Retreating to 'New Order speak'

Retreating to 'New Order speak'

By Damien Kingsbury

MELBOURNE (JP): When Indonesia was still under the rule of
president Soeharto, one of its most notable characteristics was
the government's use, or misuse, of language.

In simple terms, what was said by political leaders about
sensitive situations rarely reflected what was actually
happening, creating a sense of unreality in public discourse.

Under Soeharto, information became misinformation or, more
accurately, propaganda.

Since then, one of the most heartening signs of Indonesia's
move towards democratization has been the lifting of official
restrictions on its media, and the related upsurge in public
discussion and debate.

Yet at what is probably the most critical time for Indonesia's
fledgling democracy, when anti-democratic forces within the
country are attempting to subvert legitimate processes,
representatives of the government of President Abdurrahman Wahid
(Gus Dur) appear to be retreating towards "New Order-speak".

Gus Dur's main hope of restoring order to political chaos,
Coordinating Minister for Political and Security Affairs, Susilo
Bambang Yudhoyono, appears to betray the reform process with his
comments on the United Nations Security Council's decision to
send a mission to Jakarta to discuss the killing of UNHCR workers
in Atambua.

In rejecting the UN mission, Susilo said: "... we believe that
we should be given trust, sovereignty and a chance to do what we
have to do"'

There is no doubt that Susilo's intentions are honorable, but
"trust" in the Indonesian government by the international
community is, understandably, at a very low ebb.

Simply, despite its intentions, the government has repeatedly
shown that it is incapable of resolving the deep-seated problem
of an army largely outside its control. Part of this is
manifested in support for the Timor militias by a significant
section of the army.

In the life of Gus Dur's government there have been five
promises to resolve the militia issue. That is plenty of chance
"to do what we have to do". So far those chances have come to
nothing. Susilo should not expect trust for further promises that
cannot be fulfilled.

Indonesian sovereignty is not in question, and a visit by a UN
delegation does not impinge on that. But Indonesia must offer
reciprocal respect for the sovereignty of its neighbors,
especially through its key institutions such as the army.

It must also respect the legitimate affairs of the UN High
Commissioner for Refugees in West Timor, and acknowledge that
support for cross-border activities into East Timor betrays its
own call for sovereign respect.

But Susilo is not the main culprit. The comment by the new
Defense Minister, Mahfud M.D., saying that Cabinet members will
not meet the UN mission "because we already have our own
programs" would be laughable if it was not so bereft of meaning.

Clearly the government's program has failed, and will continue
to fail while large sections of the army -- not least of whom are
the oknum ("involved", as in "our thing" or cosa nostra) --
remain outside its control.

And that National Police information chief, Sr. Supt. Saleh
Saaf, claiming that "There is no such thing as militia, they are
all just refugees" begs comprehension.

What is a "refugee" who, backed by army forces, carries a gun,
obeys orders and acts in a group in a premeditated manner for
political ends? What is a militia, if not this? Does Saleh
believe that by simply saying that militia do not exist they will
disappear?

In one sense, it does not matter what name they are given,
because we all know what these people and their army backers are,
and what they are doing. By all means give them another name, and
then agree that this new name fits the known facts, that
political crimes are being committed.

Whether it is "militia", "political criminals", preman
(gangster), oknum ("unscrupulous member") or whatever, the
meaning remains the same.

At least Attorney General Marzuki Darusman is more frank, if
understated, noting that these "problems have been a bit
neglected".

There is no doubt that Gus Dur's government is facing a most
difficult task in asserting its authority over all sections of
the army and that the outcome of this effort is not yet certain.
Indonesia's continued democratization rests on this outcome.

It is also clear that certain sections of the army receive
tacit and sometimes overt support from senior political figures.
One wonders, for instance, whether Vice President Megawati
Soekarnoputri would have the courage or, more accurately,
interest, in pushing the "democratic" element of the name of her
party, the Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle.

Or, should we ask ourselves, is this use of "democracy" also a
reflection of New Order thinking, being no more than empty
propaganda, an abuse of the meaning of language and a betrayal of
the ideas that words represent?

Dr Damien Kingsbury is Executive Officer of the Monash Asia
Institute, Monash University, Melbourne.