The Jakarta Post, February 03, 2003
Opinion
Social violence in Indonesia is localized
Mohammad Zulfan Tadjoeddin, Research Associate, United Nations Support Facility
for Indonesian Recovery (UNSFIR), Jakarta, zulfan.unsfir@un.or.id
Indonesia is often characterized as a troubled country ridden with conflict and violence
in every region. Is this characterization correct? To answer this question, we need to
examine carefully data relating to violent social conflict. In this context, violent social
conflict is defined as conflict between two distinct social groups that cannot be
institutionalized and which turns into violent actions.
The preliminary results of a recently developed social conflict database for Indonesia
compiled by the UN Support Facility for Indonesian Recovery (UNSFIR), a join project
of the Government of Indonesia and UNDP, show that social conflicts and violence in
Indonesia are locally concentrated in only a few provinces and districts, although their
social, political and economic impacts are nationally felt.
A preliminary analysis of this database reveals two interesting features. First,
communal violence is the most severe category of social violence, followed by
separatist violence. Between 1990 and 2001, the data show that communal and
separatist violence caused maximum fatalities, accounting for 77 percent and 22
percent of total deaths in social violence, respectively. Here, communal violence is
defined as social violence between two groups of the community, or one group being
attacked by the other. Communal groups can be based on ethnicity, religion, social
class, political affiliation or simple village differences and so on.
Second, social violence in Indonesia is primarily locally concentrated. While
separatist violence only occurred in Aceh and Papua, communal violence was
concentrated in several districts or cities. Based on the conditions before the
formation of new administrative regions by the ongoing decentralization, only eight
regions (7 districts and 1 city) account for an enormously disproportionate distribution
of communal violence in the country; approximately 65 percent of total deaths in
communal violence. Based on the 1995 Inter-Population Census (SUPAS), however,
these eight regions represent a mere 1.9 percent of Indonesia's population. The eight
regions are four districts and one city in Maluku (the districts of North Maluku, Central
Maluku, Southeast Maluku and Central Halmahera, and the city of Ambon), plus three
other districts; namely Poso of Sulawesi, and East Kotawaringin and Sambas of
Kalimantan. More than ninety-eight percent of Indonesia's population has not been
"communal riot-prone".
The local concentration of social conflicts in a large country is not a phenomenon
unique to Indonesia. India, the world's second largest country after China in terms of
total population, also shows a local concentration of communal conflicts -- in this
case Hindu-Muslim violence. The local concentration of communal violence in India is
one of the most interesting fiindings in the research done by Prof. Ashutosh
Varshney, a political scientist at the University of Michigan. The study was published
by Yale University Press, 2002, under the title of Ethnic Conflict and Civic Life: Hindus
and Muslims in India.
Professor Varshney concludes that, first, the share of villages in communal rioting
turned out to be remarkably small. Between 1950 and 1995, rural India, where
two-thirds of Indians still live, accounted for about 4 percent of the deaths in
communal violence. Hindu-Muslim violence is primarily an urban phenomenon.
Secondly, within urban India too, Hindu-Muslim riots are highly locally concentrated.
Only eight cities account for a hugely disproportionate share of communal violence in
the country; approximately 46 percent of all deaths in Hindu-Muslim violence. As a
group, however, these eight cities represent a mere 18 percent of India's urban
population, and about 5 percent of the country's total population, both urban and rural.
Eighty-two percent of India's urban population has not been "riot-prone".
In contrast to India, however, communal violence in Indonesia tends to be less
concentrated in urban areas. Even though the data needs some refinement, the
incidents of social violence mainly occurred in districts and small towns. Communal
conflicts in Maluku, Poso, Sambas and East Kotawaringin (Sampit) are more a battle
between communities in rural areas.
Understanding of such facts -- that social violence in Indonesia, like in India, is locally
concentrated -- should bring significant implications in analyyzing conflicts and
exploring Indonesia's policy choices.
Although characterized by high local concentration, social conflicts (mainly communal
conflicts) in Indonesia have resulted in nationally distributed impacts. This can be
seen from the following indicators: internally displaced persons (IDPs), budget
pressure, the destroyed image of the country and the exhausted national energy to
overcome this problem.
There are now approximately 1.3 million IDPs spread across 21 provinces, largely
victims of highly location-specific social violence. Their existence will certainly put
pressure on local governments economically, politically and socially. IDPs from Aceh
are mainly spread in North Sumatra, and partly in Riau, Jambi, South Sumatra, and
up to West, Central and East Java. East Java and especially Madura are the main
destinations of IDPs from Sambas and Sampit. Poso IDPs flood its neighboring
regions. Maluku IDPs spread in all Sulawesi, Papua and up to Java. Furthermore, the
remaining East Timorese IDPs are still left in East Nusa Tenggara. All of them need
housing, jobs, social infrastructure and other economic, social and cultural rights that
have disappeared because of conflicts.
The required intervention for humanitarian aid and post-conflict recovery has caused
severe budgetary problems for both national and regional governments. It adds to the
current budget pressure due to the economic crisis and the mountain of public debt.
Violent conflicts in Indonesia have destroyed the image of the country in international
eyes with adverse consequences for tourism and investments. Even though Indonesia
has a large domestic market, the perception of an unsafe country, a brutal society
and an inefficient police and military unable to control law and order is driving away
investors and tourists.
In general, conflicts have exhausted national energy for reconciliation and
rehabilitation efforts, humanitarian aid, as well as efforts to prevent conflicts erupting
into violence in other regions. The recovery, rehabilitation and reconciliation in conflict
prone areas are becoming more complicated due to the reality that sometimes, local
conflicts cannot be isolated from politics at the national level.
The knowledge that social conflict in Indonesia has a high degree of local
concentration should improve the common understanding of conflict in this country.
Even though locally concentrated, conflicts have produced nation wide economic,
political and social impacts. Therefore, national efforts are needed to overcome those
conflicts. As part of such efforts, UNSFIR, in collaboration with several other
institutions, is now pioneering the establishment of social conflict database for
Indonesia to be used by a number of users.
* The views expressed herein are entirely personal.
All contents copyright © of The Jakarta Post.
|
