Disseminate power to the provinces

By David Keller

JAKARTA (JP): The inherent pluralistic culture found in Indonesia from the past to the present, can infer that the enlightening processes of western democracy has, without fail, determined New Order democracy obsolete.

This especially, since the dawning of the Abdurrahman Wahid government and the complex task of reinforcing "national unity". A concept not new as Indonesia was built on nationalistic fervor which was needed to repel the Dutch colonialists dating back to the early 1900s.

However, in this current political environment, the concept of "national unity" is needed for a very different purpose, that is to reinforce nationhood and to prevent fragmentation, "balkanization", of the state from becoming a reality.

"National unity" enclosed in globalization, has been redefined in a realm of internal socioeconomic and political failures of policies imposed expansively for all provinces, rather than specifically for each province.

Hence, the accentuation of Indonesian disunity. The resultant problems in contrast with the global community, highlight that, the embryonic Indonesian democratic fundamentals do not support the western characteristics of democracy of predominately accountability and transparency.

Therefore, the clashes of differing cultural democracies causes internal and external conflicts and the unpredictable nature of these conflicts is what gives Indonesia its volatility and fragility in the global context.

This fragility is especially so, considering the reactive nature of world money markets in response to the internal domestic affairs of any state in the world.

Evolving from this precariousness are culturally defined lines of division of ethnicity, religion, traditional land-ownership, as well as socioeconomic and political status. Resulting from these lines of division -- especially during the money and power offices of ex-presidents Soeharto and Habibie -- was and/or is the emergence of regional separatist thinking, resulting from self-seeking nation-building failures of the centralized Jakarta power bases.

These disparities were and are inevitable, because of the politicalization of identities within the provinces resulting from injustices of a humanitarian, economic and political nature.

In a sense, the bubble of cultural identities previously enclosed in an unsatisfactory perception of centralized solidarity has burst, with the objective to respond to injustice.

As reform and the road to justice is a construct measured against the hegemony of western democratic practices, then democracy in Indonesia and in other countries of the world are in transition toward democracy aligned with supranational laws, that supersede what some nationals decree as an infringement to sovereignty.

This thought can be applied to the provinces, as policy formation from Jakarta was/is seen as unjust and an infringement upon cultural/human rights sovereignty within the provinces.

The rationale being, for "national unity" to work, it is preferred to have discontent targeted at provincial power bases because problems such as unworkable policies, are emitted from a local source.

This does not put at risk the nation as a whole because Jakarta would act as a mediator rather than the instigator of policies ill-suited to the provinces.

From this perspective, provincial government policy and the provincial state ministers are held accountable to public opinion from within the provinces and this renders the national government in Jakarta impartial because it is not implicated in policy formation by state administrations.

Therefore, greater provincial autonomy gives empowerment to the local people since they are in closer proximity to the heart of decision making. For example, Banda Aceh with greater autonomy, would, through sheer opportunism, be more responsive to the needs of the Acehnese. In turn, condemnation directed toward Jakarta regarding contentious issues would be reduced.

Therefore, applying greater autonomy means administering the concept of federalism.

Federalist nation states of the world are numerous and include countries such as Brazil, Argentina, Canada, the United States, Australia, India, Germany and Russia. To be a federalist state -- in this case Indonesia -- means applying and/or revising the principles of Constitutional law, decentralization, territorial democracy and direct lines of communication that incorporates the provinces.

Constitutional law determines how power is to be divided or shared by mutual agreement and this aids in decentralization, with the view that national legislation and administration are constructs from provincial legislation and administration.

The provincial states must then engage in territorial democracy by ensuring that all groups and interests are represented and have a power base of their own.

However, just as particular Jakarta national interests have not been accepted because of diversity, provincial interests will also encounter difficulties because of the knowledge that what works for one group within a province may not necessarily work for another group.

This is relevant considering that the inter-provincial transmigration of peoples and their culture throughout the Indonesian archipelago creates drifting power bases.

This infers that Indonesia may require the formation of new provinces to accommodate the diversity of groups within existing provinces. Of course, if the existing provincial government is effective in engaging all groups then further fragmentation of the provinces is unnecessary.

Finally, to reinforce empowerment are lines of communication of not only a structural nature such as access to information technologies, but also by ensuring that those persons or institutions which make up the power bases create channels for consultation so that public opinion can be absorbed for virtuous policy formation.

Entering the new millennium, optimism in present conditions must be at the fore as Abdurrahman Wahid and the Cabinet of "national unity" has a mandate to develop national unity by applying federalism or federalist-like principles.

This may see the end of calls for separation and violent physical conflict as the expectant economic and political justice should lessen socioeconomic and political disparities, thus limiting conflict to dialogue only.

Therefore, a shift in the mode of conflict resolution by applying provincial civilian rule of law, as opposed to national law, can change the course of public opinion to a direction that is nearer to the core of "provincial unity" therefore, aiding "national unity".

This is because the existence of a foundation for separatist thinking is limited because there is increased inclination to reach mutual agreement, hence a reduction in polarization of thought.

The effectiveness to depolarize extreme views depends on a major factor which evolves from the article by J. Soedjati Djiwandono Time to face up to changing times (The Jakarta Post, Nov 9), which highlighted critical points about the ill discourse created when "national unity" overrides humanity, equality and justice for all.

In other words, if the road to "national unity" does not entail humanity, equality and justice for all, in all provinces, then the question raised by those oppressed to call for separation from the nation state -- or province -- is justified as a simple humanistic reaction.

Therefore, to restore positive public opinion in national government for the sake of "national unity", sustained bottom-up policy approaches must occur to appease the proletariat.

In a sense, the first step has been initiated with the formation of an accepted Cabinet.

The difficult question remains as to which powers should be given to the provinces for "provincial unity" and which powers and policies should hover above the provinces, to reinforce "national unity" and Jakarta.

The powers and policies for "national unity" should be unprejudiced and equitable and therefore, non-contentious, so that homogenized provincial understanding results.

The powers and policies for "provincial unity" should be those that can create a level of homogenization within the province, entailing flexibility to ensure that provincial differences can be expressed and not repressed.

Unfortunately, different levels of "development", means different rates of democratic infusion which affects relations because of policies imposed expansively.

Resulting from this are contrasts with political thought. Jakarta is striving to confide in supranational laws to be recognized globally as a Good International Citizen (GIC), whilst also balancing the unbalancing provincial problems.

Applying this domestically, the outer-lying provinces of Indonesia are in various stages of development, hence, contrasts exist with uniform Jakarta policy.

Knowing where the contrasts are, one can then determine which powers and policies Jakarta and the provinces should be in control of. The notions of humanity, equity and justice for all and a professional military to protect national borders are exceptions to applying non-uniform policy.

The former, to uphold basic human rights, the latter to protect national interests.

Principally, the upholding of human rights balances Jakarta and any other nation state with the global community. Confidence in Jakarta on human rights, from provinces such as Aceh, South Maluku and Irian Jaya, would in no doubt return, and the grass roots of society would endeavor to become -- in the same line as a GIC -- a GPC or "Good Provincial Citizen" and calls for referendums would end.

Therefore, the populace from each province can be empowered by Jakarta via allocating those federalist powers to the provincial capitals that help in development and prosperity in accordance with their own human and natural resources.

In association, safe in the knowledge that the national system supports human rights, then and only then, will the belief in "national unity" take root. A platform of this kind is needed for Indonesia's future.

The writer is an Australian graduate in Australia-Asia relations, currently working at the Center for Social and Cultural Studies at the Indonesian Institute of Sciences.

Window: ...greater provincial autonomy gives empowerment to the local people since they are in closer proximity to the heart of decision making. For example, Banda Aceh with greater autonomy, would, through sheer opportunism, be more responsive to the needs of the Acehnese.

The difficult question remains as to which powers should be given to the provinces for "provincial unity" and which powers and policies should hover above the provinces, to reinforce "national unity" and Jakarta.