abolishment of a conflicting approach in inter-ethnic communication. The right approach is by participation, that is in the sense that inter- ethnic communication involves two or more groups on the same level who respect each other. Thus, an inter-ethnic capacity for acculturation and assimilation is opened (in this case the indigenous and the ethnic Chinese).

The second condition is that open communication is an important mechanism to reach the capacity for acculturation and assimilation. The development of the capacity for cultural communication will enhance cognitive, affective and behavioral capacities. A tolerant attitude is an important basis in the acculturation and assimilation process. It will also give rise to openness in situations of differences and uncertainties among cultures.

The third condition is the process of interaction among ethnic groups. The process of acculturation and assimilation is one of interaction. The indigenous people create and accept the conditioning of ethnic Chinese culture and inversely. The indigenous community should push the cultural conditioning. Arman does not take this point into account.

The above three conditions are the starting point of the acculturation and assimilation process. The ethnic Chinese should indeed develop their sensitivity toward the process of inter- ethnic communication. The indigenous community encourages the conditioning and develops a tolerant attitude. The inter-ethnic community, in this case the government can assist the newcomers (meaning the ethnic Chinese) to overcome tensions and uncertainties in their life. If the three initial conditions of communication had been accepted by the ethnic Chinese and the indigenous community, the mid-May riots would not have erupted, or at least the ethnic Chinese would not have been made scapegoats.

In his article Arman has not taken many things into account. His conflicting approach incorporates strong implications which are not favorable to the clarification of the mid-May riots. There is another aspect that emerges from his opinion. The inter- cultural communication offered is very simplistic.

The failure in inter-cultural communication in Indonesia had indeed contributed to the mid-May 1998 riots. It had a complexity of problems. A quiet and clear solution to the problems can be found by the indigenous community, the ethnic Chinese and the inter-ethnic community (the state) if there is good will to communicate continuously.

A.G. Eka Wenats is on the teaching staff of the Center for Ethics Development at Atma Jaya Catholic University in Jakarta. S.M. Niken Restaty lectures business administration at the same university and is a postgraduate communications student at the University of Indonesia.