Government must act on military businesses

Government must act on military businesses

Under an increasingly tight budget, would a trust fund, as
mentioned on Tuesday by Army Chief of Staff Gen. Tyasno Sudarto,
be appropriate to improve soldiers' welfare? Following is an
excerpt of an interview on the subject with political researcher
Ikrar Nusa Bhakti of the Indonesian Institute of Sciences.

Question: Army Chief of Staff Gen. Tyasno Sudarto said
internal reforms in the military would allow the Army to set up
trust funds to improve the welfare of its personnel. Your
comments?

Answer: We must study the statement carefully. There's a
belief among the military that a soldier is allowed to do
business beyond the official duty to earn extra income for the
family. In the context of military businesses, (the statement)
could mean that the military is allowed to engage in business.

We have to question whether it is true that the government is
unable to fund the military's equipment, operations and
exercises. If the government really does not have enough funds,
the real budget must be disclosed.

Q: What is the problem with this disclosure?

A: Since the 1990s, there have been questions raised by some
groups in the United States about the military's real budget
here. In their opinion, the funds (for Indonesia) from the World
Bank in the 1980s were equivalent to the military's funds from
the state budget, meaning that the U.S. indirectly supported any
operations which abused human rights.

Some have presumed that the funds for the military in the
state budget were only 25 percent or 50 percent of their real
budget. The remainder was presumed to have come from various
military foundations dealing with many businesses owned by
military cooperatives.

Q: Do you think the government is able to fund the military?

A: Not 100 percent ... (so) I'm not entirely opposed to their
businesses. The problem is whether there has been an
international or public auditor which examines the cash flow in
the military's foundations and enterprises related to the
military, especially the Army.

Q: Are military budgets a secret in many countries?

A: Most countries never wholly disclose this. It's sensitive,
especially when it relates to intelligence or overseas
operations. There's a kind of secrecy. In some countries which
deal with overseas operations, only the prime minister, state
treasurer, foreign minister and defense minister have the
details.

But Indonesia is quite different. We don't send the military
on overseas operations as Indonesia hardly has regional and
international political interests (which need the military). If
there's something very secret, such as operations relating to
national integrity, (the budget) is kept a secret.

Q: Does this mean that the country's military budget is a
mystery?

A: I am not sure if the President knows the exact budget. The
defense minister and military chief may also have no idea. It's
because the military in Indonesia does not have one line of
command.

Observe that the Army's Special Force (Kopassus), the Army
Strategic Reserves Command (Kostrad) and the Intelligence Unit
can arrange funds from anywhere for their own operations by
themselves.

Who can disclose the real budget -- official and unofficial --
for operations in Aceh? Who can tell which group took part in the
operations, in addition to the Free Aceh Movement (GAM) and the
Indonesian Military (TNI)? ... (The involvement) could be a
policy from an institution, or from an individual because of
jealousy toward other units.

Q: So very little is in the open...

A: Yes. We can calculate the amount of (military funds for)
welfare, but not for operations. We'll never know the real
financial data from the military's foundations. A student of mine
is researching the foundations, which shows that a lot of cash
rushes easily to top ranking officers but only a small amount to
the lower ranks. This is so unfair.

Q: What should be done with the military's businesses when TNI
returns to its defense function?

A: The government must decide. China and Thailand are examples;
the governments have taken over various assets from the military
businesses. It's not a purchase as the assets belong to the
country. The government can arrange a kind of compensation, such
as extending a payment in the form of a trust fund or eternal
funds for soldiers' welfare.

Q: What is the specific problem of funding soldier's welfare?

A: In Indonesia, the military does not mean soldiers for the
state but also backers for some segments in the country. Say that
the garrison in Jakarta is funded by particular Chinese-
Indonesian businessmen. Many soldiers become undisciplined after
realizing their superiors are corrupt.

Q: So lack of welfare is not the main factor of indiscipline.

A: Far from it. Many thefts by military officers are the best
examples. Many high ranking officers are involved in bigger
cases. Just investigate fuel smuggling. It's a game with the
(business people) in Singapore, not only in Indonesia. I wonder
why the minister of mines and energy (former military officer
Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono) has not clarified the case before the
House of Representatives.

Q: How do you see the relationship nowadays between President
Abdurrahman Wahid (Gus Dur) and the military?

A: Gus Dur said recently that he didn't want to intervene in
personnel appointments in the military. He reportedly said he
would just ask the chiefs of staff for some positions. This means
he will be able to assign someone he likes below the military
chief, to which his prerogative as president does not extend.

This will upset the merit system and will cause favoritism.
Then it won't be any different from practices under (former
presidents) Soeharto and B.J. Habibie. (I. Christianto)