Government's role in interethnic relations

Government's role in interethnic relations

By Aleksius Jemadu

BANDUNG (JP): Recently the Center for Information and
Development Studies (CIDES) and Republika daily held a seminar on
the relationship between Indonesian ethnic groups.

The seminar focused on the relations between wealthy
Indonesians of Chinese origin, who are dominant in economic
activities, on one side, and the relatively poor indigenous on
the other (The Jakarta Post,Oct. 29).

Ideas coming up in the seminar included the need for big
businesses to cooperate with small and medium entrepreneurs both
indigenous and non-indigenous. Prominent businessman Sofjan
Wanandi, who is of Chinese descent, supported this idea and
agreed with a recent statement by former home affairs minister
Rudini who raised concerns over the dichotomy of the two groups.

Rudini said a week earlier that Indonesia needed to own up the
problem of the precarious relationship between the indigenous and
nonindigenous people, and find a solution to it before it led to
national disintegration.

The fact that some nonindigenous business tycoons have managed
to build huge business empires cannot be separated from the acts
of "benevolence" from some government bureaucrats who have
provided them with facilities and privileges on a quid pro quo
basis.

Many bureaucrats have formed an alliance with the
nonindigenous in order to enlarge their sources of revenue.
Unfortunately, such a collaboration does more harm than benefit
to the public interest.

To some extent we can say that the dominance of the
nonindigenous in local economies would not have been made
possible without the tacit endorsement by some government
bureaucrats.

Therefore, I would agree with Sofjan Wanandi who suggested
that the government should make a strong commitment to fairly
implement the law if we choose to protect the small, medium-scale
enterprises and cooperatives (The Jakarta Post Nov. 5, 1997). It
is the government's responsibility to ensure a just and fair
distribution of development resources.

From an ideological point of view, all ethnic groups should be
treated equally. However, there are also clear reasons for
differences in treatment. The economic capacity of the
nonindigenous is far greater than that of the indigenous.

Moreover, the former can afford a better standard of living,
while most indigenous still have to struggle for their basic
needs. These are also relevant differences which can be used to
justify the government's different treatment of the two groups.

The government has actually tried to narrow the economic gap
between the two ethnic groups. Unfortunately, the government
approach has mainly focused on the benevolence of the
nonindigenous to perform acts of charity.

For instance, business tycoons are "obliged" to set aside a
certain percentage of their profit as financial assistance for
small businesspeople. Such an ad hoc solution can never be
effective in eliminating the economic gap.

Structural reforms in the government's economic policies and
bureaucratic behavior are needed so that more economic
opportunities can be made available for small indigenous
businesses.

If we are really sincere in the effort to develop business
partnerships or networks between conglomerates and small
businesses, we can learn a lot from Japan. According to Francis
Fukuyama, Japan has the greatest degree of spontaneous
sociability among contemporary societies.

It is at the top of the list of high-trust societies. Keiretsu
networks in Japan consist of nominally separate organizations
which share capital, technology and personnel in ways not opened
to firms outside the network. It is these networks which have
made Japanese corporations more efficient than American ones.

Toyota, one of Japan's largest conglomerates, is the lead
company in a so-called vertical keiretsu. It performs only design
and final assembly functions. It is, however, linked with
hundreds of independent subcontractors and parts suppliers in an
informal but durable network.

Through its keiretsu partners, Toyota is able in effect to
establish the scale economies in design, manufacturing and
marketing of an organization.

Fukuyama argued that mutual trust among fellow citizens is a
key to a nation's economic prosperity. Only societies with a high
degree of social trust will be able to create the kind of
flexible, large scale business organizations that are needed for
successful competition in the emerging global market.

If we apply Fukuyama's idea to the general situation in our
business sector here, we would see the scarcity of mutual trust
among our businesspeople. A sharp dichotomy between indigenous
and nonindigenous with all its social and economic implications
is just an example of how difficult it is to unite the private
sector.

The fact that a partnership program between big conglomerates
and small businesses is unworkable shows another indication of a
lack of spontaneous business cooperation.

It is high time now for the government to do something to
encourage more spontaneous business cooperation and networks
among businesspeople so that it can produce synergy in facing
global challenges.

This can only be done if the government succeeds in increasing
the business capacity of the indigenous. Business partnerships
between nonindigenous and indigenous businesspeople can only be
sustainable if it is based on a recognized independence instead
of a half-hearted benevolence.

Interethnic conflict will only result in a weaker
international competitiveness of the nation as a whole.

Wouldn't that be a setback for us all?

The writer is a lecturer at the school of Social and Political
Sciences of the Catholic University of Parahyangan, Bandung. He
holds a Ph.D in social sciences from KU Leuven, Belgium.