Reviving 'SARA' talks would boost national awareness

Reviving 'SARA' talks would boost national awareness

Amid humiliation and gloom the commemoration of National
Awakening Day on May 20 means reviving formerly taboo talks on
social differences, to seek an acceptable "Indonesia" to all
across the archipelago, says historian Anhar Gonggong, a member
of the expert staff at the Ministry of Culture and Tourism.

Question: What is today's context of commemorating "national
awakening"? The founding of the Budi Utomo organization on May 20
1908 is considered a landmark in Indonesian nationalism.

Answer: There has been a misunderstanding over our process of
becoming a nation. We have not become an Indonesian nation yet.
The term Indonesia itself is still new. It was not a continuance
of (previous kingdoms) Sriwijaya and Majapahit...

Budi Utomo aimed for heightened (awareness of) culture and
education for a limited public, the Javanese... But this was the
start of an ethnic awareness becoming a larger awareness in the
context of a nation...

Other organizations followed like Sarekat Islam and the
Indische Party propagating nationalism of "Hindia" which
comprised the Dutch East Indies. "Indonesia" further developed
from organizations like Jong Java (Java Youth), Jong Ambon...
Young Indonesia... The nationalism process reflected changes.

Q: What changes?

A: Significant ones: A few educated, enlightened Dutch East
Indies citizens acquiring education not merely to earn a living
but to work for the interest of a nation.

Their organizations became new tools in the struggle. This
marked a change; a struggle using brains, a departure from the
previous three centuries in which struggle mainly used brawn.

Yet another change was the birth of another new tool --
dialog. Dialog among ourselves in meetings, those representing
ourselves through organizations, and talks with the colonial
parties. A third was the rise of another tool of struggle --
newspapers and magazines to launch ideas bringing about public
awareness...

One dialog involved (leading intellectuals) Sutakmo
Suryokusumo and Cipto Mangunkusumo. Sutakmo said the basis of
nationalism should be Javanese nationalism because of its great
culture and long history. Cipto said Javanese culture was
crumbling, so we should build the nationalism of the Dutch East
Indies. This kind of dialog continued... until the 1928 Youth
Pledge declared one archipelago, one nation, and one language --
Indonesia. But the pledge meant that we are one nation with
acknowledgement of our different histories; that despite unity,
we remain a diverse nation.

All this was created through rational dialog. Organizations,
dialogs and enlightenment led to the discovery of Indonesia.

Q: But many now fear the country's disintegration and feel
ashamed to admit they're Indonesian when they're abroad...

A: This is our fault, mainly that of political parties which
never conducted political education. After we proclaimed
independence, it was as if Indonesia was completed. It remains a
dynamic process... because we are a diverse nation.

Under (former president) Soeharto we could not talk about
those things... we were told that talking about SARA (acronym
for social differences of ethnicity, race and other groups) would
make the country fall apart.

The deepest fault lies with our self denial; by not doing so
(engaging in dialog) we have been (reinforcing) SARA... hence the
divisions among us. Indonesia is the result of a dialog between
enlightened people... Instead of developing "Indonesia" the
government extorts its own people -- witness Aceh, Irian Jaya,
Riau, East Kalimantan, South Sulawesi.

So we cannot stop drawing up strategies to bring about the
kind of Indonesia that we want in the future. Does it have to be
through continually extorting Aceh and Irian? Does Jakarta always
have to be the capital? Our fault has been the inability to
understand the dynamics that led to the emergence of Indonesia.

Q: What is the way out?

A: By reviving dialog and doing away with group interests.
Political education is important. What's the difference between
today's politics and those of the era of the independence
struggle? The earlier political organizations succeeded in
building national awareness for independence and the image that
Indonesians were equal to others -- thanks to (scholars and
leaders) Sutomo, Ki Hajar Dewantoro, Mohammad Hatta, Soekarno and
Syahrir.

It was such people who managed to provide political education
-- not the 1945 Generation, which did nothing after proclamation
because they thought Indonesia had already been established. So
we failed to understand ourselves and we stopped talking among
ourselves. Now we have dialogs, but for our own group interests.

Q: So how should we commemorate National Awakening Day?

A: By discovering its true meaning again, by building Indonesia
through dialog, unity and diversity. Unity must not be
contradicted with diversity ... Party leaders must reflect on the
leaders of national struggle.

Q: Is it worth preserving Indonesia as a unitary state?

A: I prefer a federal state because a country with so many
diverse islands and people is too large to be led from Jakarta.

Q: What about regional autonomy within the framework of a unitary
state?

A: The current concept is wrong, giving autonomy directly to
regencies -- what about the provinces? Autonomy should aim first,
for the empowerment of regions to identify and realize their own
potential; second, for the benefit of Indonesia. Strong regions
will result in a strong Indonesia ...

Q: The Anti-Communist Alliance has been commemorating National
Awakening Day by searching for "leftist" books. Your comment?

A: That contradicts the spirit of National Awakening Day because
in the struggle for independence open dialog flourished, likewise
all sorts of books and ideas. Our leaders enthusiastically
studied Marxism, communism and socialism. (M. Yazid)