Our national unity
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.