'Make love, not war!' in the troubled Aceh

'Make love, not war!' in the troubled Aceh

Aboeprijadi Santoso, Radio Nederland, Amsterdam

An Indonesian artist living in Cologne, Germany, raises
anxiety over problems in his country, the "Aceh-puzzle."

"Why is it that they want to maintain the nation by fighting
against our brothers and sisters?" says Yayak.

Fears have grown that the next round of talks between the
government in Jakarta and the Acehnese rebels GAM (Free Aceh
Movement) in Geneva may sooner or later end up with an escalation
of war.

Already Jakarta hardliners' emergency calls have deepened the
crisis in Aceh. Any escalation would perpetuate what is seen as
New Order's habit of state violence, impoverishment and
sufferings at grass root level. As a result, there is a growing
alienation vis-a-vis state authorities among civil society. Three
examples illustrate this perspective.

It has been argued that Southeast Asian old states actually
mirror a theater. The American anthropologist Clifford Geertz
suggests, all that mattered for such states was not so much the
might and power, but the great cultural and moral superiority
they claimed and displayed for the sake of their own
aggrandizement.

Today it seems just the other way around: It is the might and
power, as exemplified by its influence, geographic scale, and
military might that mark modern nation-states.

To people like Yayak, these state's businesses and symbols are
irrelevant -- "it is human life that matters, isn't it?" he
insists. In a very similar way, the Dutch colonial-state and the
Javanese aristocrats were once seen as oppressive and irrelevant
by the Blora (Central Java)-based Saminist peasants.

Yayak Iskra Ismaya, 46, an imaginative graphic-designer,
painter and folklore singer, painted vigorous images of state
repression and of children. He was forced to leave his hometown
Yogyakarta in 1992 because he had made a calendar of Indonesia's
pro-democratic struggle allegedly humiliating Mr. and Madame
Soeharto.

Yet he keeps his empathy and fighting spirit alive; he had
visited Aceh and its "war theater" in 1989, helped aid agencies
assisting children in Thailand, India and Africa, and now embarks
on a popular education project (School of Free People, Perguruan
Rakyat Merdeka) in Indonesia. He recently introduced his song
Ciliwung Merdeka (Free Ciliwung) calling for solidarity with
Jakarta's marginalized people.

Pipit Rochijat, 53, another example, is a witty ex-student,
who abandoned his study in Berlin, Germany, to resist the
intimidation that the Indonesian military attaches put him
through in the 1980s. A prolific writer, he became well known as
his essay Saya PKI atau non-PKI? (Am I PKI or non-PKI? --
referring to the outlawed Indonesian Communist Party) was
translated and published by Cornell University's periodical
Indonesia in 1985.

Pipit's internationally celebrated essay -- pointing to the
New Order's brutal method and ugly reasoning as he describes the
mid-1960s massacres in East Java's Kediri -- put him in the same
niche as Yayak. He appears to suggest that the state's
obsessions, like with Hitler and Stalin, could easily lead to,
and be used to justify, a human tragedy.

Otto Syamsuddin Ishak, 43, articulates similar views with deep
humanitarian concerns as Yayak and Pipit. A perceptive
sociologist, who studied in Yogyakarta and used to live in Aceh,
he focuses on injustice, repression and people's sufferings; his
books on Tengku Bantaqiah killings and "Jakarta's panic" (Dari
Maaf ke Panik Aceh, From Apologies to Panic over Aceh) should
contribute efforts to understand present-day Aceh.

"The next Geneva meeting should at least agree on methods to
control armed movements of both sides of the conflict that has
victimized the civil society," he urges.

Last year he witnessed the Sept. 11 attack as he crawled in
the dust of Manhattan's streets. "Even in New York, which was not
a conflict area like my homeland Aceh, the security of people is
no longer assured. Not the state, but the common people were
being victimized. Yet, instead of human security, state security
has since acquired a paramount importance; "9/11" has pushed back
the primacy of human rights," he concludes.

The values of Yayak, Pipit, and Otto -- precisely because they
have themselves been victimized by the impact of a brutal state
at home or abroad -- are relevant and reflect concerns on
problems like Aceh and Papua.

To share their concerns is to see the problems from the
victims' perspective. Few in war-torn Aceh, except the security
apparatus members, would ask -- to borrow Pipit's style -- the
silly question "Are you GAM or non-GAM?" The question is
irrelevant since the problem obviously is not the label but the
real injustice and the escalating violence. While the idea of
"independent Aceh" has naturally grown from this context, for
which one cannot blame the locals, it is the state politicians
and the military and the rebels, who were responsible for the
war.

Acehnese, who grew up in the midst of the conflict since the
late-1980s and become pro-independent-minded, should not be
punished and forced to lick and scrap the words "referendum" and
"freedom" from the wall, whilst the dictator, generals and
officers, who were responsible for the atrocities, enjoy absolute
impunity. The Army has in fact lost any legitimacy to be part of
the solution since they have been -- and remain -- part of the
problem for decades.

As a consequence, most Acehnese may by now be sympathetic to
the idea of independence although this may not necessarily imply
active support for the rebels. As both activists and locals in
Aceh told this writer recently, the state will have to deal with
not only GAM, but local independence aspiration.

For once the spirit is out of the bottle, you cannot put it
back; to do so is to kill human beings that would provoke a
greater tragedy. To win hearts and minds becomes increasingly
critical.

Indonesia's experience with East Timor has demonstrated that
its army failed to do just that. According to local human rights
NGO Kontras, South Aceh -- with a concentration of migrants,
reportedly a training ground for Army backed militias, and close
to strong GAM bases in West Aceh -- now has the second-highest
level of violence (after East Aceh). Recent arrests of foreign
observers in that area may trigger Aceh, like East Timor, to be
closed from the outside world. But, as the East Timor case has
taught us, no bloodbaths will remain hidden behind the facade of
peace talks.

Neither (Jakarta's desperate) ultimatum nor war-theater can
restore people's trust. It never did anywhere on earth.
Incidentally, this is what Sri Lanka and the Tamil separatist
rebels have finally realized and agreed to pursue a peace process
despite the enormous gap between them.

By contrast, Indonesia's regional rebellions in the 1950s were
much less threatening as the rebel-officers were disgruntled
corps-fellows without popular support. Unlike today-rebels, they
were seen as part and parcel of the nation rather than a security
problem in a resource-rich part of what is now felt as imposed
unitary state.

Unless, therefore, Jakarta generals want to risk a greater
mayhem or losing Aceh, the one thing they must not do -- and the
politicians should prevent -- is war. "Make love, not war!" said
Yayak.