Raising communist specter may be ineffective

The government is working hard to find the perpetrators of the recent riot in Tasikmalaya. It has hinted the riot was the work of "intellectual actors" and that the masterminds were using the Mao strategy. Political scientist J. Soedjati Djiwandono grapples with the issue.

JAKARTA (JP): Since the communist coup attempt on Sept. 30 1965, we have been warned against the "latent communist threat". We have been constantly urged to be vigilant. Such warnings and exhortations were repeated constantly last year, in one of the most violent and disturbed periods in the history of the New Order.

Such warnings and exhortations may make little sense for the generation of Indonesians born around 1965 and for the majority of people they are confusing and boring. Yet the latest suggestion there had been efforts to apply "Mao's theory" to the violent event at Tasikmalaya on Dec. 26 is worth examining.

Mao's theory was, strictly speaking, that of Lin Piao, once considered to be Mao's heir apparent. Lin Piao's theory was based on a strategy that Mao applied in the last stages of the Chinese communist revolution under his leadership to gain final victory over the Kuomintang under Chiang Kai-shek. The strategy had nothing to do with either Marxist or Leninist theoretical thinking. Rather, its application was necessitated by the force of circumstances.

A series of alliances with the Kuomintang, especially under the leadership of Chiang Kai-shek and at the advice and support of Moscow was forged as an implementation of Comintern's strategy (1922) of a "united front from above" in the face of Japanese invasion. On most occasions, however, such an alliance between the Kuomintang and the Communists ended with the destruction of the latter, particularly in the big cities. This forced the scattered and battered surviving Communists to flee to the countryside for consolidation. The famous "long march" is to be seen in this context.

Lin Piao wanted to make the experience of the victorious Chinese communist revolution under Mao Zedong a "model" of socialist revolution for the whole world. It was meant to be an alternative to the Soviet model, which had gone through the opposite process. In fact, no communist party the world over seized power exactly after the Soviet or the Chinese model.

The late Arnold Brackman in his book The Communist Collapse in Indonesia (1969) argued that Lin Piao's theory was in fact a contribution made by Aidit, Chairman of the Indonesian Communist Party (PKI). It was originally his idea to extend the application of the Maoist experience to the global level in the context of the world socialist revolution. Thus Asia, Africa, and Latin America were to constitute the countryside, and the advanced capitalist countries the cities of the world. For this contribution Aidit was awarded honorary membership of the Chinese Academy of Sciences.

Since the beginning of his ascendancy to the leadership of the PKI, after its near total destruction in the wake of the unsuccessful revolt in 1948, Aidit consistently adhered to the Comintern strategy of a "united front from above" by allying with non-communist political parties. This reached its peak in the form of the NASAKOM coalition before it hoped to be strong enough finally to lead a socialist revolution employing the Comintern strategy in the Chinese, not the Soviet model.

To suggest that there are now efforts to apply Lin Piao's or Mao's doctrine in Indonesia should be backed by solid evidence. So far the authorities are yet to find evidence that the Tasikmalaya riot had any link with any solid forces in the countryside.

One would also think that accusing anyone of being communist- inspired or communist-influenced simply on the basis of similar tactics sounds like an effort to find a scapegoat. Whether we like it or not, communism or the communist system has had an impact on the world at large. The idea of a planned economy, for instance, was originally a contribution from the communists. It was Stalin who first initiated a five-year development plan in 1923. It was the communists who first used the term "cadre" in the sense that we commonly understand now, as differs from its original meaning in the days of Napoleon.

Shouldn't we be honest and admit the possibility of mistakes? We should accept the possibility that the victims of the recent acts of violence are but intermediate targets, and that those acts of violence may represent genuine grievances against injustice.

One should also bear in mind that given the possibility of popular grievances against injustice underlying the present unrest, raising the communist specter would only create the impression among the uninformed that the struggle for social justice was only the struggle of the communists. This would be a credit they would not deserve.

The writer is a member of the Board of Directors at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, Jakarta.