Patriotism?

Patriotism?

One does not have to be a political scientist or historian to
know that fears of a waning of our sense of patriotism are not
new. Yet if one listens to the things politicians say, it is
clear that patriotism is still strong among Indonesians, 50 years
after independence was proclaimed.

In the case of Indonesia, there is special reason to be
worried. It must be remembered that Indonesia is one of the most
diverse countries in the world, with more than 350 ethnic and
racial groups, all with different cultural, religious and
traditional backgrounds. From the earliest days of the Indonesian
independence movement in the early decades of this century,
welding all these different population groups into one undivided
Indonesian nation has been one of the most important, and at the
same time most formidable tasks.

It is obvious that, even today, preserving this unity remains
a major concern of those in power in Indonesia. National unity is
not a thing that can be taken for granted. Hence the inclusion of
the principle of the "Unity of Indonesia" in Pancasila, the five-
tiered Indonesian state philosophy.

Against this background, the concern expressed by the Minister
of Defense and Security, Edi Sudradjat, at a seminar on "The
Nation State in the Era of Globalization" is understandable. In a
nutshell, the minister's address contained a warning to the
nation that business interests might at some point in the future
eclipse the sense of patriotism in this country.

Referring to predictions that China, rather than Japan, was
likely to become the dominant economic power in the new "Asian
Era", Edi Sudradjat noted, among other things, that many of
Indonesia's most successful businessmen were of Chinese ancestry.
He further noted that one of the determining factors for their
success was their ability to penetrate regional and global
networks.

While these businessmen are thus a national asset as long as
their success remained oriented towards serving the nation's
economic interests, "the feeling may prevail that, nowadays, not
national unity and cohesion, but international cooperation for
the sake of economic success is the most important thing," the
minister said.

Human nature being what it is, Edi Sudradjat's concerns are of
course legitimate. To put things in perspective, however, it must
also be noted that defining patriotism itself is difficult.
Nobody will deny, for instance, that both India's Mahatma Gandhi
and Sukarno were patriots to the bone. Yet their views on the
kind of economic structure that would best benefit the nation
were diametrically opposed to each other. While Gandhi preached
swadesi, or self-reliance based on the people's innumerable
cottage industries, Sukarno was an admirer of large-scale
projects and monumental industrial programs.

One could also argue that the intensive study and use of a
foreign language is unpatriotic. What we mean to say is that it
is not always easy, especially in this era of globalization, to
define what is and what is not patriotic. We believe a good
yardstick is the impact, positive or negative, on the progress
and well-being of our nation.