|
BOSTON:
Today we are living in a rapidly changing
world.
Revolution is not only taking place in the
business world through the creation of computers and
their apparatus, but also occurring in every aspect of
our lives.
In the early of 90s, no one was able to foresee
the end of New Order regime and the independence of
East Timor.
Everything changes so swiftly and unpredictably
that often catches us unprepared to anticipate its
consequences.
The
diverse and rather haphazard reactions to democracy
and reformation indicate our unreadiness in
anticipating the consequences of reformation we are
actively promoting.
We have been preoccupied by our efforts to
manage crisis in Molucca and Aceh until we are shaken
by other similar events in Poso and Irian Jaya.
Widely
regarded that the current unity crisis is driven by
the heterogeneity of our ethnic, religion and race.
This is supported by John Galtung in his book True
World: A Transnational Perspective (1980).
Galtung, a preeminent humanist, identifies
three main causes of secessionist movements.
Firstly, a relation of dominance, establishing
dominator and dominated.
Secondly, a high correlation between the
dominator-dominated dimension and geographical
location.
Thirdly, a high correlation between the
dominator-dominated dimension and ethnical or
religious factor.
Galtung’s
thesis applies to the recent movement in the Balkans
where the dominated Kosovar and Bosnian ethnic people
fought for their independence.
The vacuum of absolute domination by a certain
ethnic or religion in our country, however, compels us
to seek more reasonable factors.
One
of the fundamental causes is the unequal relationship
between central and regional governments developing
during New Order era.
During the era, regional governments were
basically treated like subordinates, not partners by
central government in managing regional development.
Central planners in Jakarta designed and
implemented the blueprints of development, setting
aside local and regional governments as secondary
actors and in some cases just spectators.
Often,
their inadequate understanding of local conditions
resulted in controversial policies like the operation
of Inti Rayon pulp factory in Porsea, North Sumatra.
Local people rejected the operation of the
factory but central government stubbornly ignored them
until finally it was shut down when Jakarta was no
longer able to control the situation.
To
make matters worse, regional leaders that were
generally appointed by Jakarta, also lacked
understanding of local issues.
In addition, their main priority was to serve
central officials who were frequently treated like a
king.
My experience when a minister visited my
hometown some years ago supports this assertion. The
local government was very busy decorating the city and
even sending students on vacation just to greet the
minister.
Another
major cause is a fundamental misconception that
occurred in our economic development strategy. The
central planners were too smart to ignore the reality
that strong regional economies are the key to
successful national development, not the other way
around.
Not only did it create serious regional
disparities but also caused some regions far left
behind compared to the nation as a whole.
According
to data released by the Central Bureau of Statistics
in 1998, the average per capita income of 19 provinces
was 1,48 million rupiah, much lower compared to the
national per capita income of 2,17 million rupiah.
Per capita income in Jakarta was ten-fold that
of Eastern Southeast Nusa and nine-fold that of
Southeast Sulawesi.
During
period of 1967-98, total approved domestic investment
in five provinces was 12 trillion rupiah, much less
compared to that of West Java that received 195
trillion rupiah. Foreign investment approvals in eight
provinces were only $2,6 billion while, at the same
period, West Java secured $64 billion.
Regional
indicators of human basic needs such as access to
health services, better education, clean water and
sanitation are even more dismal.
In eight provinces, ratio of student to teacher
at elementary level was still much higher compared to
the national average of 23 students per teacher.
Population per public health center in eight provinces
was 360, too high compared to the national average of
274.
Around
34 percent of households in 17 provinces do not have
access to sanitation, while the national average is 24
percent.
On average, 30 percent of households in 12
provinces do not have access to clean water, too high
compared to the national average of 12 percent.
The
disparities are further aggravated by capital drainage
from local economies.
Regional investment projects, mostly owned by
foreign and central investors from rich provinces such
as Jakarta and West Java, not only failed to boost the
income of local people, but also pushed the capital
outflows from peripheries to central.
As a result, capital outflows from local
economies are much greater than the capital inflows.
In addition, central or foreign companies
acquire most projects, leaving local companies with
the marginal ones.
Unity
based on mutually beneficial and equal cooperation
between regional and center governments is more stable
than superficial unity imposed by force.
Consequently, there is no other alternative
except to decentralize our economic and political
policies, and to change the nature of relationship
between central and regional governments from
subordinate to partnership.
This can be achieved without transforming the
nation from unity into federation.
The
great philosopher Bertrand Russell once remarked,
“understanding the problem is the first step to
overcoming it.” Without understanding the
fundamental causes of the present crisis, it is
impossible to formulate and implement an accurate
policy aiming to keep our nation together as one.
Your
comment
Back to
top
|
The Prospect
is published by The Indonesian Institute. Our messages are
study, democracy and unity.
