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.