TNI and civil society

The recent terrorist attack on the JW Marriott Hotel in Jakarta, the success -- at least for the moment -- of the Indonesian Military's (TNI's) offensive in Aceh, last year's Bali bombing and the world's deep fear of terrorism, have produced a very timely momentum and near-perfect justification for the TNI top brass to reiterate their demand for a return to a central role of the military in politics.

After announcing in 1999 the adoption of a new approach whereby the military would supposedly concentrate only on defense affairs, thus allowing the police to handle internal security and order, the TNI generals now realize their "mistake" in relinquishing their influential political functions. They also argue that the country's problems are too huge to be entrusted only to the police. Whereas in the past TNI complained about limited personnel in numerical terms compared with that of the archipelago, TNI is now complaining it is underutilized, in the words of Coordinating Minister for Political and Security Affairs Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono.

Last week's controversy over ideas to revise the new antiterrorism law has been taken by some as a sign of officers wanting a return to their central role in the nation's life.

The general must have also made the leaders of Malaysia and Singapore smile over suggestions to adopt their internationally criticized Internal Security Act (ISA), which enables anyone to be detained for a long period, without evidence, on the pretext of state security.

When the law on terrorism was enacted on April 4, ministers, including Susilo, proudly referred to it as an effective tool to combat terrorism while sticking to democratic principles. With no sense of irony he now complains the law is toothless, and stranger still, he has also pointed out that the exclusion of TNI from internal security affairs is against the law, without naming the law in question.

Thankfully, his two ideas have been resisted immediately by the public and by legislators. But the danger is still there, because Susilo's idea reflects TNI's growing impatience toward the civilian government and its strong desire to have a more effective say in the country's political life.

We strongly supported TNI's move to quit politics because the country needed a strong military force to defend its sovereignty. Soeharto misused the military to maintain his 32-year rule. To convince the nation of its strong political will, then military chief Gen. Wiranto changed in 1999 the name of the Indonesian Armed Forces (ABRI) to TNI, and the police were separated from TNI.

It was a painful decision, because it meant that many TNI personnel would lose their civilian jobs in the government and the legislature. Losing a role in internal politics not only meant that the military lost one of its main sources of power but also the loss of great sources of extra income, both for the institution and its personnel.

In the meantime, jealousy among TNI and its personnel is on the rise. In the words of an Army lieutenant colonel, "My police friend who graduated in the same year as I is now much richer than I. In the police, nearly all personnel, from all levels within the organization, have the opportunity to earn extra money, while in TNI, only senior officers have such a chance."

To be honest, the National Police (Polri) have worked hard to anticipate their new additional functions, and the international community has poured in substantial financial and technical assistance to the police as part of efforts to strengthen Indonesia's civil society. But the result is still very far from satisfactory, especially with regard to police intelligence network capability. Most police officers are also still the product of a military-type education.

We strongly suggest TNI fully assists Polri in boosting their effectiveness by sharing its know-how, including its intelligence networks and capacity, because in this field the police are left far behind the military. It is for the interest of all, including the military, that we have a strong and effective police, although in the short term it may affect the military's dominant role.

It is the duty of all levels of society to support the police role in internal security and public order because an effective police is the key to the attainment of a civil society. It is also our view that TNI should concentrate on its duty to defend the country from external security threats.

Terrorism has become a dangerous threat to the country's existence. Concerted efforts to eradicate its roots must be taken, but the threat of terrorism should not make us permissive regarding human rights abuses or undemocratic values, just because we are in a panic.

The eradication of terrorism does not and should not justify human rights abuses. The eradication of terrorism does not and should not go against the creation of a more humane, civil society. The two are not mutually exclusive.