Good governance is a must

By Aleksius Jemadu

BANDUNG (JP): Oct. 28 is always a day for reflection. In 1928, seventy years ago today, Indonesian youths from different ethnic and religious backgrounds gathered in Jakarta and proclaimed that they belonged to the same nation and motherland with one national language. That was the birth of Indonesian nationalism and an important step toward independence, which eventually came on Aug. 17, 1945, when Indonesia finally shook off its colonial shackles.

As a political force, nationalism remains as important as ever. It is supposed to revitalize our willingness to live together as a nation. Nationalism can be viewed as the soul of a nation, without which the common goals of its members could never be achieved. Political realists regard it as an important element in national power.

It is important to note that nationalism is confronted with different challenges from time to time. During the colonial period, nationalism was needed to fight against the colonial power. Today Indonesian nationalism no longer faces the threat of colonialism, but new challenges have taken the place of this old adversary.

There are at least two sources of challenges: domestic and international.

The two are closely related. Along with the process of political reform, more and more Indonesian regions, especially those with abundant natural resources like Aceh, Irian Jaya, East Kalimantan and Riau, have voiced their dissatisfaction with the way the central government has exploited their natural resources.

As the New Order government pushed the national economy out into the global market, these regions appear to have suffered rather than benefited from the process.

People of East Kalimantan could legitimately ask: How much benefit (if at all) they have received from almost three decades of exploitation of their forests? Were the people of Irian Jaya thoroughly consulted when the central government "sold out" their huge stock of copper and gold? Other regions could also raise similar questions regarding their natural resources.

Another domestic challenge to nationalism has been posed by the systemic violation of human rights during Soeharto's rule, a problem to which the present government seems to be incapable of offering a comprehensive solution. Apologies made by the government, no matter how sincere they are, will never be enough to heal the deep wounds caused by such repression.

Real and consistent action is needed to allow a comprehensive national reconciliation. Otherwise we will only be sowing the seeds of bitterness and hatred among the victims.

From a global perspective we tend to live in an increasingly unequal and unjust world. Many people wonder why such inequality has become worse while nations throughout the world have enthusiastically embrace the principles of political and economic liberalism. As Nancy Birdsell (Foreign Policy, Summer, 1998) succinctly put it: "Ironically, inequality is growing at a time when the triumph of democracy and open markets was supposed to usher in a new age of freedom and opportunity".

The function of global financial institutions seem to be to perpetuate the domination of rich nations at the expense of poor people in developing countries. Thus, globalization is not a neutral process. It is biased against the basic rights of poor people in developing countries. The way the International Monetary Fund (IMF) has set about curing the economic crisis in Indonesia, for instance, has unnecessarily forced millions of people into a life under the poverty line.

From a moral point of view people might ask why the poor have had to pay such a huge human price for a crisis that others (mostly the rich) created?

Rajiv Lall (Far Eastern Economic Review, Sept. 17, 1998) is certainly right when he says: "Those who typically gained the most in the boom years are not usually the same as those who lose the most in the bust -- the distributional consequences of adjustments can be socially destabilizing".

If inequality continues to prevail in economic life then people will tend to be indifferent to their nation. As a result, spontaneous nationalism will not exist, no matter how hard the government tries to encourage it.

Nationalism must be built on a strong foundation. As a subjective feeling, nationalism has to serve human interests. For instance, people love to be a part of a nation because they believe that the nation will improve their economic welfare and security.

When nationalism declines it is the government which has the main responsibility of reactivating it. Good governance capable of protecting citizens from social and economic injustices caused by domestic and global structures is the key to revitalizing nationalism.

Without good governance nationalism is absurd and meaningless. You don't need to be a scholar to understand such a simple truth.

The writer is the head of the school of international relations at the University of Parahyangan in Bandung and a researcher at the Parahyangan Center for International Studies (PACIS) at the same university.