The Years that were ASEAN, and Indonesian: Collection of Essays

The period between 2008 and 2010 was significant to Southeast Asia. During this period, the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) Charter came into force. The idea of one economic, political, and socio-cultural community for the 10 Member-States was ever more inching closer to reality. While this was unfolding, I was able to witness this community-building process by being at the ASEAN Secretariat in Jakarta, Indonesia in 2008 and at the ASEAN Centre for Biodiversity in 2009-2010.

This collection of essays (The years that were ASEAN, and Indonesian: Facing the odds towards regional integration and community building) revisits the significant events, burning issues, and memorable times in ASEAN and so in Indonesia in 2008-2010. They attempt to shed light on these events, issues and rekindle the times when nationalistic and regionalistic fervor was at the peak.

There are five topics that organize the essays. The first one is on regional studies. It starts with the banner year, 2008, for ASEAN when the new Secretary-General, Dr. Surin Pitsuwan, took his office and the role of the regional organization in the humanitarian operations and reconstruction projects in Myanmar in the post-Cyclone Nargis. One essay questions the inclusiveness of the regional integration process of the envisioned one ASEAN community when it comes to peoples participation in the process. The last essay on this topic is the security threat posed by North Korea and how ASEAN can address the threat.

The second topic deals with the environmental issues. Two essays focus on both the regional trends that cause problems and the regional capabilities and structures that can buck the trends.

The third topic is on the political developments in Indonesia. The Commission for Truth and Friendship (CTF) report is examined and its contextual usefulness. Then, the second presidential victory by Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono (SBY) is put into a global political perspective by looking at the wave of victories of oppositions in various national politics.

In the fourth topic, national security issues are discussed. In 2008, the streets of Jakarta saw the violence of student protests. At the other side of the violence are the works of the government. The last essay in the national security issues describes the deadly stampede which is a symptom of social injustice and structural violence in the country.

The last topic is on the nationalistic fervor and travel insights. Celebrating Independence Day and winning an Olympic gold generate emotional attachment to the flag and nation. Being in Jakarta, masjids and gerejas are landmarks which offer not only religious symbol, but spiritual refuge as well. Writing Jakarta without any mention of traffic jams and motorcycles is prejudicial to what it really is.

Most of these essays were published in The Jakarta Post in 2008-2010. Get the book here.

Being Indonesian from a non-Indonesian: More or less

Monas 2008

August 17, 2008. It was my second month in Mampang Prapatan, Jakarta Selatan, Indonesia. I went outside to go to the market when I was invited to join parlor and children's games on the street. The street was blocked by a pole with Indonesian flag (red and white) and my neighbors appropriated the street as a playground. I joined the balap karung (sack race). We lost the race, but there was no feeling of losing since everyone was having fun and receiving prizes. I received two candies. Despite the language barrier, we laughed and enjoyed those moments. I became part of the neighborhood. I then thought freedom and independence must not be exclusive; they are meant to be shared, to be felt, to be experienced by all.

Below is what I wrote four years ago when I was in Jakarta. It was published in Jakarta Post (http://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2008/08/20/never-more-indonesian-aug-17.html)

-------------------------------------------

When was the last time you felt more Indonesian than ever? As a non-Indonesian, I ask this question because I saw how Kosovo celebrated when its parliament declared their independence from Serbia earlier this year. I also read the news about the celebrations in Mongolia on their winning their first ever Olympic gold medal in Beijing. So, when was it that you felt more Indonesian than ever?

Independence Day on Aug. 17 would have to be one of those moments when you felt good to be Indonesian. Seeing red and white all over the place with Indonesian flags flying high in every corner, on streets, buildings and outside houses. This gives us a sense of identity and belonging. There was hardly any other moment in history which is comparable to Indonesia's declaration of independence.

Winning an Olympic gold would undoubtedly make every Indonesian proud of their own athletes' achievements. And this is exactly what shuttlers Kido and Setiawan did for 225 million Indonesians. They delivered a golden performance for Indonesia in the men's doubles badminton at the Beijing 2008 Olympic Games.

The feat came at the expense of the Chinese team who were playing on their home turf. Any athlete would understand the odds of playing against a home court advantage, but Kido and Setiawan rose to the challenge, winning from behind a set to take the two succeeding sets against a hostile crowd.

Both events combined to make us proud to be Indonesian and gave us a sense of nationalism.

Becoming Indonesian is easy: You could be born of Indonesian parents or be naturalized through a legal process. However, being Indonesian is about much more than this -- much more than simply a nationality or citizenship which can be acquired by fulfilling bureaucratic requirements.

Being Indonesian resides in the core of we are, internalized in history, songs, traditions, institutions, or in the all-encompassing culture. In Freudian terms, being Indonesian is imprinted in the unconscious mind which is reflected in our conscious level.

Thus, these two significant events activated internalized meanings and symbolisms attached to being Indonesian -- and this may have been triggered by any number of different scenarios; putting up a flag, singing the national anthem, seeing pictures of heroes or presidents, taking part in local activities, posting a note in friendster or facebook or simply talking with friends and family, here or abroad.

In a critical world, the nation should be grateful for these two historic events. They have reaffirmed and secured the 63-year-old aspirations and goals of the proponents of an independent Indonesia among the young Indonesians who will now see our country through the next 63 years.

However, when a decree was issued banning Ahmadiyah (a religious sect) to observe its beliefs, was the government being more Indonesian? When professionals decide to work abroad and send their remittance back home, are they being less Indonesian than those who decide to practice their professions locally?

When students and businesspeople use English to communicate their ideas and feelings, are they being less Indonesian? When people chose to spend their Independence Day at Ancol with their families, are they less Indonesian than those who went to Monas or took part in other independence related activities?

These sample questions can take us back to the core of what it means to be Indonesian. And it is through continuous questioning and reflection that we will establish what is truly great about being an Indonesian.

Indonesia has celebrated its Independence Day 63 times already.

So what is new? Not much, except that these two events can serve to hold Indonesia and its peoples together and make sense of their special place in the world. Events such as these provide Indonesians with more reasons to celebrate triumphantly.

Revisiting Timor Leste Crisis in 2006: Lessons in Peacebuilding

Ten years after its independence through referendum, Timor Leste is very much like a baby learning to walk on governance and politics arena. Just like a baby, it is susceptible and prone to viruses, missteps and diseases. There is an atmosphere of fragility and volatility of its health condition.

True enough in 2006, Timor Leste experienced a political and social crisis. The immediate cause reported was the dismissal of more than 600 troops in the government's military forces when they deserted their posts and refused to go back to barracks. The desertion of the disgruntled soldiers was sparked by the alleged preferential in the military structure of the Lorosae (easterners) over the Loromuno (westerners). The discrimination was based on the role and contribution in the resistance and revolutionary movement during the Indonesian occupation. The Lorosae significantly played more prominent roles in the revolutionary front than the Loromuno. The socially geographical divide, distinction and identity between the west and east, struggle for fairness and equality of treatment, and share of power in the military structure pushed the soldiers to defy orders, and it cost them their job and the fragile and volatile political situation of their young country.

However, the International Crisis Group believed that the root cause of the crisis could be traced back historically to the earlier days of the Revolutionary Front for the Liberation of East Timor (FRETILIN) between its central committee and Xanana Gusmao, then commander of a guerilla army, FALINTIL. The Group also attributed the crisis to the "poorly implemented demobilization of FALINTIL fighters in 2000 and the creation of defence force" which took some fighters in and left some out, unemployed. Thus when the more than 600 soldiers and police took the streets of Dili, they were with unemployed men and gang members.

Acting as the parent of the young country, the UN created various missions to East Timor since 1999. These mission were UNAMET for the preparation, registration and conduct of referendum in 1999, UNTAET for the administration in the transition period in 1999-2002, UNMISET for building and strengthening structures and institutions toward a functional state in 2002-2005, and then during the crisis, UNOTIL for the political mission to support the development of the institutions in 2005-2006. Under the UN mission in 2001, the decision to have a defence force seemed logical since the external threat posed by TNI (Indonesian army) in the neighboring West Timor was ever-present and imposing. Hypothetically at least, a sizeable force could delay any plan of or actual forced occupation or intrusion by the TNI while the international community is pondering whether to intervene militarily or not to stop the TNI. In the anxious minds of Timorese people and historically speaking, this could be a real scenario and they would not want to be caught flat-footed and unprepared. Besides, the defence force would create jobs for the heroes of the revolutionary front. It was a way of acknowledging their efforts and sacrifices coming to fruition. Understandably, the UN was not against job creation and giving due to the heroes of the young country.

However, the presence of TNI in the borders of Timor Leste was misinterpreted as a threat by an insecure young country like East Timor. I think the TNI was there on the borders to secure itself from mass movement of impoverished Timorese people.

Experiences in the disarmament, demobilization and reintegration of former combatants in other post-conflict countries would help forecast and prevent similar crisis. Some examples would be in Sri Lanka, the Philippines, Afghanistan, Congo, just to name a few. I think the mindset of the conflict or war still lingered in the Timorese soldiers at that time. They thought, as long as the TNI were there as a threat within striking distance, the desire to defend the homeland against the others (TNI) ringed vigorously in the hearts and minds of a capable realist, a true revolutionary. They forgot to consider that the revolution was over and that the UN would not allow a repeat of 1975. Anyway, who would argue and go against a strong-willed decision to have a defence force?

Acting as a parent, the UN could only hope for the best to and support its one of the youngest members. And the worst happened but the UN did not abandon its baby. Its neighbors in Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) also extended their hands for the efforts to make baby steps in the often violent democratization process.