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