The Conversation

Conversation between Question and Answer, could be true, could be not true. But, this is the truth.. for me.

Q: Should we wait for a closed snobbish door, while there are other doors more friendly and give hopes and possibilities of solutions for social problem among community, including service toward people with disability? 

A: For me, the answer is “NO”, because they can not wait anymore and with all those sweet promises.

Q: Do we really positioned people with disability as subject of our service activities? While we came to them like a hero, by putting our position forward and our outstanding knowledge, etc, not on our equality as human being? 

A: For me, absolutely no, if so, then we really put people with disability as object of our interests and satisfaction, in any forms. Not on their satisfaction and interest.

Q: Then, do we work on service for people with disability, going anywhere, going abroad for studying, attending conferences, because of our outstanding? Our position? Or because we are eligible? Because we are important person? Because we are clever? 

A: For me, definitely no. We go everywhere, visiting other countries to study about service for people with disability or conference, etc those all because of them, people with disability, the rest is because of our luck. We are not important person, we are caregiver for them, not to be served.

In service context or rehabilitation activities for people with disability, fund and money are not result of our excellence, cleverness, or our importance, except because of their presence, because of their outstanding. Don’t trap on routines that unintentionally our strength and knowledge lead us to use it to sell the people with disability context for our own satisfaction and interest.

Be careful, sometimes different definitions and service implementation is very slight, as if we are right and excellent, whereas we have been on fatal and paradox thought. As if we focus on goodness, welfare, and the best things for people with disability, whereas the steps we have taken are just focus on our goodness, our welfare, and for our interest, not for them.

 

NK - "Earth Hails"

READ MORE - The Conversation

OPINION on CONFLICT SENSITIVITY (Aceh & Gayo Land Case Study)

Here, I just try to convey briefly how conflicts occur in Indonesia, Aceh and other regions within Indonesia has specification, and is a point of indifference toward local culture and social aspects. Hence, it leads to acute social insult, which eventually needs high and continue social cost for curative efforts. What I write is based on my experience over 3 years in Aceh and other region in Sumatera (Jambi) in which I have been involved in handling various programs ranging from emergency relief, humanitarian, community development, community outreach, community advocacy, local participation, household based public health, local governance strengthening, coordination, and good governance. Also as supported with my education background, sociology, with variety of analysis and discussions. I know, this comment is less focused and detail and this is not the right place to describe in detail. I am ready to put in the more detail description regarding my writing. 
 

I. General Overview of the Conflict Background

Context of conflict occurred in a region or a state has different background, although may have similarity in general context. Conflict management efforts often failed due to lack of focus on different local history characters, or less attention to the existing specification as consideration in taking conflict management strategy, it is merely on copy pasting lesson learned from some other region in which conflict management successfully handled. Whereas, if we learn more, the success story from other countries because they are do care about the exclusivity they have and the efforts are conducted referring to this.

a. Historical Review

Historically, protest against the central region, in this case NKRI (Union Republic of Indonesia), has started since 1949, after the Netherlands received the round tale conference result and Indonesia officially becoming States of Indonesia Republic concits of 16 small states. This amount is increased since the independence of Indonesia August 17, 1945 with 8 provinces (Sumatera, Kalimantan, Jawa Barat, Jawa Tengah,Jawa Timur, Sulawesi, Maluku dan Sunda Kecil).

RIS was failed with its disappointment to the failure of parliamentary system. Cabinet was formed and changed in short period, persevere, more in political position fight of the leaders. Then in August 1950, RIS back to union state based on Constitution 1945.

Reviewed further, conflict context in Indonesia has occurred since pre-independence era, when kingdoms of Java doing expansion to other Indonesian regions (check Majapahit – Mataram history). The fact showing that egocentric and feel superior and think that other tribes and regions are lower and should be subject, as a background of ongoing bloody conflict throughout kingdoms history in Indonesia.

Dissatisfaction of district and community toward RI since 1950 continues. Centralized, conservative, and feudalistic governance has made districts revolt (check DI TII, RMS, PRRI rebellion, etc).

Until the new era (Soeharto) districts rebellion continued, the incidences in Timor Leste, Aceh and Irian (check how Timor Leste finally got their freedom, Aceh demanded independence, as well as West Irian).

If reviewed, conflict background or insubordination has sociology-cultural color. Whwre ethnic or certain tribe is so dominant in all development lines whether economic, political, social and cultural. With Java dominance, and more with some Javanese country figures (moreover during Soeharto era), has made other tribes alienated, as if they don’t have chance to show up, to exist that they are Indonesian. Indonesia is not only Java batik, primbon, or attitude, etc.

Consider the context of conflict in Aceh, existence and tribe arrogance has been fundamental triggered (beside other historical factors, though tribes dominant background has been factual conflict source). Java dominance (central) in economy, social, cultire and political development access has made them feel treated as ‘unfair’. The unfairness is more perceived by Aceh people while distributing development ‘cake’. Natural and other resources belong to Aceh don’t give balance benefit for Aceh development. Authorization in management, distribution and determination of use of resources is not on Aceh’s but other tribe (java/cental). This occurs in all segments of economy, politic, social and culture. When central government gave full authorization through decentralization which gives wider power to district to manage their regions in all development aspect, Aceh has reached its disappointment and revenge. This is happened because conflict management conducted by central government for Aceh is so repressive. Coordination, participative, communication in socio-culture efforts have less applied in overcoming conflict at that time.

Consider again the internal conflict in Aceh, in this case Aceh and Gayo, same color and case happened, where tribe arrogance as Aceh has underestimated other tribes in the region. Even, to tell you frankly, Aceh tribe is more powerful and conceited and ‘feels’ as they are the best. Neglecting toward Gayo tribe is really obvious and visible, and even claim, take Gayo culture as Aceh identity (like Saman dance, etc), without stating that the dance is from Gayo. Aceh also has distinction/dichotomy ‘coastal people’ and ‘mountain people’ and they made the coastal people as Aceh and other region as compliment and is not in the same position with them (check how the establishment of BRR regional III, full of primordial and tribe sensitive).

I myself was as Haed Office working with UNORC in Gayo Highland/TAFO( Takengon Field Office) always see and learn the historical, cultural, and socio-anthropological context of the facts happened withi TAFO including context of conflict. I see tribal arrogance of Aceh in social, cultural, economy and political aspects trigger ‘unfair’ feeling refers to the conflict occurred. ALA incidence is predictable and reasonable. Too much to write related with analysis background of Aceh-Gayo conflict. My conclusion is not because I WORKED IN Gayo, but merely based on historical facts, sociological reviews, and 2 year working experience in Coastal Aceh (both west or east), and my education background, sociology, directs and strengthen that tribe arrogance and ego (spread out and be in all development aspects) has been one of conflict trigger.

b. Sociological, anthropological and political

Socio-anthropologically, Aceh-Gayo conflict has lead to prolonged conflict in Aceh. Unfair treatment against existence of other tribes except Aceh (coastal people) has encountered dissatisfaction and insubordination. Gayo with its rich natural and cultural resource, seems as they don’t have any potential in the context of politic and development in Aceh, muted and alienated in historical stage. All refer to Aceh and Aceh people (coastal people). In some aspects, it is worse than the case betweem centralized governance while Jakarta is the centre pf development ignoring other regions in Indonesia. Look how the effort of first President of Indonesia, Soekarno, who realized that Indonesia is islands with various tribes and cultures, could be high potential to conflict. And he created nationalism jargon like Bhineka Tunggal Ika = Unity in diversity. And he understands the diversity of ideology and values in Indonesia and he put it in a jargon, Nasakom = National, Religious and Communist is Indonesia. And shows diversity of culture, natural resource of Indonesia in a jargon = Indonesia as equatorial emerald. The decision to take Muhammad Hatta as vice of President, as he is from West Sumatera, is expected to represent a message that Indonesia is not only Java, although many other figures from Java who are more representative at that time fro being the vice of President. Other settings also showed by Soekarno that Indonesia is we all, not Java, Sumatera, Kalimantan or Papua. So, efforts to reconcile all diversities and ethnicity have often done, for if conflict is still there, this is regardless of political interest and also international.

In the context of Aceh Gayo, efforts to rally the sociological (assimilation) has not poured out in the efforts of legislation, development aspects, and even concretely detail in daily (look how Aceh sell its Acehnese to international, look how as if Aceh language is a must and a symbol of Aceh confession in all lines and even Governor and the deputy use the language regardless where they are. So, where is Gayo? Alas? Or Jamee language?

MoU Helsinki is even more mind and Acehnese instead of Aceh provice which consist of various tribes.

c. Cultural, norm, ethic and religious Review

Can not be avoided that the context of Indonesia is diversity of cultures, values/customs and religions. Often the conflicts in Indonesia including in Aceh are triggered by this background (lcheck conflict in Maluku Utara, Poso Sulawesi, and Sampit Kalimantan). On the similar religion dominant in Aceh, namely Islam, religion value becomes insignificant to be discussed (different with Maluku Utara case), but in the framework of traditional values, application of traditional values and norm which is dominance in Aceh, again Aceh tribe is in front line. Of the naming of development jargons, programs and events places (such as Inong balee for women activities, in Gayo also use the same term, while then local government of Gayo doesn’t respect to the Inong Balee, even the benefit is good, we couldn’t blame it). The pint is, sensitiveness to local aspects and context is very bad in Aceh, moreover to step forward to sustainability stage, etc.

II. Lessons Learned of conflicts in Indonesia

1.  In regard of character/culture of Kingdoms where previously Indonesia is kingdoms. It is reflected in governance system, attitude toward diversity, superior feeling and history proud

2.  Not apart from context that Indonesia consists of various tribes and cultures with different customs and values.

3.   Not apart from different religious context

4.   Not apart from international political interest and history of colonialism and the settings.

5.  Conflict management is partial, fragmentary, not integrated, often put ethnicity ego and dominance or major tribes. Often put political interest above others which also lead from the racial or certain faction ego.

6.  Conflict management doesn’t give priority to social, culture, value-norm and local aspects context. Then, local initiative or participation becoming less considered in determining conflict management strategy (for point 5 and 6, check BRA stories and the efforts, from BRA generation 1 lead by Ir. Usman Hasan Msi who tried to interpret section 2.3.5. MoU Helsinki ideally, then BRA generation 2 under coordination of Prof. Dr. Yusny Saby MA, with community based reintegration, and BRA generation 3 under coordination of Bapak NurDjuli). How all those show trial and error, and partiality becoming games in managing this prolonged conflict.

7.  Conflict often occur due to the feeling of ‘unfair treatment’, more specific ‘not representied’. Poor appreciation toward local potential, confession toward local existence.

8. There is no local valued independent institution that has responsibility on conflict management, reintegration, and peace building. There are many institutions established for conflict management is established by government, or representing faction interest (dominant faction/tribe).

III. Efforts plan in conflict management, reintegration or peace building fore be made.

From the points of lesson learned and general review of history, socio-anthropology and political analysis, some efforts may be conducted in conflict management are:

1.  Establishing independent institution (locally) responsible for conflict management, reintegration efforts and peace building. This institution is in central, province, and district level. This institution should represent transparency and professionalism and independent. Under strong legislation protection against the given mandate. Activities of this institution are directed to coordination, facilitation, and advocacy any issues about conflict, reintegration and peace building. For temporary, it could follow KPK (corruption eradication committee). This institution should represent social, values, cultures, tribes, racial, and history diversity from each region where the institution is established.

2.   Conducting human resource and public capacity building program for conflict context through chain and locally workshop. The workshop is the institution’s responsibility. If the institution is not available, it can be given to local government. The locally workshop is a manifest of conflict color occur in each region, that can represent local feeling, aspiration, and initiative. Workshop is limited, not constantly conducted in one year/months. It can serve as recommendation for start or opening for concrete activities in the field.

3.   More focus on establishing channels of communication and two-way dialogue between benefactor and the beneficiaries in all lines, whether through mass media, radio and television, or local meeting discussing and coordinating incidences, efforts and plans and expectation in conflict context. All activities are directed to joint solution oriented, in which community role and voice is the main.

4.   The activities are more in form of FGD which will identify and discover local potential and color that will help in determining conflict management policy.

5.  Turning on local potential and existence through advocacy against establishment or consolidation of social, cultural, and art institutions in each region with similar opportunity to show up and exist based on their potential. To make local specification as potential for development.

6.  Integrating the positive values of conflict understanding, reintegration, and peace building efforts in social, education, culture institutions and other government institutions. Consider that study and learning is important to align history to give positive impact for the next generation, so integrating conflict, reintegration, and peace building context in schools, colleges and universities is required.

7.  Establishing transparency amongst actors and factions and institutions engaged in conflict in general, reintegration and peace building effort, either local, national and international to together work under vision and mission to wholly and sustainable conflict management. Not to place other interest other than creation of reconciliation and peace building. This can be done through activities, efforts of independent institution established as described in point 1.

8. Conducting advocacy and communication activities by production of books, leaflet or strong and powerful writing for sustainable peace building.

9.  Putting people/passive conflict victims (not ex GAM, government or military) as energizer and ideas creator who give inputs to authority. Policies and conducted efforts are based on input from the community, because the civil society feels the real impact of conflict, and they don’t know what benefit they obtain. They are more neutral and honest toward the reconciliation desire.

10. Give priority to social and cultural approach (socio-anthropology) in managing conflict issues.

11. Other efforts that will appear over the process, activities, monitoring and evaluation of the conflict management, reintegration and peace building program.

IV. Conclusion

The important point is: all the above efforts and other efforts are directed to lead to social contract, culture contract, and political contract which represent all factions, lines, and joint interest and will be joint responsibility in keeping and establishing sustainable peace building. Not to stuck on routine, formal and ceremonial activities .

NK - "Earth Hails"
-from my multiply's blog

READ MORE - OPINION on CONFLICT SENSITIVITY (Aceh & Gayo Land Case Study)

Coretan I: Kapitalisme, Liberalisme, atau apapun namanya

Tahapan-tahapan evolusi dalam pembangunan termasuk di Indonesia telah melaju dengan pasti. Orla, Orba, Reformasi dst; kabinet-kabinet turun dan naik, pasang dan copot dst. Desentralisasi menghantam dan merambah kuat. Dan cukup nyata juga mengarah pada globalisasi, liberalisme, imperialisme, sebuah pasar bebas. Wujud kapitalisme yg terus menguat. Semua proses tersebut termaktub dalam payung 'globalisasi', sebuah gerakan yg 'istilah' nya terus bergulir dan menguat di era 90-an sampai sekarang. Berbagai istilah dan isme mengikuti dan mensupportnya.

Perdana Menteri Inggris, Tony Blair (dari Partai Buruh), yg juga gencar mengkampanyekan solusi "the third way" bersama Anthony Giddens, dalam sebuah konferensi Kantor Berita Rupert Murdoch, 1995, mengungkapan: "..globalisasi adalah perubahan sifat dari negara-bangsa sejalan dengan semakin kaburnya kekuasaan dan semakin keroposnya perbatasan. Perubahan teknologi memangkas kekuasaan dan kemampuan pemerintah untuk mengendalikan perekonomian dalam negerinya agar bebas dari pengaruh luar." (David Yaffe, "the Politics and Economics of Globalisation", First Published Fight Racism! Fight Imperialisme!). World Investment Report, 1995, melihat ini sebagai eulogy, mengatakan: "dimungkinkan oleh kerangka kebijakan politik liberal yg semakin pesat, dimungkinkan oleh perkembangan teknologi canggih dan didorong oleh kompetisi, semakin membentuk ekonomi dunia saat ini. Investasi asing langsung (FDI) melalui perusahaan-perusahaan multinasional (MNC), memainkan peran yg sangat penting dalam menghubungkan perekonomian nasional, dan membangun sistem produksi internasional yg terintegrasi sebagai inti ekonomi dunia".

Sebuah dekade keterbukaan dalam arus keuangan, teknologi informasi dan tenaga kerja. Yang oleh kaum kapitalis dianggap sebagai cara yg paling efisien utk mendistribusikan kemakmuran dan kesejahteraan pada tingkat global. Padahal yg pasti adalah mendistribusikan kemakmuran dan kesejahteraan bagi para pemilik modal, bagi para borjuis!, akses rakyat semakin terkebiri dengan pasti oleh sistem-sistem keuangan, birokrasi dan legislasi-legislasi, serta persaingan-persaingan yg katanya sehat dan mampu memacu semangat hidup ekonomi utk lebih sejahtera. Saya hanya melihat dalam bentuk lain bahwa rakyat/masyarakat semakin menjadi alat bagi kesenangan-kesenangan para pemilik modal, target bisu dalam peta, yg bisa dibentuk dan diarahkan, direkayasa melalui kekuatan-kekuatan teknologi, khususnya informasi dan komunikasi utk semakin mensejahterakan para pemiliki modal itu sendiri.Menciptakan kesejahteraan (bias) disatu sisi utk melahirkan kemiskinan-kemiskinan akut dalam berbagai bentuk, yg lagi-lagi memberikan keuntungan terus-menerus bagi para 'kapitalis' ini. Pembodohan elit dan eksklusif, yg dengan smart telah mampu utk menjadikannya justifikasi bagi gerakan/program-program sebagai pemberi keuntungan besar lainnya.

Beberapa tahun yg lampau, 1998, Kavaljit Singh, telah menganalisa dan sangat relevan, dlm 'Memahami Globalisasi Keuangan Panduan untuk Memperkuat Rakyat, Yakoma-PGI, Jakarta", mengatakan bahwa proses tersebut dewasa ini ditandai oleh 5 perkembangan pokok:
1. Pertumbuhan transaksi keuangan internasional yg cepat
2. Pertumbuhan perdagangan yg cepat, terutama perusahaan-perusahaan multinasional
3. Gelombang investasi asing langsung (FDI), yg mendapat dukungan luas dari kalangan perusahaan multinasional
4. Timbulnya pasar global
5. Penyebaran teknologi dan berbagai pemikiran sebagai akibat dari ekspansi sistem transportasi dan komunikasi yg cepat dan meliputi seluruh dunia.

Analisa Singh tersebut semakin nyata nampak di warna pembangunan kita. Perlindungan hak hidup lebih baik bagi 'bukan' para pemegang/pemilik modal (sebut saja rakyat) semakin bias, program-program yg ada hanya menjadi iklan-iklan penyegar indera, hanya sesaat dan manipulasi, sebagai penikmat, sebagai pelupa sesaat dari derita yg panjang, dan semakin panjang serta berat sesudahnya. "internasional", baik sebagai suatu keadaan, areal, maupun kepentingan semakin memiliki peran dominan dalam meretas langkah dan proses pembangunan selanjutnya. Dan semua itu seringkali tanpa melihat warna, nilai dominan, dan kondisi realita dari negara bersangkutan. Kelompok menengah, telah menjadi katalisator yg lagi-lagi pada ujung-ujungnya malah lebih menguntungkan kelompok pemiliki modal/yg berkuasa.Mereka telah menjadi para pemain dan pekerja yg sangat diandalkan oleh sistem ini. Pembentukan kelompok-kelompok kepentingan Dunia, regionalisasi, seperti EEU atau MEE (Masyarakat Ekonomi Eropa), NAFTA (The North American Free Trade Area), APEC (Asian Pasific Economic Cooperation), AFTA (Asean Free Trade Area) dll, semakin menguatkan semua kendali ekonomi kapitalis ini, semakin membuat megap-megap kelompok marginal/rakyat kecil yg memang belum siap dan belum dibekali utk menghadapi semua itu. Kepentingan Bilateral, Regional, dan Internasional menjadi trend yg mesti diikuti, kalo gak mau disebut "gak gaul" pada konteks tersebut. Kepentingan Nasional?? yg menyeluruh dan membumi?? katanya akan terbawa koq, dengan sendirinya meningkat juga kesejahteraanya, terdistribusikan kemakmurannya sampai ke mereka. Itu kata para pengkhotbah kapitalis itu, kata para ulama liberalis itu. Kalau bagi Kang Udin di kampung salah satu desa di Garut, bagi mbok tukiyem di gunung kidul, dan bagi para wong cilik, yg termarginalkan, mereka hanya tau dan merasakan beli bahan makanan pokok, sekunder, pendidikan, kesehatan, akses sosial dan hukum, dst, semakin sulit.

Semua proses liberalisme, kapitalisme atau apapun namanya tersebut, telah memberikan dampak-dampak diantaranya:
1. Berkurangnya kontrol negara (dan rakyat) terhadap perusahaan multinasional dan transnasional serta penanaman modal asing, terjadi ekspor keuntungan yg tidak terbatas.
2. Swastanisasi asset publik, seperti perusahaan negara dan layanan publik lainnya yg dianggap tidak efisien dan tidak mampu bersaing dalam era-pasar bebas. Swastanisasi ini berarti menangani urusan publik dengan orientasi keuntungan. Rakyat miskin?? itu prioritas setelahnya bung!
3. Pemberian insentif bagi penanaman modal asing, dalam bentuk penyediaan tenaga kerja murah, keringanan pajak, dan fasilitas lainnya. Upaya menarik investasi modal internasional seringkali dilakukan atas tanggungan rakyat banyak, yg kehilangan berbagai fasilitas publik.
4. Eksploitasi sumberdaya alam yg lebih besar, karena dihapusnya hambatan terhadap daya jangkau perusahaan besar. Sangat terasa dalam bidang pertambangan dan energi, serta kehutanan.
5. Meningkatnya ketimpangan dan kemiskinan, akibat 'persaingan bebas' antar kekuatan yg tidak seimbang. Bukan hanya rakyat kecil yg menderita, tetapi juga industri-industri domestik yg memiliki daya saing lemah dengan perusahaan multinasional.

Semua telah menjadi gerakan, aksi, reaksi, program, aktivitas-aktivitas yg sistemik. Suatu sistem yg semakin kuat dan mumpuni, karena didukung oleh para aktor pembangunan, para eksekutif, legislatif, dan yudikatif, yg membuat mereka semakin memiliki asset, akses, kesejahteraan dan kemakmuran. Bagaimana dengan program-program dukungan terhadap rakyat/masyarakat luas seperti penanggulangan kemiskinan, peningkatan kesejahteraan, pemberdayaan masyarakat, peningkatan kesehatan, pendidikan rakyat dll?? Ya, sebuah sempalan-sempalan yg indah dan menarik, tapi tidak sebuah sistem yg komprehensif. Selalu diibatasi waktu dan kondisi, pencapaian-pencapaian absurd dan tidak benar-benar menancap dalam lapisan terbawah dari masyarakat, sebagai yg 'menderita'. Sustainability/keberlanjutan terus-menerus jadi target pencapaian, yg juga sekaligus tetap menjadi "harapan" utk nyata. Bagaimana tidak, wong semua itu berada dibawah sistem dengan tujuan akhir yg tidak begitu..

NK - "Earth Hails"

READ MORE - Coretan I: Kapitalisme, Liberalisme, atau apapun namanya