|
11/01/02
Reza Adenan, studying international study at
the University of Saskatchewan, Canada
It is our concern to observe the
new anti-terrorism regulation launched by the
Indonesian government a few days ago carefully. The
new regulation which gives the authority to hold
suspects without trial could provoke the military to
make a come back to our fragile democracy system and
destroy the Indonesian dream of reformation. The new
anti terrorism regulation and Indonesia’s war against
terrorism could demolish the Indonesian dream of
promoting democracy and human rights.
Despite positive responses from
various democratic countries such as Australia, the
new anti-terrorism regulation and declaration of the
Indonesian government to fight against terrorism will
not guarantee that Indonesia’s war against terrorism
would be efficient and effective. External and
internal pressures were the two defining factors that
explain why the Indonesian government, take such a
harsh regulation, to promote a quick security and
stability within the country.
Indonesian armed forces are known
to be the forces that abuse human rights and civil
liberty during thirty two years of the Suharto’s
regime. Even after the strong wind of reformation blew
through out the archipelago, the Indonesian armed
force is a still a strong instrument for human rights
abuses that occurred outside of Java due to the weak
central government in Jakarta. The tragedy of Bali and
the war against terror are being overexploited by the
government as an excuse to fight several separatist
groups within the country to avoid disintegration of
the nation. The lack of attention and professionalism
of the central government to exercise its influence
through out the vast archipelago have resulted in a
huge inequality of development across regions which is
a very conducive situation for a separatist movement,
such as the guerrilla of Aceh Liberation Movement. The
Indonesian unification as a nation just can be
achieved if the government in Jakarta are just,
responsive, and professional. Those characteristic is
not being shown or positively improved since the
reformation began on 1997.
The fact that the government of
Indonesia is going to misuse the new anti-terrorist
regulation is just a matter of time, the war against
terrorism and against its own people in Indonesia has
just begun, and the country is shrinking again to its
multi dimensional conflicts of its mankind. Indeed
there are others more efficient way to fight terrorism
in Indonesia without hurting the democracy and human
rights. The corrupt element of our immigration and
fiscal system makes Indonesia an easy gateway for
terrorist to operate in the country. Indonesia must
reform its corrupt and complex bureaucratic system,
not just to fight terrorism but also other problems
that the country is facing recently.
The new anti-terrorism regulation
and Indonesia’s war against terrorism set back the
Indonesian dream to promote democracy and human
rights. We have learned from the previous regime that
the terror was exercise by the government, and now
after the reformation, after the recognition of
freedom, democracy, and human rights the country is
just about to make a turning back with an excuse the
war against terrorism? There is never an efficient
method to fight terrorism without fighting cultural,
economical and social differences between mankind. The
American style to fight terrorism is just like
fighting street crimes without fighting the poverty.
It is ineffective and inefficient, and it has been
proved that the global terror against the system has
not been over. While we still use violence to ends
violence the violence would never disappear. And it
will be always new generation of terrorist to be born
to fight against our system.
See also link
'Terrorism fight in RI may hurt
democracy'
Alternative View
Elwin Tobing
Many people are confused and agitated with the word of
terrorism. This is due to many factors but there are
two reasons which are worthy of mentioning. The first
is their failure to recognize that we are living in a
dismal and yet beautiful world. Dismal is because some
people are prone to harm others and beautiful is
because some other people are apt to help others.
Secondly, it is due to their unwillingness to accept
another reality that, because of the first reality, a
relative peace – a peace where small conflicts still
exist as opposed to absolute peace where conflicts no
longer present - can never be achieved without
punishing bad guys. As Aristotle said, “We make war
that we may live in peace.” The question now is how,
as a nation, are we going to deliver the punishment?
In
the past, our punishing machine – military – had
conducted various brutal and murderous acts. There is
no question about it. Even military people themselves
have acknowledged that. When the ex strong man,
Soeharto resigned in 1998, the nation suddenly got the
chance it has long waited for: “revenge”. Maneuvers to
bring back the military to barrack were seriously
conducted by the ex president Wahid. He was not alone
as various elements in society supported his
movements. And combined with a continuous military
embargo by the United States, Indonesia’s military was
facing a double sword which weakens its power. Both
politically and militarily, it is being disarmed.
Geopolitically, Indonesia is vulnerable to external
and internal threats. The nation’s stage of
development - politically, economically and socially -
is also less conducive for realizing a peaceful and
stabile nation. Given this environment, how can
Indonesia protect itself from various external and
internal threats? So far, the world has not been
successful to find a solution to such problem except
by using military power. That does not mean I am a
blind proponent of using military power to solve any
threats to our national security. My concern is when
and how are we going to use it. Also another relevant
question is who is the figure behind it?
Military in the hand of a wrong individual is a deadly
monster. Think about Hitler, Stalin or many military
dictators who had turned it into a killing machine. A
military without mind and passion is also a dangerous
monster. Any conflict has to be solved first using
constructive and civilized dialog. And this matter is
much too serious to be entrusted to the military
alone. Political and social approaches must be the
first option as Mao Tse-Tung said, “Politics
is war without bloodshed while war is politics with
bloodshed.” The real test for leadership or power is
not capacity to make war but the capacity to prevent
it. But when there is no more option left on the table
except a destruction of the nation’s security and
future, a military solution is unavoidable. Then, the
question is how to use it? Should we also combine it
with social efforts and tireless political dialog?
The reason why so many
people hate our military is because it has long been
in the hand of wrong individuals who frequently used
it as the first solution to solve any threats to our
national security and who always ignored political
dialog. Therefore, rather than we are paranoid
of our own military, we better ask and answer
questions: how can we develop constructive dialog
among different groups of people in the country? How
can we produce a strong and clean civilian
government? How can we elect capable and ethical
legislative members? How can we stand up together
against bad guys? These are our real home works.
An
old related view (February
2002)
Elwin
Tobing
The
current President Wahid’s move to ask General
Wiranto to resign as coordinating minister of security
and politics is believed a part of his policy to
reform the military.
The reform is aimed at reducing military
influence in social and politics affairs and
eventually ending dwifungsi
doctrine by returning the Indonesian armed forces (TNI)
to its essential role as professional military.
Since
the late 1950s, the TNI have exercised special
influence in the political life of Indonesia through
the doctrine of ‘dual function’ (dwifungsi).
Enshrined in law in 1982, this doctrine endowed
the armed forces with civil and political as well as
professional military functions.
The army, in particular, has had a privileged
role in government being represented at every level of
bureaucracy and administration.
When
President Wahid took the office four months ago, he
has pursued military reform in various levels, one of
them is armed forces rebalance.
Wahid has attempted to balance the influence of
the army through the appointment of senior navy and
airforce officers to key posts.
Armed forces spokesman, a job traditionally
reserved for a senior army officer, has recently been
given to Air Rear Marshal Graito Usodo. In addition,
Admiral Widodo has been appointed as armed forces
commander, while Air Vice-Marshal Ian Santoso has
become head of military intelligence.
Another
policy aimed at reforming the military is a
civilian-military separation.
In line with the constitutional reform passed
by the People’s Consultative Assembly in October
last year, the president has tried to separate senior
armed forces personnel serving in the government from
their former military commands. Wahid insists that all such officers resign from the armed
forces immediately they take up their government
posts.
Reducing
the numbers of military personnel is another reform. President Wahid has sought to reduce the number of military
officers in his presidential entourage from 25 to 15
and support moves by army reformers such as
Mayor-General Wirahadikusumah of the South Sulawesi
Command to reduce the number of regional military
commands from the current eleven to seven.
This
military reform is definitely required to develop our
democracy, however, it should be done through a
gradual process.
After more than 30 years in power, the TNI have
controlled almost seven thousand key posts spanning
the whole administrative spectrum from cabinet
ministers to village heads.
Curbing the social and politics role of TNI in
one night is absolutely impossible.
In
addition, the military reform should be conducted
without causing domestic instability which not only
will impede our economic recovery efforts but also
undermine the development of our infant democracy.
It
is important to realize that the triumph of our
national reform in the 1998 and our democracy in 1999
is not a victory of civilian over military.
It is however a victory of people over
authoritarian regime, a triumph of the future over the
past and more importantly, a victory of morality over
immorality. It is the people’s mandate to the Wahid’s government to
realize the triumphs.
To
do that, the Wahid's government should not fall into
the trap of political or power game.
Instead, the government must focus their
energy, resources and capacity to work on two
important agendas: enhancing our democracy and
boosting the living standard of people.
An
enhanced democracy will eventually reform the
military. However,
a reformed military does not guarantee a more
democratic nation.
Pakistan is a good example.
The transformation from military government
only resulted in a corrupt civilian government.
The
enhancement of democracy must be done through
people’s empowerment. This requires a redistribution
of resources and a greater participation of people in
the development program.
This is precisely the virtue of the
decentralization program that the government is
planning to carry out. The government should actively
promote the program and mobilize people’s
participation and potential to implement it.
The top priority agenda therefore is to
implement and revitalize the program.
After
almost four months, the new cabinet has yet to come up
with a clear and organized idea on how to implement
the program. There
is no clear strategy and plan in human development,
education and community-based economy issues.
Headline news is full with conflicts of
political interests and controversial issues including
the Indonesian Bank Restructuring Agency's (IBRA)
plans. It
is evident that the Cabinet members lack vision,
managerial and leadership skills, and the Cabinet
seems passive rather than proactive.
Wahid should now move his energy to empower his
cabinet and boost the implementation of
decentralization program.
The
second vital agenda is to improve the living standard
of our people. One
of the significant factors influencing this program is
the moral quality of our bureaucrats, business people
and leaders. It
is impossible to enhance people’s living standards
while at the same time the agenda to control
corruption practices is still vague. So far, there is
no serious or extensive investigation on corruption
cases. The
fact that Indonesia was the second most corrupt
country in the world two years ago revealed that
corruption was a massive practice.
Improving
people’s standard of living requires a clear target
and a program of minimizing corruption practices. This
implies that another government priority is to combat
corruption. An increase in government officers’
salary must be followed by a more active control of
corruption practices. Perhaps, president Wahid should
establish a national committee for combating
corruption. This
committee, responsible directly to the president,
would work together with national and international
corruption watch agencies.
Due
to his weakness as a human being, President Wahid
should be supported by the right strategic advisers
who not merely think partially, but rather integrally.
More importantly, they must place people as the
center of their strategic policy and two of the
policies are the enhancement of decentralization
program and the minimization of corruption practices.
Therefore, the military reform must not trivialize
these two primary agendas.
Your
comment
Back
to top
|
The Prospect
is published by The Indonesian Institute. Our messages are
study, democracy and unity.
