Why reduce violence?

An article in The Jakarta Post on Feb. 12, 2001 (page 1), Indonesian and GAM strike accord to reduce violence, caught my attention and I would like to offer my comments.

First of all, what is the use of reducing violence, because we have no exact figures of how major the violence is in Aceh and how much reduction is needed.

In my opinion, the accord should be on "stopping" or "abolishing" violence, not reducing it. If what is written is true then this is more proof of how little courage and decisiveness our government has. But as we continue reading this article, we find, surprisingly, the following, which is really confusing.

In column two we find: "Under the pact, both sides agreed to halt the violence ..." What is the truth -- "reduce" or "halt"? Even with an accord -- reducing or halting -- the government should remain careful and suspicious. I remember what kind of interpretation the Free Aceh Movement (GAM) gave when the first humanitarian pause was signed. It clearly said that they agreed because this constitutes the first step to Aceh's independence. They continued causing trouble and attacking the security forces.

In Suara Pembaruan, Jan. 13, 2001, our foreign minister said, among other things, when talks in Switzerland were underway that this does not mean that GAM has to stop its military activities, but the activities should be balanced with the progress of the political talks.

So while the talks are going on the Indonesian government has no objection if GAM continues its military activities. Do you understand this policy? I don't. Although the agreement has been reached the government should remain alert because agreeing to reduce instead of to stop military activities on the part of GAM can put our security forces in a very difficult position. If they act, they would be accused of violating human rights. If they don't, it indicates their impotency.

On top of that the government should be careful appreciating the agreement. An agreement alone is not sufficient. It should have an annex, an official interpretation of the agreement signed by both sides. Besides, the government should not forget the challenge from the local commanders who said loud and clear that if the Indonesian Military (TNI) wants GAM weapons they should come and collect them if they can, because GAM has surrounded all military posts.

The government should remain suspicious because some Aceh civilian leaders put GAM armed forces, the TNI and the police on the same level. One of Aceh's prominent figures said: "I hope that ultimately both sides will be prepared to lay down their weapons". How can the TNI and the police lay down their weapons while it is standard equipment. Putting government security forces and the rebels on the same level is indeed a tragedy.

The right step for the government to take is to act according to the existing law and not to mix politics with law enforcement, as stated by the new Minister of Justice and Human Rights, Baharuddin Lopa. Another important thing is to have the courage to act and not be drowned in indecisiveness.

SOEGIH ARTO

Jakarta