Putting racial reconciliation on the agenda
By Johannes Nugroho
SURABAYA (JP): The inauguration of the seventh Development Cabinet by President Soeharto was preceded by an enthusiastic if slightly self-controlled period of name dropping for the cabinet lineup. Amien Rais, an unofficial candidate for the presidency, expounded the possibility of Indonesians of Chinese descent being admitted into the cabinet. The idea was followed up by the press and dismissed by the United Development Party (PPP) before abruptly fizzling out.
"The President is a native Indonesian", proclaims Article 6 of the 1945 Constitution. In a globalized world in which people's mobility and pluralism are evident, the term native, even the Indonesian word asli, has evolved in meaning and usage. For example, an Indonesian citizen could be of Chinese descent but born in Jakarta and having always resided here, thus making him or her a native of Jakarta.
On the other hand, Article 26, which reiterates: "Those who hold Indonesian citizenship are native Indonesians and naturalized subjects by law", provides an indisputable interpretation of the term native in Article 6. To be specific, a stereotypical native Indonesian is a Malay-Indonesian-Mongolian who is, according to an encyclopedia, "spread throughout Malaysia, Indonesia, the Philippines, Madagascar and Taiwan with distinctive features such as a brown complexion, narrow face, non-Mongolic eyes and thick lips."
The above descriptions only encompass the natives of Sumatra, Java, Borneo and Sulawesi. What, then, is to become of people from Irian Jaya and East and West Timor? They are, technically speaking, "Australomelanesids". The question remains: What constitutes a native Indonesian?
What is more, in our global village, interracial marriages are becoming more common. Indonesians today consist of the Malay- Indonesian-Mongolians, Central and Archaic Mongolians (Chinese- Indonesians who originated from China and others from northern Asian countries), Armenian-, Iranian- and Mediterranean- Caucasians (Arab-Indonesians), the Indic-Caucasians (Indian- Indonesians), the Caucasian-Mongolians (Eurasians) and the list goes on.
Hence, embarking on the fact that Indonesia is a multiracial and pluralistic society, it is within reason to assume the racial insinuation of Article 6 in the Constitution. The fact that the document on which this nation is based oozes racial innuendoes is potentially calamitous. The extreme interpretation of the article could even legitimize the persecution of those excluded from the native rank. Worst of all, the article perpetually banishes the idea of total equality among Indonesians and is subconsciously divisive.
The article establishes a political pseudodogma that a naturalized Indonesian or even an Indonesian-born citizen of foreign extraction is untrustworthy of the highest office in the land. Correlatively, so far as politics are concerned, the nonnatives are inferior to the natives. It conveys a subliminal you'll-never-be-one-of-us message to the nonnatives and could arguably compromise their sense of belonging.
Political discrimination against a particular group in society is suggestive of the same prejudiced existing social psyche. In countries such as the United States, Britain and Australia, women were denied the right to vote until the 1910s, when the suffragette movement began. The political disempowerment then reflected the prejudice against women as nonequals of men. Similarly, Russia's anti-Semitic Josef Stalin went on a crusade to purge Russian Jews from any remotely strategic positions in the 1940s.
On a different note, the Australian Constitution, which was drafted in 1901, contained a racist article barring the native Aborigines from voting. The article was later annulled by a 1967 referendum with an overwhelming majority. While racism against Aborigines still exists in parts of the Australian society, the 1967 referendum mirrored the society's "reformed" attitude toward Aborigines, which was translated into political recognition.
Comparatively, the 1945 Constitution was drafted by the founding fathers of this nation, who fought tooth and nail against colonial forces to gain independence. Indonesia was a nation born in reaction to three centuries of foreign subordination. The anticolonial psyche in the attempt at eliminating the possibility of being ruled again by foreigners was understandable.
However, the era of colonialism has passed and the nonnatives of this country are no longer foreigners. These people have chosen to live in Indonesia, speak Indonesian and even adopt Indonesian names. Is it in the best interest of national unity, as well as justice, that the political discrimination goes on?
Or is it indicative of more prevalent sociopolitical undercurrents against the nonnatives? Recent mass riots in several towns in Java and East Nusa Tenggara came as a culmination of scapegoating which stems from the long-suppressed racial sentiments. Shops and residents owned by Chinese- Indonesians were looted and set on fire. The scene was reminiscent of the scapegoating of Jews in Germany following Germany's defeat in World War 1.
Even the euphemistic way in which Chinese-Indonesians are referred to speaks of an underlying pathological Sinophobia numerous Indonesians still suffer from. The term WNI Keturunan (Indonesian citizens of extraction) is ridiculously vague. The question is of what extraction? The subconscious elimination of the word Chinese alludes to the self-censorship and discomfort many Indonesians have in saying the word.
Irrefutably, the existing ethnical unease is by large a mutual derivative. Chinese-Indonesians are as much to blame in perpetuating myths and legends about themselves. Some Chinese- Indonesians, out of a minority syndrome, confabulate their own superiority complex towards the natives. Thus, racial curtains have been drawn all over the land.
As we move toward the third millennium, the ethnical ripples have become uglier and more frequent. These ripples will become tidal waves threatening to drown us if we refuse to do something about them. It is high time we ceased pretending that we do not have a racial problem. The first step to facing any problem is admitting it.
A recent proposal by the director of the Jawa Pos daily newspaper, Dahlan Iskan, of a holiday exchange program for Chinese-Indonesian children and their native counterparts is a commendable problem-solving strategy. The strength of Iskan's proposal is its emphasis on the younger generation. Eradicating long-held prejudices and misconceptions among the older generation is arguably more difficult than teaching the younger generation to develop respect and tolerance for differences while retaining their own identity.
Another way of facilitating ethnical reconciliation is the enactment of a school-quota system. All the country's schools, around which live racially mixed groups, will have to implement a quota in admitting students into their schools. Chinese-dominated private schools will also be required to grant scholarships to native students in order to meet their quota. Alternatively, there could be a student-exchange program through which nonnative students spend a period of six months attending predominantly native schools and vice versa.
On the legal front, the first step towards national reconciliation will arguably be manifested in the abolition of Article 6 of the 1945 Constitution by a referendum. The impact of such erasure of the racist and perhaps xenophobic part of the constitution will only be symbolic.
Racial reconciliation is, alas, a complicated and sometimes turbulent process. Predictably, it will not change the Indonesian political map. Presumably, it is more unlikely than likely for an Indonesian Alberto Fujimori to rise to power. Nevertheless, it will be the parameter of this nation's maturity, enlightenment, pluralistic harmony and readiness to embrace the 21st century. Liberty, egelite, fraternity; we cannot have the last without the middle.
Window: Irrefutably, the existing ethnical unease is by large a mutual derivative. Chinese-Indonesians are as much to blame in perpetuating myths and legends about themselves.