Pros and cons of the TNI under the defense ministry

Supama P Dikrama, Jakarta

Minister of Defense Juwono Sudarsono recently made quite an interesting statement, that ideally the Indonesian Military (TNI) should be under his ministry's authority, while the National Police (Polri) should be under the Ministry of Home Affairs.

He added that it would take at least three to five years to see this ideal arrangement become a reality. Currently both the National Police and the TNI are directly under the President. The National Police separated from the TNI and were put under the president's control in April 1999, or one year after Soeharto's fall.

Juwono has also said it is common practice for the President to have direct access to the TNI chief and the National Police chief.

Although TNI Commander Gen. Endriartono Sutarto quickly played down the minister's idea, questioning the readiness of the civilian minister to lead the powerful body, and lacking assurance that he would not abuse the TNI role for his own political interests, the idea will very likely grow at high speed in the coming years.

The discourse that Juwono has introduced seems to accommodate a number of ideas and statements that observers of military affairs put forward some time ago, when the bill on the TNI became a polemic following its deliberation by the House of Representatives. Under the new law, the TNI structurally remains under the President.

There are growing aspirations that ideally the TNI should be placed under the defense ministry and be accountable to the minister of defense. This is modeled upon the structure of the military in advanced democracies, where the military is placed under the authority of a civilian.

In a democracy, differing discourses and opinions naturally exist. What matters, though, are the pluses and minuses of placing the TNI under the minister of defense. In this context, whether civilian politicians are really prepared to manage the TNI institution as one free of any political influence, must also be taken into account.

Another question is whether a civilian defense minister would be able to manage the TNI professionally, as an institution fully reflecting its identity as a military institution.

These simple questions require further deliberation among observers, academics and, more particularly, civilian politicians. They must develop a keen understanding of the civilian's capability and maturity as a political player.

The nation's level of political maturity also raise questions as to whether the TNI should be placed under the ministry of defense.

Actually, TNI personnel have nothing to worry about. It would be acceptable for them to see the TNI placed under the ministry of defense, or under the President. In either position, the TNI knows that it serves to defend the state. It would be different, however, if the TNI became a political machine or the tool of the ruling government.

Juwono was in some ways correct when he hinted that some elite members of the TNI would reject this idea. The argument for rejection, however, is not groundless.

First, we can clearly see that civilian political leaders are yet to reach maturity in implementing democracy.

Second, political parties still strongly influence their members who assume bureaucratic positions (in executive, judicial or legislative institutions.)

It is easy to imagine the TNI's future if it fell into the hands of political party members.

One could assume that these decisions would eventually drag the TNI into partisanship, whereby it would lean toward the political party the minister of defense comes from. In such a situation, it would be very difficult for the TNI to remain politically neutral.

The question is, are civilian politicians ready to ensure that the TNI never serves as the instrument of a political party or a political tool?

Not so long ago, the TNI was an instrument of the political machine of Soeharto during his 32-year tenure.

The current political reality, and past experiences, must be taken into consideration before determining the place of the TNI within this state. These efforts are also necessary to ensure that the President, who is now directly elected by the people, will not seek to influence the TNI's leadership, or abuse the military as an institution to maintain his political power.

A defense minister's political leaning must never be allowed to affect the professional duty of the TNI as a state's instrument to maintain territorial integrity and national unity and ensure the safety of the people.

Defense minister Juwono himself will certainly be able to secure the TNI as a state institution exempt from the political interests of individuals, groups or political parties. Why? The answer is simple: Juwono is not a politician and his capability is highly regarded. When a non-politician like Juwono holds the position of defense minister, the TNI will not have any worries concerning its neutrality. Juwono is a professional with unquestionable integrity and, more importantly, he is not a party man.

What would happen if a party man -- not of the same caliber as Juwono -- became defense minister? That is a scenario that all relevant parties should think hard about.

As long as civilian politicians consider democracy only as a means to seek power, the TNI should not be placed under the defense minister. Will our civilian politicians advance to the expected level in the coming three to five years? Let's just wait and see.

Our trust in the capability of civilian politicians rests with their own performance. Until now, our impression of civilian politicians has always been that they are greedy for positions and power and will pursue their own interests, by hook or by crook.

The writer is a postgraduate student at Prof Dr. Moestopo University (Beragama), Jakarta. He can be reached at supamadikrama@yahoo.com