On ethnic Chinese again

On ethnic Chinese again

On Nov. 16, Masli Arman accused me of declaring "... through
The Jakarta Post last month that the Chinese in Indonesia were
not really a minority but the third largest ethnic group in the
country (after the Javanese and Sundanese), ..." He later
displayed his knowledge to show that the Chinese only constituted
2.3 percent in 1930 and came to the conclusion that at the
moment, the Chinese only form at the most 3 percent of the
Indonesian population, not between 3 percent and 4 percent as
claimed by me. He further wrote that "... although the error
would be relatively small and tolerable. What is less tolerable
is Leo Suryadinata's tendentious claim that the Chinese are not a
minority but the third largest ethnic group in Indonesia, instead
of the eighth ..." Then he asked me to "... cease from repeating
the preposterous claim in the future."

First of all, I have to state here that I did not claim that
the Chinese are the third largest ethnic group in Indonesia, and
I did not make any declaration through the Post. The report was
derived from my paper presentation. On Oct. 26, I was invited by
the University of Indonesia, my alma mater, to participate in a
symposium on Ethnic Chinese as an Indonesian Minority (in Bahasa
Indonesia). I presented a paper on the State and the Chinese
Minority in Indonesia in which I wrote (third paragraph below is
my English translation): "... In 1930, the Chinese only formed
2.3 percent of the Indonesian population. Nowadays, about 3
percent of the Indonesian population are ethnic Chinese..." The
paper was widely distributed during the symposium and every
reporter received a copy. In my verbal explanation, I mentioned
that some Chinese and government officials claimed that the
Chinese form 4 percent of the Indonesian population but such
information was not available to me.

After the symposium, a young reporter from the Post asked me
whether or not he could cite my paper. I said that I would like
to revise the paper but he could use it. I thought that the
reader would be interested in knowing my argument on the role of
the state and the development of the Chinese minority community
but there was no report on my paper. Instead he reported the
things that I did not say.

I am aware of the ethnic composition of the Indonesian
population before World War II and many have used the 1930 census
to project the present figures of the Chinese and other ethnic
groups as no such detailed census on ethnic groups has been
conducted after Indonesia achieved independence. In fact, my
figure differs from Masli's figure (3 percent).

Regarding the rank order of the ethnic Chinese among the
ethnic groups in Indonesia, I do not share Masli's view. Masli
asserted that the Chinese were number eight, ranking the Chinese
after Javanese (39 percent), Sundanese (14 percent), Malay (7
percent), Madurese (6 percent), Bugis/Makassarese (5 percent),
Minangkabau (5 percent), Batak (4 percent) and Chinese (3
percent).

However, the 1930 census, which is the most "reliable" source
for the prewar Indonesian population, placed the Chinese (2.3
percent) as number six, after Javanese (47.02 percent), Sundanese
(14.53 percent), Madurese (7.28 percent), Minangkabau (3.36
percent) Buginese (2.59 percent) and Batak (2.04 percent). (See
my article Government policy and national integration in
Indonesia, published in Southeast Asian Journal of Social
Science, vol. 16, No. 2, 1988). Please note that the Javanese
constituted 47.02 percent, not 39 percent as claimed by Masli.

It is very sad that scholars studying Indonesian ethnic
groups, including the Chinese, have to rely on the prewar census
and make projections or educated guesses. This is because there
has been no breakdown of ethnic groups in any subsequent census
in Indonesia since 1930.

LEO SURYADINATA

National University of Singapore