GAM faces tough job to prove commitment

Aleksius Jemadu, Singapore

The signing of a peace agreement to end intra-state conflict in some ways constitutes a dangerous political gamble. The signatories never know for sure whether future courses of events will turn out according to their expectations.

It has been more than two months into the implementation of the peace agreement between the Indonesian government and the Free Aceh Movement (GAM) and a lot of progress has been made. The granting of amnesty to GAM members and the withdrawal of non- local military and police from Aceh are two examples where the plan is being properly followed.

Despite some small glitches, GAM's disarmament has also run smoothly. The most important achievement is the people of Aceh can enjoy a peace, and the longer this lasts the bigger the chance that societies in Aceh can build up a mutual trust.

However, the sustainability of peace will depend on the level of satisfaction both sides have that their objectives have been met.

GAM, for its part, has made big political sacrifices by abandoning its claim for an independent state and disarming its military forces. The focus of its political struggle is now focused on self-government for Aceh.

But there is a long way to go before that goal can be accomplished. Transforming a military struggle into a political competition in elections requires certain organizational and communication skills.

According to the peace agreement the people of Aceh -- GAM members included -- have the right to nominate candidates for the position of elected officials such as governors, regents and mayors in April 2006. The coming elections will be a test for GAM as a political entity in order to see what level of support it has among the Acehnese voters.

If its candidates do well in those elections and win in most of the districts and mayoralties, then it will have a good prospect for legislative elections in 2009. If GAM's candidates do poorly, then it will substantially reduce its credibility and legitimacy.

Preparing a successful performance in an election normally takes time and requires a sufficient amount of financial resources. On top of that, candidates should begin to approach mass organizations, religious groups and civil society groups in order to mobilize their support.

Most of GAM leaders who will likely contest in the coming local elections are still in Sweden. The Aceh Monitoring Mission has invited them to return to Aceh but many have not gone back citing concerns for their personal security.

The threat might not come from the military -- they are more likely concerned about the activities of the militias. Reports have already surfaced regarding incidents in which militia groups have taken revenge against former GAM members. Indonesian security forces and the AMM must guarantee their safety or the peace deal will face a serious obstacle.

When GAM shadow prime minister Malik Mahmud made an official statement following the signing of the peace agreement, he mentioned "militias" 10 times in his text. This reflects a grave concern among GAM members about their role in Aceh. Malik also made a reference to the tragic events in East Timor after the referendum in 1999.

The more GAM leaders delay their return to Aceh, the less time for them to prepare for the 2006 elections. The candidates from the existing political parties will certainly be more prepared both in terms of organizational structures and financial resources.

Another disadvantageous development for GAM is related to the discourse on the draft of the bill of the governing of Aceh. It is reported that three universities in Aceh University of Syiah Kuala, the State Institute of Islamic Studies Ar-Raniry and the University of Malikusaleh have proposed different drafts for the bill in which the term "province of Nanggroe Aceh Darussalam" is still used. While at the same time a written proposal from GAM uses the term "region of Aceh". While the first term reflects a commitment to the notion of the unitary state, the second term denotes to the concept of self-government.

The political significance of these different discourses is that there is a diversity of opinions in Aceh regarding the law on the governing of Aceh which is so crucial for GAM's political struggle. To make things worse, 11 districts in Aceh aspire to establish two separate provinces. We may conclude that the diversity of political options in Aceh may falsify a theory that the Acehnese would have the same idea about the future form of their governing modalities.

The writer is a Visiting Research Fellow at the Institute of Defense and Strategic Studies (IDSS) Singapore. Ideas expressed here are his own. He can be reached at aljemadu@yahoo.co.uk