Scholars question disparity as cause of recent riots

Scholars question disparity as cause of recent riots

JAKARTA (JP): The widespread belief that socioeconomic
disparities were to blame for the recent spate of religious and
ethnically-sparked riots was challenged yesterday.

Sociopsychologist Sarlito Wirawan Sarwono from University of
Indonesia's School of Psychology and political scholar Arbi Sanit
said the theory was far from sufficient to explain the riots.

"It is very dangerous to take the issue of socioeconomic
disparities or jargon about 'a third party' as the truth if we
are to cope with mass violence," Sarlito said in the one-day
seminar on mass violence held by the Center for Information and
Development Studies.

The seminar discussed the episodes of mob violence that rocked
Indonesia Last year.

Maj. Gen. Salim Siregar, representing National Police chief
Lt. Gen. Dibyo Widodo, said episodes of mass violence had
steadily increased over the past three years from eight cases in
1994, to 16 in 1995, and to 27 last year.

Sarlito said socioeconomic inequalities had nothing to do with
the riots, given most of them occurred outside Jakarta, where the
rich-poor gulf was probably the most obvious.

"Instead, the most serious riots exploded in Situbondo,
Tasikmalaya and Sanggau Ledo, small cities with less economic
contrasts than Jakarta," he said.

Rioting in the three towns claimed 14 lives.

"If disparities are to blame, the problem will be getting
worse rather than coming to an end because the disparities will
always remain, even in wealthy countries like the United States,"
Sarlito added.

Sarlito rejected the repeated claims of military and civilian
leaders that certain groups had masterminded the riots, saying
the allegations had raised eyebrows because of the absence of
evidence.

"This approach is ineffective because security officials will
always seek every avenue to prove their vague arguments. Although
they managed to arrest suspected masterminds, mass violence
remains," Sarlito said.

Government role

Separately, Arbi Sanit shared Sarlito's view, saying
accusations that "a third party" or "intellectual actors" were
behind the riots proved to be groundless.

"It is not easy to organize and mobilize people to take part
in a riot as it would take a large sum of money as well as
careful and thorough planning," he told a discussion on rioting,
organized by the Association of Indonesian Legal Aid and Human
Rights Advocacy yesterday.

"The military and government officials mostly triggered the
rioting," he said.

He supported his analysis with statistics on 11 riots last
year, six of which were triggered by security officers'
misconduct, one by an Indonesian of Chinese descent who tortured
his maid and four by brawls between individuals.

Arbi also challenged allegations that the riots were
engineered.

"The rioting happened spontaneously and was far from being
engineered," he said.

Sarlito suggested law enforcement officials improved their
professionalism in anticipation of other riots. "So they can no
longer accuse and arrest people carelessly," he said.

He said the authorities should control all means of mass
mobilization. The government's decision to ban motor rallies
during the campaigning period was understandable, he said.

He also called on government officials to avoid making unclear
statements, which could start unhealthy rumors.

Psychiatrist Dadang Hawari said mass violence could be
triggered by a combination of uncertainties caused by
modernization and pluralism within society.

Modernization, he said, has generated legal uncertainties,
degradation of morals and ethics, which in turn caused anxiety.

"There is agony behind the glitter of modernization. We are
now watching psycho-social tensions happen in our society," he
said.

Hawari said religious, ethnic and racist disputes could easily
explode in a stressful society.

However, he argued that conflict was common in developing
countries.

Another speaker, Nurhadi Pusposaputro, vice chairman of the
Coordinating Body for Intelligence, reminded the public not to
fuss about social disparity because it would be pointless.

"What we should do is come up with a solution with no
opportunity for friction," he said. (35/imn/amd)