Faith in the TNI

A public debate is raging over the Indonesian Military (TNI) bill.

As the TNI maintains that a law is needed to justify its duties, activists burn placards in dissent, claiming the bill protracts the military's engagement in politics. Observers and political scientists wrangle at great length over definitions of "command" and "structure", while legislators hold public hearings in a state of bemusement as though their minds were already made up, in spite of the arguments presented.

Much of the debate's essence is beyond the grasp of the layman, and those involved have failed to answer the question of "so what?" with respect to the bill's relevance to a person's daily life. More importantly, draftsmen of the bill also seem oblivious to the underlying concerns of its opponents.

Combined, these factors provide many average Indonesians -- despite their lacking knowledge of legislative technicalities -- a reason to suspect the TNI's shadowy presence.

At the crux of the issue is a matter of trust.

After its active role in supporting an autocracy for 32 years, the TNI cannot expect public perceptions to change overnight -- or over the relatively short span of six years, for that matter.

Trust is earned, and the TNI has not worked hard enough for it.

They would do well to remember former U.S. Army chief of staff George Marshall who, in a letter to a subordinate in 1943, underlined the necessity of maintaining public trust at all costs.

"We (the military) have a great asset, and that is our people, who do not distrust us and do not fear us. Our countrymen, our fellow citizens, are not afraid of us. They don't harbor any concerns that we intend to alter the government of the country or the nature of this government ... That is a sacred trust," Marshall wrote.

While we commend the TNI for seemingly taking a backseat in politics at the start of the reform era, we have noticed subtle, incremental encroachments of the TNI's influence in recent developments.

One reason for this has been the inherent fallibility of the President's obsession with national unity. Her hyper-nationalism prompted a realist approach that turned into a love affair with the Indonesian Military, allowing them to commence large-scale operations in Aceh, among other concessions.

A presumption also exists that when chaos emerges -- whether perceived or real -- for whatever reason, the TNI is "duty-bound" to step in and "restore order".

Traditionally, the TNI has been mindful of staying in the background and allowing political dynamics to dictate the course of where and when they might be thrust into the foreground again.

Hence, despite all its claims and adherence to constitutional and legislative processes, the TNI's future plans remain an unknown and of public concern.

The TNI bill is just one aspect of the problematic civilian- military relationship, and other issues will arise on its role in our democratically evolving political system, all stemming from an underlying suspicion that has had over three decades to take root.

In the end, it is a question of public trust -- something in short supply when it comes to the military.

Civilian supremacy over military command should be established as an unquestioned principle, irrespective of the prevailing circumstances.

The TNI must validate its own slogan of being "the people's army" and respect universal and constitutional rights -- as is expected of all citizens -- and relinquish the preferential treatment it has enjoyed.

As one of our greatest generals and conceptualizer of the military's dual-function, A.H. Nasution, in a speech to cadets at the Military Academy in 1958 noted, the armed forces "is but one of the many elements of the state" and should not be endowed with privileges nor estates above others.