Military professionalism

In the current climate of uncertainty and confusion, the assurance given last week by Indonesian Army Chief of Staff Gen. Endriartono Sutarto that the Army would refrain from ever forcefully taking power, effectively puts an end to fears of a military coup d'etat at any time in the near future.

As has been widely reported in the media, that decision was made during a meeting held at Army Headquarters last Friday attended by 55 Army generals currently holding positions in the military, the Ministry of Defense or serving several other functions.

Another major decision worth noting is that the Army will not interfere in the current burning issue of presidential succession, or in replacement of the existing constitutional mechanism. This means that the Army will leave the present controversy regarding the impeachment or replacement of President Abdurrahman Wahid to legislators in the People's Consultative Assembly (MPR) to decide.

It may also be worth noting that the meeting last week was held in response to an earlier statement by Indonesian Military (TNI) Commander Adm. Widodo that the TNI would no longer involve itself in day-to-day politics, instead adopting a purely militarist role as defender of the country.

Those who are familiar with the history of TNI will not fail to recognize the significance of the decision. Throughout much of Indonesia's rather brief history as an independent country, the Indonesian military has insisted on existing with a "dual function" by serving the nation as defenders in times of danger, as well as a sociopolitical force to ensure effective governance and protect the nation's stability.

For decades the TNI has laid claim to such a privileged position, based on the argument that it was born a people's army defending the country against the threat of a return to Dutch colonial rule, while effectively administering territories over which the civilian administration of the Republic of Indonesia had no control.

The dual function concept which finally delivered the military with the all-powerful role of running the country, as most Indonesians are familiar with during the New Order administration of president Soeharto, however, can be traced back to the late 1950s, after then-president Sukarno launched his "guided democracy" system of governance.

To be fair, the dual function concept brought many benefits for Indonesia. For one thing, it ensured stability, which is a major precondition for economic development. On the other hand, the concept made the military difficult to control -- which in the longer term proved to be damaging to the nation.

One legacy which the military's dual function of the past decades has left is the proliferation of military businesses. These businesses have been described by some observers as constituting the biggest and most powerful conglomerate in the country, remaining difficult to control until this day.

A less obvious, but no less damaging, effect of the military's dual function is the limitation of public liberties, which in the short term may have a stabilizing effect on the country, but in the longer term suppresses creativity and leads to harmful social disparities.

Obviously, a strong military is needed, especially in a country such as Indonesia with its archipelagic geography and immense diversity. That strength, however, must be accompanied by a high standard of professionalism.

In the current situation it is difficult to say that the goal of military professionalism has been achieved. The apparent inaction which the police and military have been displaying during various incidents of unrest, including the recent conflict in Central Kalimantan, tend to confirm such doubts.

It is nevertheless heartening to see that the TNI appears to have begun to show a degree of professionalism by disassociating itself from day-to-day politics. It is a stance deserving support from the government, legislature and indeed the whole of the nation. The TNI should be allocated the necessary means to develop into a force capable of not merely defending the nation against external dangers, but hopefully of also preventing the nation from breaking up through the use of firm but humane measures.