Jingoism rises to the fore over East Timor

After a reluctant call for United Nations peacekeepers to come to East Timor, Indonesia now seeks to prevent certain countries from taking part in the operation. Political analyst J. Soedjati Djiwandono calls this maneuver "nationalistic jingoism".

JAKARTA (JP): I hate to say, "I told you so." We as a nation should not look back, but face the troubles at hand with honesty, sincerity and good will. The government's decision to seek international assistance by asking the United Nations to send a peacekeeping force to East Timor is the best and most appropriate move given the circumstances. Like it or not, both the police and military have failed, putting it bluntly, to maintain security, law and order in East Timor.

That should surprise no one, considering that from the very beginning their impartiality has been in question. The explanation that military personnel face a "psychological obstacle" in cracking down on pro-Jakarta militias is an unacceptable excuse. Rampaging prointegration militias were created, armed and controlled by the military, which could easily have disarmed them and ended their brutality.

It does not seem inconceivable that the creation of the militias, with all its consequences, was a way of pacifying veterans of the East Timor campaign and the children and families of those who lost their lives fighting for East Timor's integration into Indonesia, who understandably but unjustifiably resent the result of the self-determination referendum. I hope this is not true, for such a policy, at the cost of innocent lives and the suffering of thousands of others, would be morally abominable and therefore totally unacceptable.

We can consider the American experience in comparison. Thousands of American soldiers died in Vietnam, yet the United States simply abandoned the Vietnam War because the American people were disgusted with it. They refused to continue to support what they saw as an immoral war. They learned the right lesson.

It is pointless to place blame on any particular leader, government or nation for past mistakes. History is a jigsaw puzzle, formed by the complex interaction of innumerable factors and therefore never fully revealed or understood.

Did not most, if not all of us, for example, in one way or another support Soeharto's New Order regime -- almost without reserve -- and the dual function of the military, as well as the integration of East Timor? The point is that it has been a learning process for all of us. It is just that some of us learn the right lessons while others the wrong.

Yet, sadly, this point has been sorely missed by our military and political elite, particularly certain members of the House of Representatives and political parties. Some of these people have insisted, for example, that the UN peacekeeping operation in East Timor "seriously consider the self-respect of the Indonesian nation" and not involve Australia.

One reason given for such calls is that the government and the Indonesian Military (TNI) cannot ignore public sentiment, which does not welcome Australia's "participation".

Some of the political elite have also said that Australia, New Zealand, Portugal, Canada and the United States must be excluded from the peacekeeping force on the trumped-up accusation that they "have political interests" and are therefore not neutral, as if the Indonesian military or police were. If these countries' political interests relate to the protection of human lives and human rights, what is wrong with having political interests?

Whatever the case, the Indonesian nation and the public should not be exploited for the misplaced nationalism and jingoism of the military and political elite, which are simply excuses for the misdeeds and wrongdoings in their own ranks. As events during the current crisis have shown, many among these very people have damaged our nation's integrity, pride, self-respect and self- confidence by sowing discord and violence in society through the exploitation of any and all sentiments.

It is ridiculous for these politicians to accuse certain countries of "having no shame" in interfering in our domestic affairs, when they have shamed Indonesians with their behavior in the political scene, wrangling and jostling for positions in the postelection power structure rather than focusing on reform. It also misses the issue to accuse other countries of encroaching on Indonesia's sovereignty over East Timor, when at the heart of the matter is the fact that the international community has always questioned the country's sovereignty over the territory.

For once, President Habibie is correct when he says he will leave it entirely up to the UN Security Council to determine the makeup of the peacekeeping force. He was right in saying that Indonesia was not at war with anyone, and that, as quoted in this paper, "We're on friendly terms with everyone". There is one catch, however. The cooperation between the UN peacekeeping force and the Indonesian Military must not become another bone of contention between Indonesia and the international community as represented by the UN.

One would hope that Habibie would maintain this position. It would make up for his mistakes in first coming up with his East Timor policy. The problem seems to be, particularly as far as the issue of East Timor is concerned, that Habibie is not always the one calling the shots. Whatever the case, however, success in restoring security, law and order to East Timor with the assistance of the UN peacekeeping force would help restore the image, reputation, influence and authority of the Indonesian Military and government.