Our national unity

It has been almost a month since the riots that rocked Jakarta between May 13 and May 15. The wounds from the violence, arson and looting of those days are, however, still far from healed. With a countless number of shops and businesses destroyed and their owners having fled to other countries or safe havens here in Indonesia, our daily commerce has yet to fully return to normal.

Considering the fact that last month's riots left thousands of people without a job or livelihood, it would be wrong to say that our fellow citizens of Chinese ancestry -- more popularly referred to as "nonindigenous Indonesians" -- were the exclusive casualties of the rioting. Nevertheless, Chinese-Indonesians were the ones who bore the brunt of the tragedy. Minority groups of any category -- religious, ethnic or racial -- make easy targets for the airing of social discontent. This could explain the feelings of animosity, bred by envy, that exists among many Indonesians toward those among them who are of Chinese descent.

Such feelings of hostility and envy, as historians have often pointed out, existed among Indonesians even before the country became independent. Chinese immigrants prospered under the old colonial system, while the indigenous population was left to occupy the lowest rank on the social ladder. Since then, although access to better education and life opportunities have gradually became available to more and more indigenous Indonesians, anti- Chinese sentiments have continued to ferment, especially among less privileged Indonesians.

The interesting question, however, remains: Why did such anti- Chinese sentiment in the past rarely explode with such calamitous force as was seen in Jakarta last month? The answer to this question may be for our historians and sociologists to find. One explanation that has been offered, however, is that the dubious practice of engaging certain well-liked Chinese-Indonesian associates as business partners of indigenous Indonesians in power has widened the divide between Chinese and indigenous Indonesians. The fact that their business dealings were often perceived by the public as shady in nature, obviously did not help to make things better.

From the Chinese-Indonesian point of view, one complaint is that they have been practically shut out of all other fields except business. They feel that this has contributed to their "economic animal" image -- one that they, in fact, would like to shed as soon as opportunity allows; hence the formation of an Chinese-Indonesian political party soon after Soeharto's fall.

Whatever the actual reasons may be for the continuing irrational anti-Chinese sentiment that widely exists among indigenous Indonesians, it is high time that we begin making some serious efforts to resolve the problem. Government and private think tanks could provide a valuable contribution by doing the necessary research. The Malaysian model of preserving harmony in a multiracial society may be worth studying in this context.

To live as one nation, undivided by ethnicity, language, race or religion is not only an ideal that is enshrined in our national philosophy Pancasila, it is also one that was publicly proclaimed as early as 1928 in what has since become known as the 1928 Youths' Pledge. As a policy goal, that ideal was publicly pronounced in the early years of our independence by then vice president Mohammad Hatta. The job that awaits us now is to give substance to that ideal. Unless we do so, racial strife and economic disruptions may continue to hound us, even as the new century dawns and makes a mockery of our stated ideal to become a modern nation.