"Aksi" and Indonesian democracy

"Aksi" and Indonesian democracy

Max Lane, Murdoch WA, Australia

On May 26 The Jakarta Post published two interesting opinion
pieces: Indonesian democracy or 'demo-crazy'? by Ziad Salim and
Complacency: Indonesia's democratic deficit by Adam Tyson. In
some key respects, these two articles presented opposite points
of view.

Salim argued that Indonesian democracy was, in effect, marred
by two much political activity, specifically street
demonstrations while Tyson was arguing that there was too much
complacency. In some ways, however, there is also an overlap in
the two perspectives.

There is little doubt that street demonstrations, called unjuk
rasa in the media but aksi (actions) on the street, have played a
central role in Indonesian politics since the days of the
struggle against Dutch colonialism. In the period of the
nationalist struggle, it was called actie massa and actions like
strikes and mass rallies (vergadering) became a major weapon
against Dutch colonial oppression.

After independence, it was the campaigns of mass
demonstrations against the remnants of Dutch colonialism, in
particular the unjust foreign Debt, that resulted in the Ali
Sastromidjojo government repudiating 85 percent of Indonesia's
foreign debt to Holland. Today's demonstrations against the
foreign debt to American and British banks have not yet reached
the same levels.

Unilateral actions by workers also successfully took control
of Dutch plantations, mines and other companies in the late
1950s, providing a basis for Indonesia to develop its economy
independent of Dutch neo-colonial interests.

When these companies were mismanaged in the late 1950s and
early 1960s by their new managers, usually military officers,
there were again demonstrations demanding retooling (i.e.
dismissal) of these managers.

There were also demonstrations demanding that state
enterprises have management councils where trade unions were
directly represented. By 1965 one third of all such state
enterprises had trade union representation.

In 1964, when new land reform laws passed on parliament were
being thwarted in their implementation, landless peasants also
demonstrated by occupying land due for distribution. In these
latter cases there was unjuk otot (flexing the muscles) when
landowners used the police and militia against the farmers.

One myth is that Sukarno was overthrown by student
demonstrations. Sukarno was overthrown as a result of a slow coup
by Gen. Soeharto. The student demonstrations by anti-Sukarno
students during 1965 and 1966 were used to legitimize the moves
made by Soeharto.

They were very different than the street demonstrations in
1997 and 1998 that forced President Soeharto out of power. In
1965-1966, the students were backed by the Army who had arrested
or killed members of the much larger student organizations that
supported Sukarno. Anti-Sukarno students went out onto the
streets; while pro-Sukarno students went into goal or were
buried. In 1997 and 1998, students were defying the Army, not
being supported by it.

In fact, the coming to power of Soeharto in 1965 saw a
concerted attempt to end all aksi: Depoliticisation and the
floating mass were the orders of the day. But Soeharto was not
able to end all aksi. because (the anti-Sukarno) students had
been allies of Soeharto in 1965 and 1966, the new government felt
it necessary to allow some extra freedom on the campuses. Once
the 1966 generation had left the campuses and a new generation
was active, demonstrations began again, this time mainly against
corruption. By 1973/1974, demonstrations were again a daily
affair.

From 1978 until 1988, demonstrations were relatively
infrequent. But in 1989, students and peasants began
demonstrating together, mainly over issues of land dispossession.
A whole new generation of aksi and unjuk rasa began. During the
1990s, factory workers joined the process, as exemplified by the
protest strikes at factories like Gajah Tunggal and Great River.
In fact, I think Salim is underestimating the extent to which
ordinary people joined aksi.

A review of the Indonesian press during the period points to
an increasing participation by factory workers, office workers,
fishermen, farmers, students, teachers and even doctors, all
sectors, in aksi and unjuk rasa. Most of these, though not all,
were small and around immediate issues, but a new generalized
process had begun.

This process began a new stage in June 1996 when about forty
thousand people demonstrated on a march to gambit station in
Jakarta protesting the coup against Megawati Soekarnoputri in the
Indonesian Democratic Party.

As with many demonstrations before, the Army was used against
the demonstration. Political unjuk rasa then multiplied during
1996 and 1997, including during the 1997 election campaign. The
ground was being laid for what was to happen in early 1998.

Aksi had gone from being only about local and specific issues
but about national political questions. Soon there were aksi
around the country on Indonesia's campuses demanding the
resignation of Soeharto after it was seen that his only response
to the socio-economic crisis after 1997 was to appoint even
closer cronies, even his own daughter, into his cabinet. It was
then that the aksi momentum increased leading to the occupation
of the parliament building in Jakarta and even bigger
demonstrations in some other cities. Soeharto fell and the era of
reformasi began.

So it was unjuk rasa and aksi that has given Indonesia the
freedoms it has today. Will they continue to play such a positive
role or are they becoming counter-productive as argued by Salim?

The extent to which they occur in the form of protests is
directly dependent on whether socio-economic sand cultural
conditions are improving as a result of government policy, or
getting worse.

This is a simplistic explanation, but accurate all the same.
Will the next government have a program that can reverse the
decline in conditions for the majority of Indonesians?

Answer that question and you have answered the question about
the role of aksi.

The writer is Visiting Fellow of Asia Research Centre at
Murdoch University.