Situbondo case reflects our violent culture

Situbondo case reflects our violent culture

Violence has manifested itself in a number of incidents
recently, the latest being the massive riot in the East Java town
of Situbondo on Oct. 10, in which five people were killed and
scores of buildings, including churches, were damaged. Hotman M.
Siahaan tries to unravel this phenomenon.

Question: How do you view the violence in Situbondo?

Answer: It is difficult to say. People of different religious
groups in Situbondo have always lived harmoniously, as far as I
know. I am afraid they are just victims.

Q: Victims of what?

A: Victims of something big. Something of a bigger scheme.

Q: What scheme?

A: Let's just take a look at the significance of the case. It
shows how deeply entrenched the culture of violence is in our
society, and how easy it is for us to resort to violence.
Political interests may also be at play, but the consequence at
the grass roots level often goes beyond control. It is a serious
challenge to our efforts of empowering the people toward
democratization. It forces us to review the various segments of
our development, from religious tolerance to our obsession with
stability.

Q: Is there a need for reflection?

A: Absolutely.

Q: In what way?

A: In the way the government deals with the people. For
example, why did it dismiss the Situbondo riot as a "common
crime", while calling those who fought for land rights
"subversive" elements?.

Q: How do you describe the social characteristics of the
Situbondo people?

A: Situbondo is one of five regencies in East Java province
which is highly populated by the Madurese. All these regencies
have a high conflict potential, especially over land proprieties.
Most of the land on which they have lived and worked for decades
is plantation land taken over by the government from the Dutch,
and they are demanding their rights over it.

Here, the farmers are experiencing "relative deprivation".
They expect to own land, but they do not have the ability to make
it happen. Their grievances to local legislators went unheeded.
At the same time the kiai, Moslem scholars, are very influential.

Q; What does this mean?

A: It means the regencies are relatively easy to handle, in
spite of their conflict potential. The government should have
known better that the way to communicate to the people there is
through the kiai. The problem is, often they are approached only
when something bad has already happened.

Q: Violence has kept on reoccurring, including the recent
soccer-related violence along the Jakarta-Surabaya railway track
and the July 27 riots. Why is this?

A: People resort to violence when they experience relative
deprivation. This occurs when they do not have the ability to
accomplish what they expect to accomplish. For example, traders
who have worked hard for many years and get nowhere. At the same
time, they see a privileged few who make billions easily. Or,
take our aspirations on democracy. They have grown very rapidly
in recent years, but our political institutions are being
restrained.

Q: Is the Situbondo farmers' case a unique one?

A: No. It is symptomatic. It happens in other spheres of life
as well, like culture, and it is befalling all levels of the
society, including the upper class. Take the yuppies, for
example. They are doing well economically, but they are weak
politically. This is also a relative deprivation symptom. They
are handicapped in certain dimensions of their life.

Q: How should we address this issue?

A: We should truly start empowering our social institutions.
In the Situbondo case, the social institutions are the Moslem
ulemas of the Nahdlatul Ulama socio-religious organization. They
should be given political accommodation. This has yet to take
place.

Q: The National Commission on Human Rights has urged the
government to bring rebel members of the Indonesian Democratic
Party and the security officers who accompanied them when they
stormed the party headquarters on July 27 to trial?. What does
this mean?

A: It means that there may be people who have the power to
inflict violence by pitting people against each other. They can
do this by virtue of their power.

Q: How could you explain it from the theory of sociology?

A: According to Robert Ted Gurre, there are three kinds of
political violence. The first one is called "turmoil", which is a
relatively spontaneous violence. It is less organized and
involves a smaller number of people compared to the other types
of violence. The second, "conspiracy", is highly organized
political violence. The third type is "internal war". You can
call it a civil war. It is also a highly organized form of
violence, which heavily involves the people. I believe the
Situbondo riot, as well as the July 27 riots, belong to this
category, though on a smaller scale. Wasn't it violence by
civilians against civilians?

Dr. Hotman M. Siahaan is a lecturer in social sciences at
Airlangga University, Surabaya.