Conflict should be part of poverty reduction strategy

Mohammad Zulfan Tadjoeddin, The Hague, Netherlands

Indonesia will soon have a new government led by the first directly elected president in its history. Many problems of the country are waiting to be resolved. Among them, resolving violent conflicts and combating poverty are still two major issues, apart from addressing unemployment and corruption.

It seems violent conflict of all kinds is a key feature of Indonesia today, especially since the onset of the economic crisis in 1997. Rampant communal violence has torn apart Kalimantan, Sulawesi and Maluku; a new phase of separatist violence has developed in Aceh and Papua; while other kinds of violent conflict have also erupted, although at a lower intensity, in other parts of the country.

At the same time, poverty reduction has become a national priority along with the process of economic and social recovery.

The latest National Socio-economic Survey (Susenas) in 2002 estimates that the number of Indonesians living below the poverty line has declined to 17.6 percent. Though the poverty head count ratio is approaching pre-crisis levels, a number of points should be noted.

First, in several poor regions like Gorontalo and East Nusa Tenggara, more than 30 percent of the population still live in poverty. Second, the national poverty figure of 17.6 percent does not include the conflict prone regions, namely Aceh, Papua, Maluku and North Maluku. This is because the survey could not be undertaken in those provinces for security reasons. Looking at the past data, poverty rates in Maluku (including North Maluku) and Papua in 1999 were extremely high, 46 percent and 55 percent respectively. The figures were more than twice the national poverty average at that time.

Given the high incidence of poverty in conflict prone regions, can we link the effort to reduce poverty and the outbreak of violent conflict? Should conflict be seriously considered in a poverty reduction strategy?

There is a growing international literature on the link between conflict and poverty. Most refer to cases in African countries, such as Rwanda, The Congo, Somalia, Ethiopia, Zimbabwe, etc, where chronic poverty is regarded as a direct result of persistent conflicts and vice-versa. However, it is still hard to find Indonesian literature on the subject although the country is facing the problem of conflict and poverty.

Conflict analysis and its prevention should be considered as an important element in the poverty reduction strategy in Indonesia, beyond the traditional discussions focussing on how to identify the poor, how to target them, its fiscal consequences and so on. However this issue has not been properly addressed in the current draft of Indonesian Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper (PRSP).

To begin with, the following questions need to be addressed. Does conflict cause poverty? Does poverty lead to conflict? Is there a two-way causation between poverty and conflict, leading to a vicious circle of "conflict -- poverty -- conflict" or "poverty -- conflict -- poverty"?

Violent conflicts have direct effects on poverty through the destruction of physical, human, and social capital, resulting in a disruption of productivity, heightened unemployment, social displacement and increased physical insecurity. These developments were basically what one could find in Maluku, for example.

As can be seen in conflict prone areas in Indonesia, conflicts have created fresh poverty. A significant number of people have suddenly become poor. Part of the community directly affected by violent conflict will automatically fall below the poverty line, mostly due to the destruction of physical capital, loss of work due to disrupted economic activity or the loss of income-earning family members.

At the same time, poverty has also generated vulnerability. For example, most Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs) quickly fall below the poverty line. According to the data compiled by the World Food Program at the end of 2002, there were 1.1 million IDPs from conflict prone regions, namely Aceh, Sambas, Sampit, Poso, Maluku, North Maluku, Papua and East Timor. They left their jobs and economic assets, and their social and cultural life was disrupted. They moved to new areas without any certainty about their future. Moreover, the IDPs also affect local inhabitants that live near their settlements as their presence often causes economic and social disharmony.

On the other hand, poverty might also cause conflict. However, this direction of causality is not as obvious as the other way round. Although poverty might not be the root cause of major conflicts or rebellions in Indonesia, poverty can stimulate crimes that can escalate into a serious social problem.

Lampung might be the best example for this case. Although this province is not widely considered a conflict-prone region like Aceh, Papua or Maluku, there is a significant level of violent conflict in Lampung, mainly in the form of spontaneous violence between villages, armed robbery and vigilantism.

The social division between the native and migrant populations is often associated with groups involved in violent conflicts. A recent World Bank study on violence in Lampung, the poorest province in Sumatra, notes that poverty -- in relative, as well as, in absolute terms -- is an important underlying factor behind the violent conflicts in the region.

Conflict is a central element that must be recognized in developing a poverty reduction strategy. Conflict is a barrier to poverty eradication. Conflict creates a situation where any kind of development interventions like social safety nets, rebuilding infrastructure and providing public services such as basic health and education would be less successful and less effective. Furthermore, conflict retards economic growth -- as many studies also suggest -- while growth is essential for poverty reduction.

Parties committed to development and poverty reduction -- especially the government bodies, NGOs as well as donor agencies -- need to start addressing the barriers to their work. Dealing with conflict is essential to development as conflict must be seen in a broader context of development, rather than confining the issue within the security and political domain. The task is really how to put the variable of conflict with all of its dynamics in a new, broader social development policy for Indonesia.

The writer is a graduate student at the Institute of Social Studies (ISS), The Hague, Netherlands. He can be reached at ecd0421@iss.nl.