10 Years after the Fall of Suharto

10 Years after the Fall of Suharto – Views from the People’s Organisations

SITORUS Harris

mai 2008

The following is the thirteenth translation out of a series of 13 interviews with leaders of labour, peasant, fisherpeople, urban and rural poor, environmental, student and social-political organisations in Indonesia around the theme “Ten Years after the Fall of Suharto – Views from the People’s Organisations”, which appeared in the first edition of Jurnal Bersatu (Journal of Unity) – James Balowski.The situation 10 after the fall of Suharto (2)

Introduction

The following discussion was written based on interviews conducted by Jurnal Bersatu (Journal of Unity) editorial staff with a number of people’s organisations. The spectrum and “political groupings” along with the sectors and class of organisation were several of the considerations in the choice of the groups that were interviewed. Nevertheless there were two organisations – the People’s Movement Alliance for Agrarian Reform (AGRA) and the United People’s Party (PPR) who on the eve of the publication of this journal were unable to be interviewed.

Social-political organisations

3. Harris Sitorus, Secretary General National Liberation Party of Unity (Papernas)

In general terms, there has been no significant change in social welfare over the 10 years since the fall of Suharto. This can be seen from the gap between levels of income and expenditure, where half of the Indonesian population have an income of less than 18,000 rupiah a day, whereas there is a need to buy rice and so forth. This is already included in the category of poverty, but officially the government states that the number of poor in Indonesia is only around 39 million or 16.7 percent, whereas it is actually three times this number.

The principle problems facing the people at the moment

The urgent problem in Indonesia is the lack of welfare that is a caused by incorrect policies, because of the grip of imperialism. Indonesia itself actually has a great deal of natural wealth, but it is not used for the benefit of the ordinary people. The state, which should be the servant of the public has instead liberalised all sectors of the economy. This is what we must take back, because we are the owners of this land of Indonesia.

This discourse, in principle, has also been developing in groups outside of Papernas. Moreover many bourgeois politicians have also been taking up the issue of national autonomy, although their seriousness is open to question. But a means has not in fact been found to correctly put the above discourse into practice. Hopefully groups or individuals that understand it can continue to mutually discuss the problem in order that it can become a joint issue that in turn can become a new political force.

State of the people’s movement

Following the fall of Suharto, many critical individuals emerged and on the one hand, this was positive, because it signified that people were struggling though their own methods and endeavouring to advance these means of struggle. But this situation of struggling individually could not be maintained, and this has been the reason for the weakness of the people’s movement over the last 10 years. Unity is needed, not just as a perspective, but with concrete measures.

People’s movement unity

Since 2001, there have been many concepts of unity. In general terms, among various movement elements, there has been a similarity in the vision and views about the basic problem in Indonesia and the means to overcome it. The problem is — and this has existed since the Suharto era — in practice these various elements have had unique and different characteristics. For example, in viewing the mass movements, there are those that prioritise moving quickly and there are those that prioritise prudence and strengthening the basis first before a large mass movement can exist. In addition to this, after Suharto was toppled, there were different experience of struggle and new ideas.

One of the best possibilities to apply is to mutually carry out things that can be jointly agreed on and to undertake individually things that cannot be jointly agreed to, while testing this in practice to obtain an understanding about which practice is the most correct. In addition to this, elements in the movement also need to discuss how, if full unity cannot yet be achieved, to mutually support each other. Papernas itself is of the view that unity in concrete terms, is building a political party, because the problem in Indonesia is a problem of power, bearing in mind the forces that have been in power up until now have not been able to pursue that which is being demanded by the people.

Aims of the struggle

Papernas’s concept is one of national unity. This concept sets out from the fact that the Indonesian people in general, from all classes or sectors, are confronting the grip of imperialism through neoliberalism. For Papernas, it is this that must be resolved first of all. Indonesia must rise up first and become a nation that is autonomous though a national government, so that its tendency is populist in general or progressive nationalist. So the fight with domestic capitalism can be continued later after this initial stage is finished, although this does not mean that Papernas excludes this fight right now.

Political parties

In a situation where state institutions have been modified in such a way that is it difficult for it to be accessed by the movement, unity is thus indeed a necessity for the movement if it is to compete with the parties that already dominate. Communication in this direction must be built in order that in 2010-2011 or other years, the movement can unite its forces. All parties also need a concrete picture about the practical steps needed for unity, so that it is not just groping around, which could then lead to splits and conflicts.

Papernas itself is projecting to take state power, because real power lies in the state institutions, such as the parliament and so fourth. It is here that political power is established, not in the streets. So, Papernas is currently endeavouring to combine extra-parliamentary methods with parliamentary methods to broaden its influence. This is why Papernas is endeavouring as fully as possible to be involved in the 2009 elections. So the form of an open mass party has been taken so that Papernas can become a tool to accelerate the political consciousness of the marginal layers, bearing in mind the potential for this exists and can be seen from the unrest that is currently spreading in society.

The 2009 elections

The 2009 elections are strategic, because it is linked with the issue of power. For Papernas all issues that are linked with power are strategic in character, because all of these issues will determine what Indonesia wants to become in the future. The state institutions that exist at the moment cannot of course promise anything, but in de facto and concrete terms a movement that could make revolutionary change possible does not exist. So, no matter how bad our state institutions are, they must still be intervened in so that we do not just become spectators who simply accept their policies. Although we must indeed work on concrete issues in society, at the same time we must also put forward the perspective of holding power. That is what Papernas is currently trying to do.

In the 2009 elections, the elements of the movement must take a stand and not become apolitical, such as carrying out golput (white movement, abstaining from voting). If indeed there is no alternative, it is better to carry out a boycott than to golput. Papernas itself is currently seeking another way so that it can be involved in the 2009 elections and if successful, colleagues in the movement can elect Papernas people. If this turns out to be a failure, we can elect other alternative forces such as United People’s Party (PPR). If not, perhaps in other parties there are good individuals, who have been tested and can represent this social unrest. We could elect them with the hope that after they are in power, they will not become free individuals. Papernas itself does not trust individuals such as those in the Golkar Party, because they must become a part of an organisation or collective.

• From Journal of Unity – May 2008.
• Harris Sitorus is Secretary General National Liberation Party of Unity (Papernas).

Sumber: Europe Solidaire Sans Frontières