Genuine dialog stems from mutual trust

Genuine dialog stems from mutual trust

By Mochtar Buchori

JAKARTA (JP): Gen. Wiranto's offer of dialog with university
students to ease existing political tensions seems to have hit a
snag. No single group of students believes that it is possible at
this moment in time to hold an honest and sincere dialog with the
Armed Forces. Their distrust and suspicion of the Armed Forces
and the entire government apparatus is so deeply entrenched that
it seems impossible to surmount.

This is an unhealthy situation, and very worrying. So much so
that Gen. (ret) Rudini, formerly the minister of home affairs and
Army chief of staff, felt obliged to advise students to accept
the offer. He assured the students that Gen. Wiranto was serious
about the offer and that the proposed dialog was not meant to
stifle or restrict their freedom of expression, but that it was
sincerely intended to accommodate their political aspirations.

On another occasion, Lt. Gen. Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono, Armed
Forces Chief of Sociopolitical Affairs, expressed regret that
students had rejected the offer. He looked upon this snub as a
manifestation of student antipathy toward the Armed Forces. He
assured students that the Armed Forces did not have any bad
intentions or hidden agenda behind the invitation. He too argued
that the proposed dialog was an attempt to include student views
in the political decision making process, not to dampen their
voice.

Will these assurances change student attitudes and perceptions
of the generals, the Armed Forces and the government?

I am afraid not. As far as I can see, the rejection has been
born out of a deep distrust of the government and the Armed
Forces, who are the main instrument of state power. This distrust
has not just come out of nowhere. It has emerged in reaction to
the continuous use of the language of power and violence by the
government and the Armed Forces over many years. It is also a
reaction to the government's tendency to win every argument, even
if it has to resort to dirty tactics, absurd logic, and false
information.

Is it surprising that this kind of situation has created
distrust, suspicion and skepticism among university students and
academics?

Not in my opinion. Anyone who has been trained to respect
facts and rational argument will be repulsed by falsifying of
facts, fabrication of evidence, and the use of rampaging reason
to force an opinion upon others.

The academic community, including students, and the government
bureaucracy, including the Armed Forces, have been using two
different languages. The two have never before met on a level
playing field. How can academics and students be expected to
suddenly drop their suspicions and skepticism, and come to
believe that they will be treated as equals in the proposed
dialog?

True dialog can only be conducted between individuals or
groups of individuals who trust each other. No amount of
assurance can bring about genuine dialog if trust or confidence
is lacking. Without mutual trust, what will ensue is either a
monolog or a mere display of formal politeness. Such an encounter
will not contribute anything toward solving the problems that
exist in real life.

Confidence building is thus a prerequisite to a true dialog.
In my opinion, it is the responsibility of the Armed Forces to
initiate the process of building confidence. This will not be
easy because statements made by Prof. Wiranto Arismunandar, the
new Minister of Education and Culture, have deepened student
distrust of the government. He said on one occasion that
demonstrating students were just "amateur politicians", while
those taking part in hunger strikes should realize that "they are
not Mahatma Gandhi".

He has also demanded that students offer "concrete ideas" for
solving existing problems, instead of just criticizing the
government.

From newspaper reports it was evident that students were very
upset, felt belittled by these remarks and thought the minister
was saying to the world that protesting students were just an
insignificant nuisance.

This enraged them because they feel themselves to be very
significant. They plunged into these political demonstrations not
to become "amateur politicians, but because "professional
politicians" had failed to acknowledge the political aspirations
flourishing in society.

One academic reacted rather cynically to the minister's
suggestion that students offer "concrete ideas", arguing that
this could not be so, since by definition an idea is an abstract
concept. Only after an idea has been put into practice does it
become real or concrete.

Why should responsibility for finding solutions fall to
students? That is the government's job. The government has
created all these problems by making unscrupulous moves which
they knew would have unpleasant consequences.

This argument and counter-argument can be extended ad
infinitum. But such an exercise will not improve the frosty
situation or solve anything. If we are genuinely determined to
find a lasting solution, then a genuine dialog to exchange ideas
for solving our problems collectively is imperative. To make this
happen, confidence building must first take place.

Francis Bacon said that confidence building is the act of
"opening the heart", which can be done only with a "true friend,
to whom you may impart griefs, joys, fears, hopes, suspicions,
counsels, and whatsoever lieth upon the heart to oppress it."

Can the Armed Forces become a "true friend" to the students?
And can the students in time accept the Armed Forces as such?

I think the real question is "How to do this?", not "Can this
be done?"

The writer is an observer of social and cultural affairs.