GAM faces tough job to prove commitment

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