Searching for real racial unity

Searching for real racial unity

By Sri Pamoedjo Rahardjo

This is the first of two articles comparing ethnic Chinese in
Malaysia and Indonesia.

JAKARTA (JP): The social environment in Indonesia is currently
characterized by continued disharmony. Repressed anger was
manifested in the May 13, 1998, racial riots, which claimed many
lives. The victims were ordinary citizens, particularly those of
Chinese descent. Since then, ridicule, blaming and naming of
scapegoats along racial lines have been daily features in our
society.

We should learn from Malaysia's Chinese-Malay ethnic
relations. Malaysia also experienced a strong undercurrent of
tensions between the Malays and Malaysians of Chinese descent.
These tensions reached a peak in the infamous Kuala Lumpur fatal
riots, also on May 13, in 1969.

Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad sought an explanation of the
racial riots in his book The Malay Dilemma. The book basically
used a historical approach in understanding the friction. It
mentioned how the hatred toward non-Malays, particularly the
Chinese community, accumulated over a long period of time. The
Malays were not treated as the legal hosts. Instead, they were
compelled by the British rulers to accommodate the arrival of the
immigrants. The immigrants were intended to serve the colonial
powers, as casual workers in mines and rubber plantations. In
terms of human relations, contacts with immigrants were kept to a
minimum to discourage conflicts.

After Malaysia's independence, the Malays were again coerced
to accept other races in the name of social harmony. Despite
tolerance and accommodation, there was actually no real deep-
rooted harmony. The Malays did not see evidence of assimilation
of immigrants into the Malay culture. The immigrants maintained
their own cultural heritages. They continued to disregard the
dominant culture. Their continued refusals to integrate with the
Malay culture was manifested in the Communist rebellion and the
Kuala Lumpur riots.

Learning from past mistakes, the Malaysian government
introduced policies to upgrade the status of Malays both socially
and politically, through improved educational opportunities,
strengthened economic positions, and increased nationalism and
political awareness. Although these policies could be interpreted
as discriminatory, in essence, they provided security and
strengthened the pride of Malays. Despite the improved harmony
today, non-Malays may be neighbors or even friends and business
associates, but still live in their respective ethnic and
cultural pockets, which are extremely different and often
conflicting with the dominant culture.

What can we learn about Indonesia's present conflict from the
Malaysian experience? First, social harmony in Indonesia was
forced. Similar to Malaysia, apparent harmony during colonial
times was ensured by suppressing the seeds of hatred. For years,
the Dutch colonial administrators maintained superficial harmony
by segregating society into racial groupings reflecting the
division of labor.

The Europeans were treated as highest in the social strata,
the indigenous population, known as inlanders, as the lowest.
Other Asian races fell somewhere in between. The social hierarchy
was further determined by religion, with Islam considered
synonymous with backwardness. Dissatisfaction among the
indigenous people grew steadily, as they saw they were being
discriminated against in their own country. They were considered
more of a threat than a partner. Only a few indigenous
Indonesians were given opportunities to enter schools, and only
with the intention of supporting the colonial system.

Second, the Chinese community was an extended arm of the
colonial administrators. The majority of immigrants were
recruited to support colonial activities, as they were proven
effective collaborators with the administrators. They were
employed mainly to help suppress conflicts, collect taxes, work
as security officers, support mining activities or work in the
plantations. As a result, a feeling of oppression and
discrimination emerged among indigenous Indonesians.

Added to this was a distinct lack of assimilation of the
Chinese community with the host culture. The lengthy presence of
the Chinese in the community had not resulted in significant
assimilation. Contrary to Malaysia, two distinct Chinese
communities had emerged in Indonesia. The peranakan, whose racial
characteristics had mixed, with male descendants maintaining
strictly their Chinese cultural heritage, while female
descendants have less responsibility to hold on to the culture.
The babah have a singular racial characteristic and cultural
traits, who have not assimilated with indigenous Indonesians at
all.

It can thus be concluded that discrimination, collaboration,
and lack of assimilation created antipathy among the indigenous
Indonesians toward the Chinese community. The indigenous
population became increasingly angry at the apparent shifting
alliance of the Chinese with the powerful elite. In many cases,
tight collaborations among high profile members of the Chinese
community with the rulers were witnessed. Many people likened
this to the occupation by colonial, Japanese and allied forces,
when ethnic Chinese chose their sides for their own survival.

The writer is a social and economic observer, and former
regional development bank officer in Manila.