Taking potshots at the military

As a man with very little experience in politics, I read with great interest an interview in the Sept. 17 The Jakarta Post, with Ikrar Nusa Bhakti, a senior researcher at the Indonesian Institute of Sciences. He is also described as a political scientist, and I think, as a specialist in Indonesian Military (TNI) matters. In short, he is a very learned man.

He made interesting statements, some of which I agree with and some I consider unfair to TNI. Ikrar said: "I don't buy what TNI Commander Gen. Wiranto said when he claimed that 'psychological obstacles' between TNI and prointegration militias had obstructed peace efforts." Perhaps slow down is better than obstruction; I agree and I do not buy it, either.

From this, I draw the conclusion, perhaps incorrect, that TNI has created a psychological relationship with prointegration militia and not with the "other side". I can fully understand these feelings, born out of the same political position on East Timor, although I think it is not right for the military to take sides because it should be neutral and stand above all parties. Despite the psychological concerns, the military should do its job as ordered.

The military experienced the same thing in the late 1950s when Aceh, North Sumatra, West Sumatra, South Sumatra, Kalimantan and Sulawesi rebelled against the central government. Worse still, the rebels had under their command TNI units, the same TNI who fought for independence in the five-year war against the Dutch, side by side with the military under the control of the central government. This was a war between brothers, between comrades in arms. Tragic but, accepting duty above all, the military acted according to its orders. In 1961, this civil war ended and the military again became one.

Ikrar was unfair when he stated that the military has failed to reestablish order. People sitting safe and sound behind a desk should once in a while go to the front and find out the real practical problems and obstacles and then give judgment. How can TNI, even when it is backed by the status of a military emergency situation, restore law and order in 48 hours, when Ikrar judges the situation as mayhem. This is ridiculous. Even UN troops are given four months, or 2,880 hours, to restore law and order. Given equal time and opportunities, I am sure TNI can perform as well as the UN forces or perhaps even better. Ikrar himself mentioned that TNI has a good international reputation, having taken part in 20 UN peacekeeping missions, in countries far from Indonesia.

I am shocked when Ikrar said that the military is against civilian supremacy and the military also is unwilling to acknowledge equality among civilians and the military. These are purely groundless accusations which he cannot substantiate with facts. This is prejudice against the military.

I also do not buy Ikrar's statement that a general amnesty for members of the military who perpetrated right abuses would lead to a willingness of the military to give up the dual function role. He connected the dual function of the military with rights abuses, which in my opinion is completely beside the point. This only shows his prejudice toward the military.

The dual function is not a creation of TNI, it is a duty "given" to the military by the Indonesian people, and provided with a legal and constitutional basis.

Be impartial and do not only focus on the bad things; they are also found in the civilian community. Remember, the suspects in Baligate are civilians, and money politics has been played purely by civilians and so many more.

SOEGIH ARTO

Jakarta