It's up to Indonesians to improve themselves

It's up to Indonesians to improve themselves

Sayidiman Suryohadiprojo, Former Governor, National Resilience
Institute (Lemhanas), Jakarta

It is clear that Indonesia as a nation state is the biggest
loser in the Bali tragedy. It all happened because of the
ineffectiveness of the security services who were not able to
detect or prevent the tragedy. Thereafter, the security services
have been slow to come up with credible proof and evidence of the
initiators and the actors in the bombing, leading to a lot of
speculation over the whole affair.

Many in the West, in particular in the U.S. and Australia,
have expressed their astonishment about these speculations and
wonder why Indonesia does not just accuse "Arab terrorism" or al
Qaeda operatives.

For Indonesians, it has not been easy to accept such
accusations. In recent years, trouble has not only come from
Muslim radicals. There has also been the bad experience of
western intervention for a long time, as documented by the late
Indonesianist George M. Kahin in Subversion as Foreign Policy
regarding the U.S. policy in Indonesia. The threat of danger has
come from so many corners.

Speculation, including from the country's many secular
nationalists and moderate Muslims, will continue unless and until
our security services come up with credible evidence of the
culprits.

People in the West should also understand that Muslim
Indonesians look at the U.S.-led war on terrorism as a U.S.
effort to enhance its national interests. If it is a real war
against terrorism, why aren't targets expanded beyond al-Qaeda,
Osama bin Laden and Taliban? What about Israeli terrorism against
the Palestinian people or Basque terrorism in Spain?

Indonesians have fought terrorism since the Dutch colonial
times; it was a normal procedure of the Dutch colonial forces. A
good example is the mass-murder of civilians in Sulawesi by Dutch
captain Raymond Westerling and his troops. Dutch forces also
burned, tortured and killed civilians when they could not find
Indonesian guerrillas.

But why are those acts and also the atomic bombs on Nagasaki
and Hiroshima in 1945 never mentioned as violating humanitarian
values? Or for that matter, the bombing of North Vietnam during
the Vietnam War. And not long ago the U.S. air attacks against
Afghanistan that killed many people who were not members of the
Taliban or al-Qaeda. Are these all "normal" as part of war? If
so, why are nations that are not siding with the U.S., always
punished if they are considered to have violated humanitarian
values, even if their actions caused less death and suffering?

A nation must be strong to get the respect of other nations --
or side with the U.S.

Indonesia has traditionally adhered to an independent foreign
policy, having friendly relations with other nations but not
siding with them, including the U.S. Therefore, Indonesia must be
strong economically and militarily to be regarded as equals by
other nations. Obviously, the weak condition of Indonesia today
is a splendid opportunity to treat it with disdain, especially by
Australia. An article in the Australian Financial Review of Oct.
19, 2002 by Brian Toohey said it very clearly: "Crafting a
response to the Bali atrocity would be much simpler if the
Indonesian government was culpable, even in a peripheral way,
like the Taliban was in the attack on New York's World Trade
Center last year."

In other words, Indonesia could be easily punished with a
military attack that would finish it as a nation state. Reports
of an Australian intelligence center setting up an office here
reminds us how weak we are and how our sovereignty no longer
counts.

But it depends on Indonesians themselves whether they are
respected or not. If they can strengthen the effectiveness of
their government, Indonesia will definitely regain a respected
position in the international community. The nation needs a
government that can improve the economy and security, including
the armed forces, the police and the intelligence services. The
big question is how to achieve that with the present political
system, which gives little opportunity to develop the leadership
required to establish a strong and effective government.