Flashpoints engulf Indonesia

Flashpoints engulf Indonesia

Bantarto Bandoro
Editor, The Indonesian Quarterly
Center for Strategic and Indonesian Studies
Jakarta

Indonesia has had four presidents in just four years (1998-
2002) and each of them has experienced a turbulent period during
their presidency. The sources of the turbulence in the country
are the quite potentially dangerous flashpoints of Maluku, Aceh,
Papua, Sulawesi and Kalimantan, and perhaps to certain extent
Jakarta.

There are a number of unconnected regional rebellions. Some
are ethnic or religious conflicts, other regions want nothing
less than independence. In Sulawesi in 2000, religious violence
spread to the remote Poso region of central Sulawesi. The
violence continues in spite of the 2002 Malino I peace accord.
Aceh is still far away from becoming a stable region as the
separatist GAM army continues its push for independence for the
province. In Riau, there was no open warfare, but there were
feelings of injustice among Riau's 4.5 million inhabitants. Such
feelings have led them to call for Riau's independence based not
on politics but on economic grievances.

In Papua, guerrillas of the OPM are fighting for independence
while the political struggle is advanced by the Papuan Presidium
Council (PDP). Sectarian conflict in the Maluku islands,
especially Ambon, continues unabated, putting at stake the Malino
II peace accord for Maluku. The government is now thinking of
imposing martial law in the region if the security situation
deteriorates further.

Indonesia is a sprawling archipelago of more than 13.000
islands and the government in Jakarta now faces a constant
challenge to keep the country together and stable. Indonesia now
seems to be besieged by a these flashpoints. It is perhaps
against this background that President Megawati Soekarnoputri, at
the Ansor congress opening ceremony last month, urged all sectors
of the society to be aware of the threat of national
disintegration. This is in fact not her first statement on the
disintegration issue.

Sometime in October 2001, Megawati repeatedly warned
Indonesians of the possibility of the country's breakup if ethnic
and religious issues remain unresolved. She even used the former
Yugoslavia as an example and linked Indonesia to the Balkans.

Indonesia's challenges are enormous. How serious is this
threat of disintegration in our country and does Megawati's
statement reflect that she is now up to dealing with the issue of
disintegration more seriously?

Megawati's concerns over the consequences of the destabilized
and warn-torn archipelago has touched on the real sense of the
huge problems Indonesia is now facing. Part of it is injustice.
This is the experiences suffered by many groups in eastern as
well as western parts of Indonesia, and those also experienced by
the minorities.

Such arguments continue to be put forward by those who happen
to be treated indiscriminately by the policies of the central
government. Violence has then become the way to advance justice.
Ambon is a case in point. It is reported that one of the warring
groups in Ambon has been treated unequally by the local
government, causing further violence.

Disintegration is not only about separation. Disintegration
can also mean, among other things, imbalances in central and
local institutions. This balance is necessary to facilitate
development or peace building. There is skepticism that the
government's policy on decentralization will result in a more
stable archipelago because of the strong sentiments of ethnic and
religious elements.

Thus, there was an idea, from the government, to slow the
process of decentralization so that the issues of ethnicity and
religion could not be used by the local elites to boost their
position in many local governments. The concerns are about the
excessive use of ethnic or local symbols and ethnic pride to
support regional autonomy. But in order for us to have a
democratic state and society, we have to decentralize the
government. This is perhaps the proper way to promote justice
provided that the government is wise enough in handling the
ethnic and local symbols sentiments.

Those flashpoints will still be in existence and might move in
more dangerous directions. Stricter but indiscriminate policies
are therefore imperative to start reducing the degree of damage
which could be caused by these flashpoints. But the policies
should not be one that would hinder the democratization process
in the country.

The government of Megawati must resolve what some understood
as "predemocratic problems" as a precondition of democratic life
as they cannot be solved by the normal process of democracy.
Sadly, as we have been witnessing in the past two years, violence
played a major role in their resolution. Democracy is thus a
source of disintegration.

If Megawati means disintegration is the total detachment of
the local and national elements, be it political, economic and
territorial, from the Indonesian unitary state, then the
disintegration takes place both at the micro and macro level of
the state, and this is precisely because there had been no
integration at the level of national society as a whole. In other
words, there had not been a degree of integration needed to
create a self-sustaining community with which people identify,
that is, a nation. Megawati must also realize that Indonesia is
not yet a corrupt free country, a factor that is also responsible
for disintegration.

Megawati's government must take stern policy action against
those who seek to break away from Indonesia and manage those
flashpoints in such a way that would prevent Indonesia from
disintegrating into a "junk nations". This terminology, used by
Christopher Dickey in his article in Newsweek on November 27,
1995 to characterize the falling apart of a country, means "bits
and piece falling away from an old state without quite managing
to form new ones".