Why a bigger budget

Why a bigger budget

It would be merely self-evident to say that the scars that
more than thirty years of military-dominated rule have left on
this country run deep among Indonesians. Just how deep they are
can be gauged by the strong opposition that has been voiced in
many quarters of our society against the rather substantial
increase in the government's new security and defense budget.

The draft, as submitted by President Abdurrahman Wahid to the
House of Representatives last Thursday, sets aside a sum of Rp
10.1 trillion (nearly US$1.4 billion) for defense and security
expenditure spending over the nine-month transitional period from
April 1 to Dec. 31, compared to Rp 12.2 trillion (approximately
$1.7 billion) for the previous 12-month period.

While such an amount may to richer countries look like a
trivial sum for ensuring the security of the nation, here in
Indonesia it can easily look like an improper extravaganza amid
the nation's current economic circumstances.

Aberson Marle Sihaloho, House representative for the
Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle (PDI Perjuangan), quite
aptly expressed the mood that prevails among some Indonesians
with his post-presentation comment that "the government should
concentrate on improving the people's social welfare instead of
spending more money on defense."

This would have been true enough, of course, under ordinary
circumstances. Taking into consideration, however, that the
security situation is at present far from ordinary -- and indeed,
that it is threatening Indonesia's very survival as a nation --
the practical wisdom of such a statement can be debated.

Ever since the fall of the New Order regime of President
Soeharto in May 1997, the police and the Indonesian Armed Forces
(TNI) have time and again demonstrated their inability to
effectively cope with major crises. The continuing unrest and
killings in Aceh and Maluku offer but two of the most dramatic
illustrations of this incapability.

Long outstanding cases of legal and human rights violations
committed either by the military/police institution or by rogue
members in their ranks remain to this day unresolved. In such a
situation, civilian politicians less concerned with the security
and well-being of the nation than with the consolidation of their
own power are trying to exploit the situation.

Obviously, there is an urgent need for the government to take
some resolute measures to end the various conflicts and
conspiracies that are threatening to tear this nation apart. To
be able to do this, however, it needs to have the machinery to
ensure that orders are properly and effectively carried out. This
can only mean that professional standards within the police and
military must be upgraded, not least regarding their intelligence
gathering and processing capabilities so that trouble can be
detected and averted before it has the chance to erupt and
spread.

For these reasons the increased budget allotment to improve
the effectiveness of the police and armed forces is justified,
especially since the Rp 1.2 trillion increase represents a mere
10 percent over the previous year's budget -- far less than the
62 percent increased proposed several months ago by Minister of
Defense Juwono Sudarsono.

Still, one rather disturbing question remains. Given the
overpowering political role which the Indonesian military have
apportioned to themselves in recent years, isn't there danger for
Indonesia's budding democracy in allowing them to rebuild their
strength?

The obvious answer, unfortunately, is yes, there is. That is
why the increased funding must also cover education and training
to turn the Indonesian national police and military into truly
democratic law-abiding institutions that are capable of imparting
a sense of security and well-being among the people -- or, to
borrow the newly coined military terminology, to help them
reposition themselves in Indonesian society.

This is the crucial point that must not for a moment be
overlooked in defining a new role for the Indonesian national
police and military. But to simply deny them the money they need
to become truly effective guardians of the nation's security is
to miss the point of the issue.