Julia is not just a feminist and femme fatale

By Stevie Emilia

JAKARTA (JP): She is known as a woman activist and feminist. But Julia Indiati Suryakusuma is certainly more than just that.

Considered herself as an "accidental activist" -- since she only involved in five or six street protests in her entire life -- Julia admits that she is a feminist.

"I say jokingly, if I am to be labeled a feminist, it has to be 'feminist and femme fatale', which catches people by surprise because they see it as being contradictory and I love contradictions," said Julia.

She received her master's degree at the Institute of Social Studies in the Hague with her thesis titled State Ibuism: The Social Construction of Womanhood in the Indonesian New Order, which was about the government-sponsored organization of civil servants' wives, Dharma Wanita. Julia said she was labeled a feminist because she was outspoken and provocative -- and not only on feminist issues -- long before people dared to speak out as they do now.

"I abhor hypocrisy and deceit, and feel that an important mission in my life (not just my work), is to unveil the truth. I say things as they are, which often shocks people. Sometimes I do it deliberately, to shake people up, because I think many people need shaking up. They live with so many constructed 'truths' imposed on them that they don't really know who they are anymore...," Julia said.

Personally, she found feminism a useful way to look at the world. It made people see imbalances and injustices as well as power relationships not only between men and women, but also between people and the state, groups and nations.

But Julia considers herself more a social scientist and a writer, a skill she nurtured since she was 18 years old through her debut in the field of literary criticism, which won her some writing contests.

"For me, writing is my activism... My ultimate aim is to raise people's awareness... I write to inform and hopefully to enlighten, but also to debunk and demystify. You could say what I do is called 'passionate scholarship', which is socially engaged in nature."

Julia, who used to call herself an anarchist due to her rebellious nature, has been linked with various groups, such as the Voices of Concerned Mothers and the Women's Coalition for Justice and Democracy, which she helped found. But she has never stayed in an organization for long.

"I find in that way I keep in a 'honeymoon' and 'romance' stage, which is more productive and creative," said the mother of 24-year-old Aditya Priyawardhana and wife of actor-director Ami Priyono. Her husband suffered a mild stroke last March but is now improving.

Julia's life is far from being simple. In the pursuit of education, she had to make difficult decisions, such as leaving her then 10-month-old boy to study abroad.

"It was not an easy decision, but it turned out to be the right one. We are now the best of friends. Before I was his mother and mentor, but now he's become my advisor and guardian angel as well. I don't think I could ask for a more wonderful son... Sometimes I wonder what have I done to deserve him, but perhaps I did do something good after all," Julia said.

In 1997, she had breast cancer and it took her a year to heal herself. She did so successfully by using natural and traditional methods, including a five-week raw food diet to detoxify her system and natural medication. She also studied enery healing techniques such as Qigong and Reiki, performed meditation, prayed and have faith.

"I knew somehow I would get well and that this was just a trial for me to go through, to make me stronger...," Julia said.

As the daughter of retired diplomat Iman Suryakusuma and Karlina Karnasutisna, a former teacher, strength has a profound influence on her life and what she became.

Julia, who was conceived in Penang, Malaysia, was born in New Delhi, India on July 19, 1954. She sampled different lifestyles in countries where her father was assigned in places such as London, Hungary, Czechoslovakia, Italy and Germany.

"My childhood background made me an internationalist, which I consider myself to be, and does not detract at all from my love of this country and people and, in fact, enhances it," said Julia.

But is she satisfied?

"I am happy with my achievements, but I never feel satisfied. There is always more to do and to learn, and in this way, I am a perpetual student... Simply put, I want to continue to learn, and it is in this way that I would like to produce knowledge. I'd also like to publish the work I have done in the course of my career...," said the organizer of the International Women's Film Festival in 1996, the first event of its kind, which was held on International Women's Day.

First, she plans to write more about her personal life. But she has to wait since she was working on the Indonesia Political Parties Almanac (API), which was released prior to the June 7 general election and contains a directory of profiles of 141 then registered political parties at the Ministry of Justice, 10 essays and an appendix containing the election's regulations. The book was made by an independent team supported by 13 nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), such as the Women's Solidarity, Indonesian Forum for Environment, Kalyanamitra, Independent Election Monitoring Committee and the Institute for Policy Research and Advocacy.

Here are some excerpts of an e-mail interview with her:

Question: What were the reasons behind the making of API?

Answer: API was born and created within the context of the crisis. The crisis had to happen after decades of oppression, exploitation and being bamboozled by all those corrupt, power- crazed officials. It is Indonesia's way of healing from an illness that lasted for too long. Suddenly, all these parties, hundreds of them, were born -- an abrupt explosion and reaction to the artificially manipulated three-party system which paralyzed our political system and minds. And suddenly, everybody was hankering for democracy and reform. That is all well and fine, but how? Everybody was confused.

API was a way to try to systematically untangle the threads of confusion and chaos by providing basic information on the parties which were potential choices for Indonesia's future. We had to embark on political education, and for that we needed tools, not just information, but knowledge and new paradigms. I wanted to create a tool which provided all these things, which were the prerequisites for true change, a change toward democracy. The aim was to create a tool for political education, not just for the people, but also for the parties; a comprehensive reference to the political actors and processes during this reform period as well as raising issues crucial to Indonesia's transformation.

Political education -- and changing people's mind-sets -- takes place over a long period of time. But from the beginning I had a long-term vision for API. There is a tendency for people to want immediate results, immediate information and immediate power instead of a step-by-step creation of political knowledge, a political society and system which truly serves the people. I hope that API will contribute to that aim.

Q: Is it going to be published annually?

A: We plan to publish API annually as a political review journal.

Next year's edition will contain an evaluation of not just the performances of the parties, but also various aspects of the elections, such as the regulations and their implementation, the various election-related bodies, its organization, the violations, the vote counting, the results and the performance of the election monitoring.

API will also continue to profile the most important parties and raise issues that should be brought up and dealt with by parties and the government.

Q: You said in your essay in API that one way to deal with the country's structural violence was to turn to anarchy. Can you explain your opinion on the matter?

A: Structural violence is the systematic use of violence by the state through their policies. Policies which impoverish the people and which confront the interest of the poor majority with the elite minority. They do so by: building infrastructure and facilities that favor the rich, necessitate the forced removal and eviction of people from their land in the name of development, destroying the environment, killing the diversity of local cultures as well as biodiversity, using women as a means of production of children, services, industry, to produce foreign exchange without any form of protection or adequate compensation in return, giving priority to the industrial sector rather than local food production, destroying family life through development policies that are urban-oriented, sacrificing traditional village life, using religion to divide people, repressing creativity and stifling freedom of expression.

My use of the term anarchy here is of antiauthority. We have had to suffer an extremely authoritarian state for over 30 years. So by stating anarchy, I mean simply a reduction of state power and a return of sovereignty to people. I used the term anarchy to also be provocative, because I feel that by provoking people, it makes them think. It doesn't always work. Sometimes it just makes them angry or confused!

Q: So you see a need to reduce the power of the state to stop violence?

A: Absolutely. It's possible if we change the system and the basic principles of state as embodied in the Constitution. The present Constitution should be at least amended, if not changed.

The rest goes back to API's aims, which is to help empower civil society by providing information and knowledge which will enable people to participate in state affairs and be involved in decisions concerning their lives. Education, especially political education, is crucial here.

Q: With that opinion, what do you think of the present level of violence in the country now? Any differences with the New Order rule?

A: It's tragically still very high, as we can witness on a daily basis, because there has been no fundamental change in the way problems are dealt with. The approach is still confrontational and power-oriented.

To be quite honest, no, I don't think the present administration is any different from the New Order government. Are we all blind? Come on, it's still the same old people playing the same old games under a different name!

However, the momentum and desire for change and the possibilities are there. But the risk of the old forces returning, not that they ever went away, is still great.

Q: What kinds of violence do you see? And what does it show you?

A: All kinds of it, from state violence, not just in the form of military, physical violence, but an abrogation of people's civil rights in general, to emotional violence, which can be passive in nature but is still very destructive anyway. It shows that we are an immature, ignorant and undemocratic people unable to accept differences and reconcile them in peaceful, productive and creative ways. We've got a long way to go.

Q: So it seems like violence has become an acceptable solution here?

A: Yes, people have been cultured to believe that violence is a way to solve differences of opinions. Instead it sharpens and exacerbates them, as we know. It's a vicious circle, one that has to be stopped immediately. We are still very much a paternalistic, feudalistic and hierarchical society, where people look up to leaders, but there is no leadership. Do we choose the Indian or Singaporean model? Neither are really savorable. It's really problematic.

Q: What are the causes of violence? Are they indicating something to you?

A: Injustice, fear, ignorance. Yes, it indicates we are in trouble and we have to do something about it before we annihilate ourselves!

Q: Who is responsible behind the violence?

A: All of us. But yes, the state, not just the government or military. Concerning the latter, you expect them to be violent anyway and trained to be killing machines. I say all of us, because we need to recognize the violence within ourselves and that there is a tendency to resort to violence, even so-called reform groups.

Q: What is a possible reaction toward violence?

A: Most of the time, it is more violence. That's what we have been taught. Violence begets more violence, everyone knows that.

Q: What should we do then?

A: First of all, we have to believe that there are alternative ways and that peace is the only option to be able to maintain Indonesia's integrity to be one, which is at present seriously threatened.