Short Story: THE NIGHT THE PHONE RANG

First published in The Jakarta Post, March 26, 2006

Short Story: THE NIGHT THE PHONE RANG

By Alpha Amirrachman

The telephone rang piercingly, breaking the long silence. But Siska Anggraini did not move an inch. It was the middle of a drizzling night; the heavy rain had just let up.

A cold breeze sneaked impishly through Siska's body, penetrating her soft skin before coming to rest against bone, making it even harder to fall sleep. She again pulled up the blanket, covering herself thoroughly.

Siska glanced at Syamsul Bachtiar, her husband, who was sleeping like a log by her side. A high-flier who had successfully built up his media business, his elegantly square face was striking, though his body did not exude strength.

He was sleeping again with his gold-plated glasses on -- a bad habit.

The phone rang again. Syamsul had always wanted to install a phone in their room, but she had always forgot to buy another one.

She didn't dare wake him up. Slothfully, Siska got up and placed her feet on the cold marble floor. She dragged her reluctant steps outside the bedroom and toward the stairs.

So dark! She had always been afraid of the dark, easily frightened since she was a child. Walking warily, she slid against the wall desperately searching for a light switch.

Siska sighed with relief as the light came on. The antique clock showed the exact time: 12:15 a.m.

She saw the TV, sofa and a pile of scattered newspapers. Hours ago, she and Syamsul had sat here in the living room watching movies. But Siska left for bed early after her husband, a devout fan of horrors and thrillers, switched the DVD to his favorite film.

"Sorry honey, I'm so tired but I just can't miss this masterpiece," apologized Syamsul before presenting a good-night kiss. Siska couldn't stand horror flicks; she hated them.

It was just another evening between the two of them. They longed for kids, but she stopped consulting doctors after one ill-mannered quack declared that she was infertile.

***
As she was climbing down the stairs, the phone rang again. It was dark as hell down there. She was again forced to grope around like a blind woman.
In the split second after she turned on the light, the phone rang so impatiently, like a hungry dog barking to be fed.

"Hello?" she grumbled, picking up the phone on a small wooden stand.

No answer.

"Hello?!" Still no answer. She suddenly felt spooked. All the things in the room -- the paintings, tables, sofa, walls -- seemed to be staring through her as she stood like the accused.

Trembling, she rushed back toward the stairs, only to be checked by the phone, ringing, again. She turned around, walked back and angrily grabbed the phone.

"Hello!!"

A pause, and a male voice was on the other end. "Siska Anggraini?" splashing gently into her ear like a wave on the shore. She didn't recognize the voice.

"Who the hell are you? Why are you calling at this time?!" she raged.

"Well, you don't need to know who I am, but I'm calling for a reason. Besides, you haven't slept yet, have you?" said the man.

Siska frowned. "What do you want?" No answer, so she pressed on. "Do you want me to report this to the police? They could easily find you!"

She heard the giggle in his voice.

"I've been doing this for a long time, and the people I've called haven't been able to call anyone else ever again, let alone the police."

"How do you know me? Have we ever met?" her curiosity got the better of her.

"No, we haven't met, but I always know who'll answer my calls," said the man, calm. "And I've been watching you. I can see you're wearing a purple nightgown. Am I right?"

Siska was shaken. She panicked. Her eyes quickly swept around the spacious room, but all the windows and doors were shut tight, no gap or crack exposed.
No possibility that someone out there was secretly peeping on her, except for the painting by Basuki Abdullah of a proud Javanese aristocrat, whose eagle eyes always stared haughtily.

A string of tension was vibrating into her consciousness and beginning to torture her soul.

"Are you human... or a ghost?" Siska's voice almost failed her.

"It's up to you how you regard me," whispered the man.

Her stomach fell abruptly. She screamed, hoping frantically that Syamsul would wake up. But the notorious silence soon swallowed her scream without any sign that her husband had been bothered enough to awaken.

She started to sweat heavily. Her heart was beating faster. Her gown became wet and chilly, its increasing transparency exposing her smooth skin and lean body. She thought she had no choice but to run upstairs and shaking her husband awake.
"No!" commanded the man. "Don't drag Syamsul into your problem. It's none of his business. This is between you and me."

Siska wanted to wrench herself free from the phone, but her feet seemed to have been tied to the spot. She collected her remaining nerves and pleaded, "So tell me what this business is."

"All right, but I feel uncomfortable when you're nervous like this. Please be calm, calm..." So suggestive, so much gentler. "Please be calm ... no need to be afraid, Siska..."

Bizarrely, Siska gradually grew composed. Her heart was again beating almost normally.

"It seems that you are now prepared to listen to me," he uttered after a long silence, which appeared to confirm that Siska was more in control of herself.
"I might be ready to listen, but I have a question first. How do you know my husband's name? Are you somehow connected with him?"

The man burst into long laughter. "What a shameful accusation! I know him, but he doesn't know me. This is my unsurpassed expertise -- I have a list of names of people in the world and I always know what's going on in their minds. I don't need to elaborate on this; it's beyond human," he said imperiously.

"Sure, I'm not stupid," said Siska.

"Now I also have a question for you. Have you ever committed a grave mistake in your life?"

"A grave mistake?" Siska was dazed, trying to recall her past. Her first failed marriage might have been her only big mistake.

"Like robbery or ... maybe murder?" his voice rose on the last word.

"N-no, never," Siska started trembling again. "I have never done such dreadful things."

"You are lying. I swear to you that I will never tell anyone, not even your husband."

"I have never done such things! Besides, it's none of your business!"

"I predicted that you would flatly deny it." But he did not sound disappointed.

"What is it you want??" Siska wanted to end this conversation, but somehow she was unable to cut the phone.

"You promised that you were ready to listen to me, which means -- as far as I understand -- we should engage in a frank discussion," but again, oddly, he did not sound insistent.

"I have never made any promises to you."

"Never mind, I know your ins-and-outs anyway, Siska Anggraini. You are such an awful paradox. You are afraid of the dark and are easily frightened, but ironically, you have no fear in committing the cruelest act ever by human being.

"Remember your first marriage to Sutrisno Mangkunegolo, a well-off retailer? You killed him to inherit all his money. You chopped up his body into pieces. Unbelievable this was done by such a sweet-looking woman like you. You then framed your brother-in-law -- with whom you had had a love affair, I should add -- and had him thrown behind bars while you went free.

"You are sick! You might look like an angel," he whispered in a tone that was at once piercing, "but one with an evil heart and cunning."

"Enough!!" Siska bit her lips, thin from fear.

"You might have succeeded in your first attempt. Now you're married to a media mogul, Syamsul Bachtiar, and you are planning the same cruel scenario. You snake in the grass!"

"Do you want money?!" exploded Siska.

"I need no money," replied the man, politely.

Siska pressed her hand on her nightgown, bending over a little. It was getting chillier. "Then what do you want?" she muttered, hissing in an almost inaudible voice. "Do you want me to...?"

"No, thank you. I don't need your body. Besides -- I'm sorry to say this -- you're not my type."

The man's words stabbed at her very heart.

***

Syamsul had no alibi. He was in the house at the time the murder had occurred. Siska's body was found brutally mutilated, her severed hand still holding the telephone, her wedding ring still glimmering on her finger.

Syamsul had fainted upon discovering the gruesome scene in the early morning.

***

He had loved his wife so deeply, a woman with a childlike, carefree mind and a sweet heart. He had no idea who had taken her life nor why. Perhaps his business rivals? Or did his wife have enemies? But all the windows and doors had been completely locked. Nothing was broken. Nothing was out of place.

"In the name of God, I had no reason to kill my wife!" he cried at court.
But the judge uncompromisingly sentenced Syamsul to 20 years in prison for killing his wife, Siska Anggraini, during the most talked-about trial in the country.

He refused to appeal.

***

During his dreary 20-year prison term, he filled the walls of his cell with his wife's pictures and killed the time by staring at them. On the day of his release, he went straight to his wife's grave.

While hugging her tombstone he vowed, "I swear to God, I will find the man who did this!"

Syamsul's media empire had gone bankrupt. The house was the only property he had to his name. He could sell the house or borrow money from the bank to start another business.

But the euphoria of press freedom following the collapse of the New Order regime almost two decades ago seemed to have completely faded away, and competition in the media industry appeared to be getting tighter and tighter, as people were more meticulous and selective about high-quality media.

He might need to explore a new business avenue.

***

Syamsul had fallen from grace almost completely. Worse still, his migraine was getting so worse that it often attacked him violently out of the blue.
He was relaxing in the living room, stretching out his body and weary soul.

"You will always be my angel," he sobbed, taking off his glasses and tenderly touching a picture of his late wife with the tip of his fingers.

All the furniture remained as before, although they were covered in dust, but the TV and other electronics were predictably out of order. Their collection of now out-of-date movies was still here.

Well, at least he had already reactivated the electricity and telephone.
And he had two pressing jobs on the table: Build a new life and avenge himself on the man who had killed his wife.

For Syamsul, it could only be an eye for an eye...

But he needed to rest first. Life in prison was no vacation.

He inhaled deeply before trying to steal some sleep on the couch. It was already dark outside, and it was starting to get chilly, perhaps because it had just stopped raining.

Syamsul snatched a grubby blanket from the bedroom and covered his head with both hands, desperately trying to stop the painful migraine as he felt it beginning to attack him again.

His mind, nevertheless, endlessly replayed memories of momentous events with Siska: A candlelight dinner in Paris, a gondola cruise in Venice, an opera in Sydney, a heated argument on a Phuket beach that ended in a passionate evening.

Through his reveries and migraine, he heard the telephone downstairs ringing.

-- Jakarta, July 24, 2005, after fixing the phone

Illustration: The Jakarta Post

http://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2006/03/26/night-phone-rang.html

LOCAL WISDOM PREVENTS CONFLICT ESCALATION IN MALUKU

First published in The Jakarta Post, March 20, 2006

LOCAL WISDOM PREVENTS CONFLICT ESCALATION

Alpha Amirrachman, Ambon, Maluku

Along the 30-kilometer road from Pattimura airport to the Maluku capital Ambon, the view of destroyed churches, mosques and houses no longer shocks most Ambonese.
In a taxi that charged three times as much as before the conflict, the driver explained which areas belonged to Muslims and Christians. He never uttered the words "Christians" or "Muslims". Instead he crossed his fingers when referring to Christians and bent his finger close to his thumb to form a crescent, the symbol of Islam.

He seemed to realize the sensitivity of the words, and that if he expressed them in the "wrong" tone he might re-trigger the conflict. Or that if security officers overheard, he might be misunderstood and thought to be planning to stir up the conflict between the religious communities.

Just recently a clash broke out between police and military that left two personnel killed and one student injured. Police officer Second Brig. Arnold R. Wakolo was stabbed to death by unidentified people on March 3, followed by an apparent retaliation murder of military soldier Second Brig. I Putu Haryanto the following day. Police then allegedly opened fire on a crowd in Batumerah village in Sirimau district, injuring Pattimura University student Saiful Wakano.

The incident did not escalate into large-scale violence. If the injured student had been killed, the situation could have spiraled out of control. Remember the protracted communal conflict of a few years ago was triggered by a small fight between a petty criminal and a public minivan driver on Jan. 19, 1999, yet it left thousands dead.

"Conflicts will only benefit security officials," said local activist Abubakar Kabakoran, who has been promoting peace in the city that has been religiously segregated since the communal violence. He recalled that Army soldiers received lots of money for guarding goods that arrived in the Muslim dominated port and for providing security during the delivery of the goods from Muslim to Christian areas during the two years of the conflict. When peace prevails, such material gains cease.

"Nonetheless, the marines might still be benefiting from backing illegal fishing and the police from issuing licenses for unregistered vehicles, things that could cause envy among the demoralized Army personnel," said Abubakar.

It is true that militant groups, some of them used to receive support from individuals in the military and police, such as Laskar Jihad, Satgas Amar Maruf Nahi Munkar, Mujahidin and Siluman from the Muslim camp, and Laskar Kristus, Coker and Pasukan Agas from the Christian side have been disbanded. However, the rivalry between military personnel, or between the military and police, still poses a serious threat to the peace building process. This may be part of the problems following the separation of the police from the Indonesian Military in 2000.

Besides the problem of a "militarized" society, by birth, Indonesia has a spirit of uniformity, not plurality. People learned and adopted the culture of violence from the imposition of the authoritarian New Order regime. After the fall of the regime, the spirit of forced tolerance was replaced by ethno-nationalism, particularly in conflict areas such as Maluku where the Republic of Southern Maluku independence movement remains strong.

So how to break this circle of violence? From a cultural perspective, it can only be broken by "not learning the violence". Local wisdom which promotes peace can actually be explored to help communities detach themselves from this culture of violence.

Religious tension can also be reduced by the spirit of brotherhood, which can suppress religious differences, because members of the united family often adhere to different religions.

There has also been a bakubae movement in place, exploring a set of local values that help prevent violence. In religious discourse, a statement like "The father of Muslims and Christians is Abraham" can be spread to increase the sense of commonality between the two religious communities.

Nonetheless, peace-building initiatives following the government-sponsored Malino peace agreement in 2002 have only slowly become fruitful. Hasbollah Toisuta from the Institute of the Strategic Study and Empowerment of Maluku said that often social activists are "selling" the Maluku conflict merely for the sake of enhancing their credentials.

"Like the bakubae movement, many of its initiatives are mere talks among elite groups held in Java, without concrete programs for the ordinary people here," lamented Hasbollah, adding that if local people had been more intensively involved, the results could have been more in-depth and widespread.

Therefore, besides improving the professionalism of the police and military, local wisdom-based peace initiatives such as peace education involving ordinary people are imperative to produce a genuine and lasting peace. Besides celebrating the harvest in Buru district during his visit to Maluku on March 17-19, President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono should also use this opportunity to touch on more fundamental issues that concern the future of peace among ordinary people in this conflict-torn province.

The writer is a researcher at the International Center for Islam and Pluralism and a lecturer at Sultan Ageng Tirtayasa State University in Banten. He is currently doing research in Maluku, West Kalimantan and Central Sulawesi on the role of local wisdom in conflict prevention and resolution.

STRENGTHENING COMMITMENT TO RETURN TEACHING INTO ITS NOBLE AND MEANINGFUL PROFESSION

First published in the Fourth Quarter Report 2005 (October-December), issued in March 2006, Sampoerna Foundation

STRENGTHENING COMMITMENT TO RETURN TEACHING INTO ITS NOBLE AND MEANINGFUL PROFESSION

Alpha Amirrachman

Comparing today’s teachers to those who lived in the previous era seems to be very ironic. Becoming a teacher then was perceived highly respective in the society, but now many will only regard it as second or even third alternative before they come up with an idea of other “ideal” professions. It is no longer considered as a desirable occupation, even though we all realize, without teachers we will not be able to get sufficient education—or to put it bluntly, without teachers we should not be able to achive what we have now.

Up to know, ideals campaigned by noted educationalists Ki Hadjar Dewantara and Ahmad Dahlan remain in history books, with virtually no generation to transform their noble values into education that is truly liberating the ordinary from vicious circles of poverty and intellectual backwardness. What is wrong with our education system? Why do we remain in a backwater even among our fellow neighbors such as Malaysia and Singapore? Should we blame teachers from all these failures?

Indeed, no one can agree more that teachers are the backbone of this nation whose duty is to sharpen the intellectual life of the nation. However, one would also agree that the competence and qualification of teachers in this country are still far from satisfactory.

So, we can simplistically answer that our backwardness is the result of poor academic performance of teachers. But one may argue that formal education is not every thing; teaching certificate doesn’t guarantee that teachers are effectively able to transfer their knowledge to students. Besides, teachers are not only to teach, but also to educate. They deal not only with sharpening cognitive aspect, but equally important with molding the soul and character of this nation, the aspect of humanity.

In this area, too, I am afraid to say, that teachers have also lost their capital to become a decent model for their students. When students do not look up their teachers in genuine admiration and respect, it is hard to believe that teachers are able to carry such a noble duty. From what I learned, during the independence movement teachers were not only members of a noble profession, but also a liberating force who transmitted their zest for independence to their students, and were highly respected for their morality, integrity and dedication.

Burning with curiosity, I recently met with Chairman of FGII (Forum Guru Independen Indonesia, Indonesia Independent Forum of Teachers) Pak Suparman and had conversation with him at his modest house in the outskirts of Jakarta to explore more stories about teachers.

From the outset, Pak Suparman, who is also a public high school teacher, has always been concerned with the saddening development of education in this country, so particularly the fate of teachers. He said that though not the isolated factor, but miserable teacher welfare must have led to the decline of teacher professionalism. He also deplored the fact that many teachers are still unaware about their rights—their rights to at least being treated as decent human beings, not mere cogs in this huge but often ineffective bureaucratic machine.

He said solemnly, “During colonial time teachers were open-minded individuals who liberated our people from backwardness. They used to be very well respected, but the New Order has heavily bureaucratized teachers. Teachers are no longer engaged public intellectuals who promote democratic values—they were instead made into acute obstacles of democratization. Worse still, they have effectively lost their dignity.”

In short, teachers were turned into mere “mechanical mannequins” who teach without creative thinking. Moreover, due to insufficient salary, the cases of teachers moonlighting to desperately meet their family needs are widespread; sometimes their side jobs are irrelevant to their profession. Ironically, teachers are even having difficulty even to give the best education to their own children.

The quality of teacher education declined as teaching becomes the last choice of profession. Or can we still call teaching a profession, given it lacks not only intrinsic rewards but also most of the characteristics of a real profession? I feel too shamed to answer. But what is obvious is that teacher competence is below standard. Let me take public schools as an example. Based on teacher required education background, statistics from the Ministry of National Education (2004) disclose that at the elementary school level, out of 1,150,554 teachers, 391, 507 (or 34 percent) are incompetent; at the junior high school level, out of 445,175 teachers, 317,112 (or 71.2 percent) are incompetent, at the senior high school level, out of 187,000 teachers, 87,133 (or 46.6 percent) are incompetent; and at the vocational high school level, out 211,642 teachers, 70,595 (or 33.4 percent) are incompetent!

Therefore, there are three interrelated problems of teachers that we need to deal with. First, it is their low academic performance. Second, it is their deprived welfare condition. Third, it is their curtailed creativity after almost three decades under the authoritarian government. All these need to be addressed with integrated, not partial educational policy. And gladly, the government and the House officially endorsed Teacher and Lecturer Law on December 6, 2005 as a “New Year gift” for the education sector. It is perceived that the new law will boost teacher professionalism and welfare and provide legal assurance for teachers’ right to association.

Nevertheless, according to Pak Suparman, it is actually easier said than done to realize the spirit carries by the law. Showing some statistics to me, he lamented, “It is stated that the welfare would only be realized when teachers have met the newly required qualification and competence. However, out of 2,777,802 teachers in Indonesia—from kindergarten to senior high schools, public and private—only 958,056 or 34.49 percent who hold undergraduate degree. Teachers of junior and senior high are a bit fortunate because about 50 percent of them already posses undergraduate degree or at least Diploma Three. But this would be a disaster for kindergarten and elementary school teachers, out of 149,644, only 12,658 or 8.46 percent who are deemed qualified.”

This means that there are a huge number of teachers who would not be able to immediately enjoy the upgrading of their welfare promised by the law, while the government only sets ten years for all teachers to meet the required competence and qualification. This is a giant task that puts our education really at the crossroad in this country. In this case, the government is now planning to screen teacher education institutions, both public and private, which would be granted accreditation to provide extra training for the unfortunate teachers.

Teacher training, nonetheless, is not simply training teachers and awarding them with certificate, but more importantly it is also about how to enhance genuine teacher professionalism and make them love the job they have chosen—because what impedes effective teaching is that teachers worked within outmoded and unprofessional systems where there is nothing they can be proud of.

For this to achieve we need sincere and unrelenting commitment from all concerned parties to participate in making this undertaking meaningful and beneficial, otherwise it would be a waste of time and energy or could even be prone to irregularities which will again victimize the already ill-fated teachers.

However, when we come to the nuts and bolts of commitment in education investment, it often proves to be low. Why? According to Miguel Palacios Lleras (2004) in his book Investing Human Capital: A Capital Markets Approach to Student Funding, for industrial sectors, the unlikely immediate fruit of investment in education poses risk to their economic calculation—uncertain value, illiquid investment, difficult collection of payments and absence of collateral. For the political establishment, besides fiscal constraints, it is also risky because there might not be any return of investment by the time the next election is held.

Lleras’ argument is undeniable. The enhancement of labor productivity and human capital could have deep social implication because they would gear the nation towards a bright and prosperous future. But so appalling that it is often difficult for us to put it into practice. For example, the portion borne by our own government and industrial sectors only reaches between 26.13 percent and 46.26 percent of the total cost of education, while by parents, ironically, has amounted to between 53.74 percent and 73.87 percent (The Jakarta Post, March 24, 2005).

Therefore, with the government is still unable to meet its constitutional duty to allocate 20 percent of national budget for education on the ground of financial constrains, and with many students benefit little due to low professionalism of teachers, it is high time for private sectors to take part in this dignified effort and help determine the fate of the teachers whose noble duty is to liberate this nation from its backwardness.

It is heartbreaking that teacher like Pak Suparman did not seem want to lose his optimism. “As a teacher, I should always be optimistic, no matter how impossible it would be,” he proudly showed his t-shirt bearing the picture of Ki Hadjar Dewantara which read Guru Sang Pembebas— Teachers the Liberator.

Alpha Amirrachman is an academic member at the Faculty of Education and Teacher Training of Sultan Ageng Tirtayasa State University in Banten and a columnist for The Jakarta Post daily

.

FREEPORT AND THE CRISIS OF MULTINATIONAL COMPANIES

First published in The Jakarta Post, March 9, 2006

FREEPORT AND MNC CRISIS

Alpha Amirrachman, Serang, Banten

Local miners, armed with bows and arrows, clashed with security guards, soldiers and police after they sifted through PT Freeport Indonesia's tailings in Papua (The Jakarta Post, Feb. 27, 2006). It is not unusual for a multinational company operating in a developing country to be embroiled in conflict over environmental degradation. While 77 percent of U.S. companies -- many of them have grown into multinational ones -- have a formal system in place to proactively identify key environmental issues, the attack on Freeport in Papua certainly reveals a sad story.

Freeport arrived in Indonesia in 1967, before the government under Soeharto formulated the foreign joint-investment law, enabling the U.S. gold and copper mining company to hold a wholly-owned subsidiary. The company has amassed incredible wealth from its operation. It has been accused of polluting Otomona River, by constantly dumping crude copper tailings into Ajika River. Environmental groups have revealed that around 420 square kilometers of the area surrounding the company has been environmentally damaged.

From an organizational point of view, the clash between local Papuans and the mining giant should be regarded as the failure of a modern organization to deal humanely with marginalized people. Due to the incident, the discourse on the concept of a postmodern organization has come to the fore as it has failed to achieve its initial noble objective of leading human beings to a more humane, advanced and civilized society. However, the notion of postmodern organization itself is not unproblematic.

While postmodern organization is often seen as an antithesis of modern organization which is believed to be more environmentally friendly and flexible, with continuous education and empowerment and greater participation of marginalized groups within and outside the organization, there has not been a fixed definition of postmodernism. Likewise, postmodernism hypercritical of modernism and its insistence on abandoning the latter has been criticized, too, as Schmidt (1994) asserts that "modernism is a continuum and it must be reflected, cannot be abandoned."

Despite its perceived greater flexibility and noble objectives, there is still doubt that the "less authoritative" postmodern organization could have a concrete and effective agenda to impose an education that could empower individuals and to deal with the issues of the minority. The attempt of the defenders of postmodern organization to revoke authority is debatable, as it is unthinkable that an organization can effectively operate without having authority. Perhaps, what an organization needs is a more humane, sensitive, flexible and accountable type of authority exercised by democratic leadership. What is clear is that the emergence of postmodern organization has given a fresh catalyst to conduct a critical evaluation of modern multinational companies.

So how do we see postmodern organizations? There seems to be two schools of thought here. First is to regard this as a totally different form of organization that views itself as an antithesis of the classical modern organization. Second, is to look at this phenomenon as a continuous and gradual process of evolution of a contemporary organization into something more humane. Therefore a middle path is sought for compromise.

Equally important, this discourse on postmodern organization should be seen as a reflection of the success and failure of the modern organization in the ongoing quest toward the betterment of any organization. So can this quest help multinational companies to sensitively and comprehensively deal with the issues of local people? It is clear that the continuous transfer of knowledge, honest dialog, just and transparent empowerment programs, and tangible mutual collaboration between multinational companies such as Freeport and indigenous people within and outside the organization in inevitable.

Multinational companies should show their moral determination to ultimately return most of their privileges to the local people who are now still incapable due to the lack of knowledge, know-how and technology. Otherwise, local people would be increasingly marginalized, the environment would further deteriorate, and multinational companies would grow into a serious threat to civilization.

The Freeport row would not have occurred without the complicity of the elite groups of the country, both civilian and military, who have long benefited from the exploitation of Papua's natural resources. They too should abandon their personal greed, put pressure on Freeport and generate the maximum benefit for the development of the local people.

The writer is lecturer at Sultan Ageng Tirtayasa State University (Untirta) in Banten and a researcher at the International Center for Islam and Pluralism (ICIP).

SULASTOMO'S ACCOUNTABILITY TO 1965 TRAGEDY

First published in The Jakarta Post, February 26, 2006

SULASTOMO'S ACCOUNTABILITY TO 1965 TRAGEDY

Alpha Amirrachman, Contributor, Jakarta

Di Balik Tragedi 1965 (Behind the 1965 Tragedy)
Yayasan Pustaka Umat.
Januari 2006. 179 pp.

Sulastomo has presented his personal account of the 1965 aborted coup in his book Di Balik Tragedi 1965 (Behind the 1965 Tragedy). As a chairman of the Indonesian Muslim Association (HMI) from 1963 to 1966, Sulastomo not only observed the transition of power from Sukarno to Soeharto, but was directly involved in the power game at a time when young Indonesia was bitterly sandwiched between two competing ideologies: communism and capitalism.

The HMI survived amid intense pressure from the PKI to disband the Muslim students' organization. Sulastomo's humble personality and his sharp mind in assessing the situation helped the organization build strategic rapport with the Army as the emerging political force.

Now Sulastomo, a physician whose clean record has never been tainted by the New Order's corrupt practices, is speaking up to challenge the theories surrounding the tragedy. He divides his red-covered book into six analyses. Analysis one, the coup was the result of internal friction within the military, particularly the Army; analysis two, it was orchestrated by Soeharto against Sukarno's leadership; analysis three, it was engineered by Sukarno; analysis four, it was a conspiracy between DN Aidit/Sukarno and Mao Ze Dong; analysis five, the CIA fueled the conflict; and lastly it was the PKI that masterminded the coup.

The first analysis he considers unacceptable because it was the Army itself that was targeted by the PKI. Indeed, there were internal rifts and the kidnappers of the generals killed were Army personnel. However, he considered the kidnappers as mere puppets who exerted little influence on others.

The second analysis is also thrown out by the writer because Soeharto was very loyal to Sukarno and was not ready to accept more authority. Soeharto's attitude reflected a Javanese saying mikul nduwur mendem jero (highlight one's good deeds and bury his bad deeds). After the 1965 aborted coup, however, people's demand for regime change intensified.

The third analysis is also not plausible because Sukarno himself was bewildered in the morning of Oct. 1, 1965 after the kidnapping of the generals. Having received the report from Brig. Gen. Supardjo -- one of the leftist military personnel -- Sukarno denounced the kidnappings. Sukarno himself was very cautious regarding the issue of the Dewan Jenderal (The Council of Generals).

The fourth analysis purports that because Sukarno's health had deteriorated there was an agreement between DN Aidit, Mao Ze Dong of China, and Sukarno that the latter "take a rest" in Swan Lake, China. Sulastomo refuted this, as it was implausible that the founding father would agree to leave behind his people in such a critical situation. Kruschev of the USSR once offered Sukarno the opportunity to "take a rest" as a government guest during the struggle to reoccupy Irian Jaya, but he refused.

The fifth analysis is also refuted. It is true that CIA intelligence officers might have played role in Indonesian politics, but credible documents show that Western countries were surprised over the "premature" coup by the PKI, which was more likely inspired by political developments in Peking (now Beijing).

The sixth analysis suggests that it was the PKI who masterminded the coup. There are several arguments purported. The PKI was strongly inspired by Peking which was at that time spreading its power throughout Asia. The "progressive" political party was also anxious that Sukarno's health was deteriorating and was concerned that if it did not seize control through a coup, the Dewan Jenderal would do so first. He added that although not all members of the Central Committee of the PKI were aware of the coup, such as Nyoto, the system within the party dictates that the PKI as an organization should bear all responsibility.

Based on his recollections and interviews with other players, including former president Soeharto and Hardoyo, the former chairman of the left-wing Concentration of Indonesian Student Movement (CGMI, a student organization affiliated with the PKI), Sulastomo defends the sixth analysis. His defense is also supported by Harry Tjan Silalahi, a former activist of the Indonesian Catholic Students Association (PMKRI), who helped campaign for the elimination of the PKI. Harry Tjan has contributed his thoughts in Sulastomo's book.

Nonetheless, during the launching of the book at Jakarta Hilton Hotel on Jan. 25, which was marked by a "PKI bashing" poetry reading by a prominent poet Taufik Ismail, the book drew criticism from Sukmawati Soekarnoputri, the daughter of Sukarno, who was among the audience. She argued that the coup was a result of bitter friction and rivalry within the Army, particularly between Soeharto and Ahmad Yani. The latter was murdered during the coup.

Understandably, the Di Balik Tragedi 1965 did not attempt to discuss how millions of ex-PKI members, sympathizers and their families were killed, tortured or discriminated against following the coup or how Sukarno was in fact was put under house arrest until his death.

Indeed, when a nation painfully reflects on past wounds, it is always advantageous to hear directly from the people involved, whatever perspectives they might hold. As noted historian Anhar Gonggong said during the book launching, the writing of history never finishes. Equally important is what human rights campaigner Salahudin Wahid said that truthful reconciliation is what this nation badly needs to heal its wounds. Jakarta Feb. 1, 2006.

The reviewer is a lecturer at Sultan Ageng Tirtayasa State University and a researcher at the International Center for Islam and Pluralism (ICIP).

RI SCHOOLS LANGUISH IN EDUCATIONAL BACKWATER

First published in The Jakarta Post, February 25, 2006

RI SCHOOLS LANGUISH IN EDUCATIONAL BACKWATER

Alpha Amirrachman, Serang, Banten

The National Education Standardization Agency (BSNP) is reportedly planning to overhaul the much-criticized Competency-based Curriculum (CBC), which was introduced only in 2004, because of the yawning gap between its "ideal" and the very reality of our education system's condition.

Among the perceived problems is that the existing curriculum contains more subjects than the preceding one. This has resulted in more work for both teachers and students, while the CBC strangely emphasizes "process", which requires flexibility and creativity during the learning process.

Moreover, the definition of competency is never clear. Compounded by its complicated indicators of the subject content, the curriculum looks more like a maze than an effective guideline.

Likewise, except in a few top schools that participated in the pilot projects, most teachers and students could not live up to the CBC demands. Many teachers are still trapped in the old paradigm of one-way-traffic communication and most students are also trapped, preferring to wait for direct and detailed instructions.

This country has so far changed its curriculum seven times, but education quality remains grossly low and the country is forced to languish as a backwater among its neighbors. Education fails not only to bridge the education and industry sector, but more crucially to build intellectual and emotional aspects of humans - as evidenced by the many, many student brawls and communal conflicts.

What is wrong with our education and its curriculum development? It is hard to answer in a simple way as it requires a holistic approach to answer and there are, indeed, interwoven factors. But in order to identify its possible weaknesses, it is important to locate the issue of orientation in our curriculum development which, I would argue, seems acutely lacking.

Principally, according to Elliot W. Eisner and Elizabeth Vallance in their edited book Conflicting Conceptions of Curriculum, there are five curricular orientations.

First, curriculum as the development of cognitive processes highlights the importance of "the inclusion of materials and activities associated with processes and aimed at learning objectives related to learner's abilities to solve problems, think and become independent in the pursuit of understanding the world about them".

Accordingly, this means more emphasis on the process and connection between cognitive aspects and useful practicality that will help students appreciate their life, something that is clearly missing in our education, particularly given the controversial National Exam, which merely seems to emphasize output rather than process and excessively highlights cognitive aspects without enough attempts to relate them to affective and psychomotoric aspects.

Second, technology should not be seen merely as a "hardware". Therefore, the crucial element in technology is the measures and techniques of instruction and their related methodical knowledge.

In the face of the inadequate "hardware" facilities, this paradigm breaks the "lazy perception" that now teachers should be mainly assisted by advanced gadgets, which are non-existent in most schools across the country. Technology here is seen more as a "technique" of teachers to creatively make use of whatever facilities are around them.

Third, curriculum should have the spirit of learning creatively with "faith and reverence" through exercising responsible freedom, searching for the fullness of disciplined understanding and participating in unremitting dialogic query. This means the curriculum should encourage students to experience "transcendental" processes in learning activities.

Fourth, curriculum should be designed to support perceptions of social reconstruction that see schooling as an agent of social change, and which is relevant to the interests of both students and societies. As such, curriculum should help students grasp problems of larger societies from where their personal problems have stemmed from.

Fifth, curriculum as an academic rationale is to encourage students to be grateful for the works that comprise the diverse intellectual and inventive disciplines, but proposes that the emphasis is put not on topics or subjects but forms of thoughts.

In this case, academic rationalism does not merely mean multiplying the number of subjects in the curriculum (and making it as thick as possible!), but categorizing them in the form of thoughts that students can easily comprehend.

A curriculum might contain the five key interrelated orientations; however, it should have an emphasis as to avoid the "clash" or the excessiveness, which might instead blur its objective.

I do not mean to praise certain aspects at the expense of others, but against the backdrop of the situation where moral degradation, intolerance and dehumanization seem so pervasive, I just cannot agree more to an argument advanced by a noted education expert, Michael Apple, that what we need is not merely a "functional" literacy, but a "critical" literacy which "enables the growth of genuine understanding and control of all of the spheres of social life in which we participate."

Above all, nonetheless, whatever curriculum orientation or its combination is chosen, it inevitably needs open-minded teachers as the public engages intellectuals who are well-trained and are liberated from the old paradigm. Without this, we will remain abhorrently ensnared in our imprudent trial-and-error experiment in curriculum development.

The writer is a lecturer at the school of education at Sultan Ageng Tirtayasa State University in Banten and a researcher at ICIP (International Center for Islam and Pluralism). His published essays can be read at http://alphaamirrachman.blogspot.com.

UNTIRTA TRIES TO BREAK 'LITERATURE DEADLOCK'

First published in The Jakarta Post, February 5, 2006

UNTIRTA TRIES TO BREAK 'LITERATURE DEADLOCK'

Alpha Amirrachman, Contributor, Serang, Banten

In this era of global capitalism, materialism has rigorously marginalized the value of humanity. In education, for example, subjects that are perceived to be able to broaden one's knowledge and skills to survive in the era, such as economics, have become the darling among many students.

Education is now merely taken for jobs -- for money -- and no longer for molding character by instilling values such as honesty, sensitivity and tolerance. Other social sciences that are somewhat considered to be "less money-oriented", such as Indonesian literature, are increasingly marginalized.

"So we need to break this `literature deadlock'," argued Wan Anwar, head of the Literature and Bahasa Indonesia Department of the Faculty of Education at Sultan Ageng Tirtayasa State University (Untirta) in Serang, Banten.

The department conducted a one-day seminar called "Enhancing the Quality of Literature and Bahasa Indonesia Teaching at School" on December 17, 2005.

While it was open to the public, the seminar attracted many schoolteachers, particularly from Banten province, as it aimed to explore an enjoyable but effective way of learning and teaching literature at school.

Guest speakers of the seminar were Riris Sarumpaet, an Indonesian literature professor from the University of Indonesia, Abdul Chaer, an expert on teaching Bahasa Indonesia from Jakarta State University (UNJ), and Ahmadun Y. Herfanda, a Jakarta-based poet whose poetry and short stories have been widely published in the national media.

Riris, who is also chairwoman of the Association of Scholars of Indonesian Literature (HISKI), lamented that many Bahasa Indonesia teachers needed to respect the profession that they had chosen for themselves, and should not lose their zest for teaching literature. Riris urged that the teachers "re-internalize" literature.

"How many of you cry when you read a heart-breaking poem? How many of you really urge your students to appreciate literature and explore the depths of its meaning?" she challenged the overwhelmed audience.

Meanwhile Abdul Chaer, a prolific writer of books on linguistics, shared his long-time experience in teaching Bahasa Indonesia. He specifically defined literature as a "language phenomenon" that has received appreciation around the world, but not so much in this country. He shared the theoretical and academic aspects of teaching literature, and also practical know-how to tackle potential problems in class.

Ahmadun Y. Herfanda, drawing upon his creative experience as a poet, said expectations were high that the study of literature would not merely end with a mastery of literary theory, but also with a sufficient degree of writing skills. Succumbing to the audience's enthusiasm, Ahmadun eventually read a few of his poems in his usual, unique aura of spirituality.

Perhaps because of this encouraging atmosphere, several participating teachers began to stand and address questions to the speakers, while others read their own poems to the applause of their colleagues.

More notably, the participants appeared delighted that the seminar also marked the inauguration of the Banten branch of HISKI. HISKI Banten is headed by Untirta's Chussaery and Yudi Juniardi as, respectively, chairman and secretary.

Untirta is very much aware of the problems faced by teachers -- particularly literature teachers -- ranging from conflicting government policies to insufficient facilities and to low salaries.

It is because of this that the department has initiated regular activities to promote literature awareness among HISKI students, such as the bimonthly "Afternoon Appreciation" program, which that involve students to encourage them to appreciate literature through reading, writing and performing plays.

The program has invited many figures from the literary and cultural communities, including: Jakarta-based poet Jamal D. Rahman, Yogyakarta-based short story writer Joni Ariadinata, Tangerang-based short story writer Khusnul Khuluqy, Bandung-based drama actor Ayi Kurnia Iskandar, Bandung-based actor Wawan Sofwan, Bandung-based novelist Dewi Sartika, Jakarta-based poet Dodi Ahmad Fawdzy and Chaedar Alwasilah, a professor of English at Indonesian Education University of Bandung (UPI).

The program was also marked by the launch of a book by several Aceh-based poets titled 8.9 Skala Richter, Lalu Tsunami (8.9 on the Richter scale, then the tsunami).

For 2006, it plans to invite Taufiq Ismail, a senior man of letters, novelist Gola Gong and Lampung-based poet Isbedy Setiawan, who has earned the title of "the pope of Indonesian literature".

Poet Wan Anwar, who is also an editor of national literary magazine Horison, cannot agree more with Riris that during the contemporary era, in which moral degradation is so pervasive and corruptors rule this country, "people in the literary community can come to the fore as a moral force by sharing with our students the spirit of humanity, the values of which are abundant in the world of literature".

But he also stressed that "we need earnest cooperation from all concerned parties to make this possible -- to make literature an enjoyable and meaningful subject at school".

The writer is a lecturer of the Faculty of Education at Sultan Ageng Tirtayasa State University, and also contributes opinion pieces to The Jakarta Post.

PESANTREN COMMUNITIES 'UNABLE' TO ACCEPT PLURALISM, TOLERANCE

First published in The Jakarta Post, January 26, 2006

PESANTREN COMMUNITIES 'UNABLE' TO ACCEPT PLURALISM, TOLERANCE

Alpha Amirrachman, Jakarta

The recent research conducted by the International Center for Islam and Pluralism (ICIP), the Indonesian Islamic Boarding School Association (BKSPPI) and AusAID, in which I was involved, shows that many pesantren (Islamic boarding schools), both traditional (salaf) and modern, in West Java reject pluralism as they perceive this as an acceptance of the relativity of religion -- or rejecting the notion that Islam is the absolute truth.

For the folks at the boarding schools, pluralism is ideologically unacceptable, and they wholly support the controversial fatwa issued by the Indonesian Ulema Council (MUI) which bans secularism, pluralism and liberalism.

According to Diana L. Eck (2001) in her influential book A new religious America: How a 'Christian country' has become the world's most religiously diverse nation, "Pluralism is not an ideology, not a leftist scheme, and not a free-form relativism. Rather, pluralism is the dynamic process which we engage with one another in and through our very deepest differences." She also explains how Islam is growing rapidly and freely in the United States, side by side with Judaism and Christianity.

It follows that pluralism does not mean an abandonment of principles; we merely accept others' differences. Is that not beautiful? But why do the pesantren communities reject pluralism? Why has the spirit of intolerance strengthened among them? We could not really find a complete answer during the research.

A noted Indonesianist, Prof. M.C. Ricklefs of the National University of Singapore recently held the Indonesians in attendance, during a seminar to discuss the ICIP research finding, spellbound, not only because of his deep knowledge of the history of pesantren in Indonesia back to the 1800s, but also because of his eloquent Bahasa Indonesia. However, I could not help but notice that some of the Indonesian faces in the audience began to show anxiety when Prof. Ricklefs proposed that all education here become fully secular.

He argued that multiculturalism had been a success in Australia because many religious schools in the country, including the Protestant schools where he sent his children, adopted a policy of 90 percent secular education and only 10 percent religious education (he later admitted that the percentage is actually speculative as he did not do research on it).

Some of those in the audience politely rejected his proposal, and also refused his notion of liberalism as they misunderstood it as an "uncontrolled freedom". Even though Prof. Ricklefs stated during his presentation that liberalism means giving freedom "as much as possible" to people to develop their potential with appreciation of the rights of others.

Clearly there was problem of understanding terminology -- something that is fittingly addressed by Prof. Machasin of Islamic State University Sunan Kalijaga of Yogyakarta who reawakened us as to why many Muslims rejected the ideas of pluralism, liberalism and secularism.

He argued that there is a strong tradition in Islam of always referring to the texts, rather than to concepts first. He shared his experience during the congress of Nahdlatul Ulama when he proposed that the study of hermeneutics should be include in the recommendation. But others rejected this, arguing that such a term comes from "the West" and it was used by the West to deconstruct their Bible. He lamented the fact that if he had used the word tafsir , which translates as hermeneutics, he would have had not problems convincing the audience.

Islam, actually has a rich history of pluralism as it spans a long period of time and an abundance of diverse thoughts, and many of them were sometimes at odds with each other. Therefore, trying to find a reference of something that seems to be new is actually not a difficult endeavor.

While the development of the many pesantren in Java was shaped by local culture, it was also molded by values and tradition that were rigorously and consistently nurtured by pesantren leaders, meaning that every pesantren has its own uniqueness, again showing pluralism among pesantren. However, due to the great influence these schools usually have toward their surrounding communities, this contains positive and negative sides. It is positive if the pesantren can provide an alternative education that is beneficial for the surrounding community such as life skills in addition to religious studies. But it is negative if the pesantren decided to reject new ideas that are actually beneficial not only for the students but also for the surrounding community. So, it is imperative to have wisdom by conducting due diligence before persuading pesantren to accept and digest new ideas.

But how is respecting differences specifically addressed in Islam?

We can therefore infer that pluralism, as a mode to perceive plurality and to voluntarily accept differences is something that is inherently entrenched in Islam. The Koran clearly states that the noblest attitude in addressing differences is to "strive as in a race in all virtues" -- constructive competition to do good deeds, and that final truth belongs only to God.

Prof. Ricklefs could only grin at me on the sidelines of the seminar, "If only the Liberal Islamic Network changed its name into Arabic...", a reference to the Indonesian group that has come under fire recently by local fundamentalists after it too was singled out in the MUI fatwa.


The writer is a research fellow at the International Center for Islam and Pluralism and a lecturer at Sultan Ageng Tirtayasa State University.

ARE WE A TRUE REFLECTIVE NATION?

First published in The Jakarta Post, January 7, 2006

ARE WE A TRUE REFLECTIVE NATION?

Alpha Amirrachman, Jakarta

Reflection in this context refers to a thought, idea or opinion formed as the result of deep contemplation on an action or value that has been put into practice.

John Dewey (1859-1952), one of America's most influential philosophers, said the "union of observation and memory" was at the heart of a reflection.

Can our nation be reflective? Is our society adequately reflective amid today's rapid global changes?

When we contemplate the history of this nation -- particularly from the independence struggle and the proclamation of independence in 1945 up to now -- it is evident that at certain junctures the spirit to improve the quality of this nation was overwhelming.

The student movement, at any given time, such as the fall of Soeharto and Sukarno, has always been remarkable in introducing a new paradigm while overthrowing the oppressive rulers.

The people vowed thereafter the practices of the old regime would never be repeated and they would stick to the universal values of democracy and human rights.

But was this the result of true reflection or just a reaction to prolonged societal dissatisfaction? It was probably a combination of the two, but given the chaotic circumstances following the fall of Soeharto in 1998, would appear to have been more reactionary than the result of reflection.

Moreover, these vigorous efforts were somewhat wasted through our failure to stick to our new commitment and the fact that we became trapped again by the promises of the new government.

Through a historical lens, we can see how terrible practices such as authoritarianism always prevailed after the much-welcomed new era. It is disturbing to realize that we often did not need to wait for long to see and become victims of the practices that had previously been carried out under the old regime.

For example, still fresh in our minds is that our civil servants were forced to become members of the ruling party, Golkar, in the Soeharto era.

Recently, however, Vice President Jusuf Kalla voiced the need to return the "political rights" of civil servants.

Another example is that the press was subject to tight controls during the Soeharto era, yet the government recently issued a regulation on the control of broadcasters, soon to be followed by more restrictions on print media.

Why is it always like this? Apparently, our capacity for true reflection is always undermined by our greed and shortsightedness. In spite of the blood and tears shed to achieve this freedom -- which has blessed us with ample opportunities -- we cannot be satisfied in our triumph and fail to make good on our commitments.

Notably, a reflection that is guided by morality, integrity, and commitment, not a mere reaction driven by impulses and desires, is what this nation crucially needs.

However, given the fact that there has not been even a loud and unremitting voice in rejecting the recent setbacks, let alone measured collective efforts, one has enough reason to be skeptical of this ailing and self-ignoring nation's capacity to learn from its past experiences.

The writer is a lecturer at the Faculty of Education, Sultan Ageng Tirtayasa State University in Banten. He is also a research fellow at ICIP (International Center for Islam and Pluralism) can be visited at http://alphaamirrachman.blogspot.com.

VOLUNTEER GROUP SUPPORTS ACEHNESE TO EMBRACE FUTURE

First published in The Jakarta Post, December 18, 2005

VOLUNTEER GROUP SUPPORTS ACEHNESE TO EMBRACE FUTURE

Alpha Amirrachman, Contributor/Jakarta

The first time when the team from Al-Azhar Community Development in Aceh (ACDA) surveyed the catastrophe in Nanggroe Aceh Darussalam, the members were deeply disturbed by the palpable feeling of disorientation emanating from many of the survivors.

However, they were further surprised with the fact that many children there were still able to demonstrate enthusiasm and spirit, particularly when they came together in a group and played.

As reconstruction progresses, many who lost their children and families are now looking determinedly to the future, with some experts predicting a baby-boom in the region.

This spirit is indeed an invaluable capital for them to rebuild their life and bury their wounds.

It is because of this that ACDA—a volunteer based organization founded by alumni of Al-Azhar Mosque’s youth organization in Jakarta—has followed an approach of transformational relations, which is designed to restore and nurture intrinsic capacity of the community to identify their own problems, to manage their resources and to communicate solutions that would enable them to comprehend their present and future lives realistically.

The ACDA program places the civil capacity-building efforts ahead of infrastructure establishment in disrupted areas by adopting a transformation process called Community Driven Development (CDD). Accordingly, the expected goal is for the affected community to develop the confidence and ability necessary to recognize problems, suggest solutions and plan their own future, along with any physical deployment, such as social and economical infrastructure proposed by working institutions in their surroundings.

A cultural approach has also been adopted, and under this approach, the ACDA uses mosques as its base, considering that the staunchly Islamic province employs a certain degree of shari’a in its law.

Mosques are used not only as a center of worship, but also a center of cultural, social and economic development.

The ACDA accompanies and assists the community in responding to government policy in rebuilding their devastated province. The main tools used in this are focus group discussions and participatory methodology, which motivates women and men from all strata of life to raise development issues and evaluate the impact on them, generate information based on their own personal experiences and broach issues of concern that demand collective efforts both through education and advocacy.

For the first year-program, from July 2005 to June 2006, the ACDA is focusing on community service and community relations, which is to be followed by long term community empowerment program. The organization is focusing initially on Nagan Raya district to develop model of participatory development.

This short term program is being pursued through reconstructing and activating local social and cultural infrastructure, such as physical restoration of meunasa—small mosques—mosques, and schools and libraries for children and students; facilitating kindergarten and primary school education through assistance in formal and informal education for children in cooperation with local governments, non-government organizations (NGOs) and awarding educational scholarships; donating emergency aids; and organizing small groups of local people to guarantee the sustainability of the programs.

Long term programs focus on community empowering, which is aimed at nurturing societies that are well organized and possess the capacity to systematically solve their problems. Activities towards this end include conducting social and economic studies that can be used to help refugees in entering reconstruction phase of Aceh as is outlined in the National Development Planning Board’s blueprint; providing technical assistance to local residents to run small-and-medium scale businesses, such as in drawing up proposals, business planning and business organization; and in facilitating aid distribution offered by other NGOs or individuals that particularly target economic and educational rehabilitation.

In appreciation from the locals for this long-term project, the ACDA has been granted a two-hectare plot of land, which will be followed soon by another plot six hectares for the purpose of building schools.

Many challenges still remain, with survivors bearing the psychological scars of the devastating disaster, as ACDA program director Chaidir Amin said: “We often find that the children sob at night, surely remembering of how their beloved parents were tragically swept away by the tsunami. And some of the adults still find it hard to forget the cheerful faces of their dead children. To tackle this problem, our volunteers try to build deeper personal relationships with those affected individuals, by becoming their close companions and persuading them to busy themselves with positive activities.”

Another pressing challenge is, he said, “how to convince the Acehnese that, although they have been victimized by Jakarta for too long, we non-Acehnese do embrace our brothers and sister in Aceh with sincere heart.”

The contributor is a lecturer at the Faculty of Education, Sultan Ageng Tirtayasa State University, and volunteers as an educational consultant for the ACDA.

TEACHERS AND THE LACK OF DEMOCRATIC CHARACTER

First published in The Jakarta Post, December 21, 2005

TEACHERS AND THE LACK OF DEMOCRATIC CHARACTER

Alpha Amirrachman, Jakarta

Is democratic character shaped by training? Many would answer "yes", including Victoria Camps in her essay Education for Democracy. She wrote, "If democratic behavior means the acquisition of certain habits, certain civic virtues, these can only be inculcated through education." Therefore, according to this argument, no one is born a democrat. America, for example, underwent hundreds of years before the country came of age and reached democratic "maturity", yet its leading politicians claim that democracy is still not the best system, merely a bit better than any other system of government.

Democracy is more process-oriented rather than output-oriented. It is, thus, an exhausting effort, yet considered fairer as all possibilities are diligently debated and all interest groups are consulted. The output might not be perfect, but should be acceptable to all, thus reducing potential conflicts among the "political animals". This, according to Victoria Camps, highlights the vital role of education in shaping the minds and deeds of people to acquire certain democratic values.

From this perceptive, Indonesia can be considered both fortunate and unfortunate. It is fortunate because it has now finally become a democracy. It is, however, at the same time unfortunate, because the development of democracy has been moving at a snails pace despite all the potential it has with the diversity of its people. Take a look at India, a nation that gained its independence at almost the same time as Indonesia. India has consistently trained itself as a democratic state and continuously upheld academic freedom and enhanced its academic standing while the latter has plunged into authoritarianism with rigid indoctrination and text-based learning in classrooms.

While many praised Indonesia for its swift move to democracy, it has nevertheless been marred by incidents which do not reflect democratic values. The euphoria saw tragic incidents in a form of sectarian and religious conflicts such as in Poso and Ambon, along with secessionist struggles in Aceh and West Papua and bombings by militant fundamentalists. Worse still, Indonesia's democracy has practically been abused by the feeling of superiority of the majority over the minority.

Indeed, it is a utopian ideal that education can bring about such a swift change in attitude within societies. But efforts have been made, including the overhaul of civic education, although the vibrant teaching material would not be of any use if teachers generally still lack competence and their welfare is neglected.

But has the attitude of teachers been influenced by this new atmosphere? Do the recent cases -- such as the increasingly critical voice of many teacher organizations -- show the shift in this attitude, from merely passing on knowledge to being open-minded and critical educators? It is hard to answer, but democracy is also training by doing.

And no matter shallow and superficial it would seem, teachers' increasingly critical awareness of the life of this nation should be judged in an appropriate manner. Why? Because this is a sign that we are on the right track toward the molding of the democratic character of our students.

But have teachers received the appreciation that they deserve? I don't think so. Democratic character should include sincerity in looking at ourselves critically and -- if necessary -- boldly but honestly stripping away our own weaknesses. This is what was vividly displayed by teachers during the national commemoration of Teacher's Day which was attended by Vice President Jusuf Kalla.

Prof. Winarno Surakhmad, a senior and noted educationist, read out a poem during which he had to pause several times due to the raucous applause of thousands of teachers, "When will our school buildings improve their grade from just a chicken coop? Here is buried the remains of a teacher, who died of starvation after living on a salary that runs out after only one day." But to the surprise of many teachers and guests, the red-faced Vice President scolded them in a high-handed tone: "Teachers (should) form the nation's soul and character. If you mock the nation, who will respect it?" (The Jakarta Post, Nov. 28, 2005).

Kalla is undoubtedly correct that teachers are burdened with the responsibility of helping shape the nation's soul and character, but what he failed to realize is that such a noble duty would not be able to succeed without the ability to take a critical look at ourselves. What Professor Winarno did was to merely reflect on the saddening reality of education in this country.

This incident shows how the authoritarian attitude is still subconsciously embedded in the minds and deeds of our leaders, besides sadly demonstrating that the perception that teachers are mere conduits of knowledge -- not innovative agents of social change -- and that their job is only to teach, not educate, is still also deeply rooted in the mind-set of our leaders.

Some would say Kalla was just expressing his opinion honestly, but his reaction sends a clear but threatening message that a critical and reflective attitude should be not be part of a teacher's character. While the incident will not halt the march of this nation toward democracy, it shows how some elements of our society are still trapped in a state of denial toward our own shortcomings, an attitude that would instead weaken teachers' spirit and slow the recovery of this sick nation.

GIVING TEACHERS AND LECTURERS THEIR DUES

First published in The Jakarta Post, November 18, 2005

GIVING TEACHERS AND LECTURERS THEIR DUES

Alpha Amirrachman, Jakarta

Nov. 25 will be a moment of truth for the education sector in Indonesia. It is the day the government and the House of Representatives (DPR) have agreed to officially endorse the teachers and lecturers bill and to recognize "Teachers and Lecturers NationalDay" after a six year-delay.

The bill itself, however, remains controversial.

The largest bone of contention with educationalists surrounds the welfare of teachers and lecturers. Article 13 states that teachers and lecturers are entitled to "decent" salaries and conditions. It is hoped that their salaries would be adjusted to at least three times higher than non-teacher civil servants in the same classification (golongan) who are already entitled to other professional incentives.

It remains to be seen whether the government will be able to meet the requirements in the new bill. The suspicion that the bill is merely a ploy to divert public attention away from the fuel price hikes could turn out to be justifiable.

The bill also mainly addresses teachers and lecturers who work for state institutions, not private ones. Many educationalists argue that the bill is therefore discriminatory, as most education in this country is run by the private sector. However, the government is unlikely to be able to provide incentives for the private sector due to financial constraints.

It is also not realistic to expect the government to set explicit rules regarding private teacher salaries as each private institution has different standards and financial capacities. On the issue of legal protection for private teachers and lecturers, the new law on foundations (yayasan) is considered adequately progressive by most observers; the problem, as in most cases in our country, lies in it iimplementation.

The bill should instead create a competitive atmosphere between private and government institutions in education quality and teacher welfare.

In this era of decentralization, it would be moving against the clock if every segment of society remains dependent on the central government. Decentralization should give private educational institutions the authority to run their own affairs, particularly for community-based education.

As importantly, the bill rules that any teacher association should conform to existing regulations, meaning it should be in the form of a legal entity with the usual administrative requirements, such as a minimum number of members and representatives in selected cities throughout the country.

Although it is understandable that one teacher association may not always be a true representative of teachers, this seems to be a restriction in disguise, stopping teachers from freely articulating their political aspirations.

During my research fieldwork, no matter "chaotic" the political atmosphere was due to the burgeoning of teacher associations, a genuine teacher association would always survive and a bogus one,which was riddled with short-term political interests and often needlessly disturbed the running of the local government, would die due to the lack of support.

Teacher education is also being poorly addressed. While the minimum academic qualifications of undergraduate and diploma four (D-4)might be acceptable, a minimum number of 36 credits to achieve "competence" is grossly inadequate. This is partly because of the conversion of Teaching Training Institutions (IKIP) into universities. The change is based on wrong-headed perceptions -- or perhaps even a sense of inferiority; that IKIP graduates are somehow less qualified than university graduates.

Let's hope the bill is not merely an attempt to whitewash over people's fears about education in this increasingly difficult time.Despite its flaws, there is still a hope the bill is a step forward, if not a major leap.

WHAT INDONESIANS THINK OF AUSTRALIA

WHAT INDONESIANS THINK OF AUSTRALIA

SBS Insight 05 October 2005

The following is a transcript of an episode of Insight titled "Neighbours", recorded in Jakarta and broadcast October 4,2005 on SBS TV Australia. Taken from Insight Transcripts:

For some time Insight has been planning to produce a special edition of Insight from the Indonesian capital, Jakarta. We've had plenty to say about Indonesia but we wanted to know what Indonesians think about us. Insight planned to talk about Australia's foreign policies, Muslim extremism and the trials of young Australians on drug charges in Bali. A poll had shown nearly a third of Australians view Indonesia as a threat, a country where 90% of the population is Muslim. Insight planned the program to coincide with next week's anniversary of the terrorist attack in Bali in October 2002. Tragically, another massacre in Bali has now occurred. Insight recorded this program before the events of the weekend but what our guests have to say is still entirely relevant. Our forum was held at the studios of Metro TV in Jakarta. Insight invited community leaders, politicians, diplomats and journalists, many of whom have visited Australia. Our guests included Yenny Wahid, the daughter of the former Indonesian president - she once worked as a journalist for the 'Sydney Morning Herald' - also Desi Anwar, the senior newsreader for Metro TV where we recorded our program, Wimar Witoelar, a former presidential advisor and a well-known commentator and Angelina Sondakh, a former Miss Indonesia and a Member of Parliament.

JENNY BROCKIE: I'd like to welcome all of you to Insight tonight.Thank you very much for joining us. And I'd like to start with you, Alpha Amirrachman. You've just come back to Indonesia, I think,after studying at the University of Sydney. What do you think Australians don't understand about Indonesia?

ALPHA AMIRRACHMAN, JOURNALIST: Thank you, Jenny. But I don't want to get trapped in stereotyping, OK? But I was in Sydney when the Bali blast occurred. It was so tragic. Many Australians were killed. And people at the university were very diplomatic. They didn't want to show their anger to me, their cynicism. But, outside of the universities, I met one woman who was unable to hide her anger and she told me, "Bali should not belong to Indonesia." I said, "Why?" "Because Bali is so different from the rest of Indonesia." "What do you mean by 'the rest of Indonesia'?" "The rest of Indonesia means Muslim majority." So I don't want to get trapped in stereotyping, but I have strong -

JENNY BROCKIE: But do you think that stereotyping exists in Australia?

ALPHA AMIRRACHMAN: Yeah, yeah, I think so. But I had a strong impression that, that woman doesn't really understand the diversity of Indonesia, doesn't really understand the complexity of Indonesian society. That's my impression.

JENNY BROCKIE: And you - I know you also wrote about another incident in a bar, when you were in a bar in Sydney. Can you tell us that story?

ALPHA AMIRRACHMAN: Yeah, but I was with my Australian friends and some of my international friends verbally attacked me, they said, "Your country is so dangerous because most of them are Muslims." And I was so angry. And my Australian friend calmed me down and then he drove me home. But I didn't get drunk. I was drinking orange juice at the time. Those people were drinking beer and they were angry with me.

JENNY BROCKIE: But how did you feel, though, when you received that sort of message in Australia? How did you feel at that time? You were angry, yeah?

ALPHA AMIRRACHMAN: I was so angry and I said, "You know, a small fight in Indonesia could result in headless body on the streets." I was so angry, I expressed myself like that. And my Australian friend calmed me down and, yeah.

JENNY BROCKIE: Desi, what do you think? You're a news anchor here at Metro TV where we're recording this program. Do you think Australians understand Indonesia?

DESI ANWAR, TV PRESENTER: Well, I wouldn't want to presume what Australians think of Indonesia. I mean, the - the one thing that we do get is through the media coverage of what - Australian media cover, what Australians think about Indonesia. And I don't know how true that is, whether it actually reflects the sentiment of Australians in general.

JENNY BROCKIE: So what do you think of that media coverage, though,when you see it? What sort of things are you talking about?

DESI ANWAR: Well, for example, the reaction to the Schapelle Corby case, for example, and of course the trial of Abu Bakar Bashir and that kind of emotions that we get to read on Australian media. And again, being in the media, I don't know how -

JENNY BROCKIE: Representative it is.

DESI ANWAR: How true, how representative that is. I mean, my personal experience with Australians, I mean, they're wonderful people. I know a lot of people in Australia and I know a lot of Australians in Indonesia.

JENNY BROCKIE: But what it is about that kind of coverage that worries you?

DESI ANWAR: Well, I think it doesn't worry me as much as - for example, it shows in a way that there is this gap of understanding about Indonesia but what actually worries me most is that the emotional reaction that that kind of - you know - generates a kind of ill feeling, which I think is unnecessary. Because, I mean, emotional responses I can perfectly understand because, you know, with emotional reactions, you can motivate people to do, sort of, good things, you know? It makes people generous for example. It makes people - it puts people together. But, in terms of emotional responses that create, for example, negative impact, I don't think it's very good -

JENNY BROCKIE: You mentioned a gap in understanding. Where's the gap?

DESI ANWAR: Well, I think basically - I mean, I wrote an article about the reaction to the Schapelle Corby case. One thing that I think Indonesians cannot understand is why was there such an emotional response from the Australians because, when Indonesian media, for example, covers issues about Australia, for example, the Bali bombing, we actually covered the - more of the victims, you know, the Australian victims of the bombings more than the Indonesians who actually died. So to get that kind of response is -

JENNY BROCKIE: So you think it's skewed the wrong way in a sense?It's sort of tipped the wrong way?

DESI ANWAR: Yeah, and I think it's, you know, I think that kind of reporting, I mean, if the media wants to focus on that kind of reporting, they're not actually doing themselves a service by focusing on the emotional side of the reactions.

JENNY BROCKIE: Yes, Wimar, yes.

PROFESSOR WIMAR WITOELAR,JOURNALIST: I don't think we can single outthe Australian media as such but the media of any developed country which has an organised press backed by big business. I'm a Professor of Journalism at Deakin University and I've seen how people are channeled into the world of PR, world of journalism, and I know the individuals well, I know very many Australians. All of them are unbiased. All of them are enlightened. All of them are educated.But, when they band together, they have a posse mentality that says, "Lynch the image of the Indonesians." So I think it's a frenzy among the media, which is not specifically Australian.

JENNY BROCKIE: But I'm interested about the point you're making about when people get together they're - you said bossy?

WIMAR WITOELAR: Posse. American, P-O-S-S-E. You know, "Get the culprit, round up the citizens, get the black guy, the Chinese guy,the brown guy."

JENNY BROCKIE: Racist?

WIMAR WITOELAR: Yes.

JENNY BROCKIE: You think the Australian media is racist?

WIMAR WITOELAR: No, they're not racist, but the Australian media appeals to some part of Australia which somehow, you know, gets their feelings incited over that. But you don't see that when theyare individuals.

JENNY BROCKIE: Yenny. Yes. Do you agree with that? I mean, you've worked as a journalist on the 'Sydney Morning Herald' and you've lived in Australia.

YENNY WAHID, DIRECTOR, WAHID INSTITUTE: To a certain degree, there is a stereotyping that journalists do to make the stories simple for the readers. And I think Indonesia is such a complex and diverse culture that, without the simplification and stereotyping, it would be very difficult for the, you know, the readers or for the - What do you call it? For TV. For the viewers, the audiences to understand what's really going on. So it's almost -

ANGELINA SONDAKH, MEMBER OF PARLIAMENT: I just want to jump in. You know, the perception, you know, because when I was meeting with the Member of the Parliament from Australia and some of the young members of the Parliament and they say, "Angelina, are you Indonesian?" and it's like, "Yes. Why?" "You don't look like Indonesian." I mean, that's one perception. But I'm purelyIndonesian. My mum is Mindanaoese and my father is Indonesian. Thisis how the Australians see Indonesia and the Indonesian people. I mean, besides that, you know, people from Aceh, Minadano, Jakarta are different.

JENNY BROCKIE: So do you feel Indonesia gets simplified as a nation?Lots of nodding here.

YENNY WAHID: Any news in the world about other countries always gets simplified. It's just the nature of the media, in my opinion. And also, in my - I think that most people are very provincial, be it Indonesians, Australians, Americans, you know, any countries. I mean, they tend to look at things from their own perspective. So the media, in a way, has to follow that dictate, you know, otherwise,people won't really understand the story. So, in that process, the nuances get lost.

JENNY BROCKIE: And what are the nuances? Tell me about the nuances of Indonesia.

YENNY WAHID: Well, you know, the fact that -

MAN: Tell her about the Muslims being seen as troublemakers.

YENNY WAHID: Yes, the Muslim issue, you know, is very, is very simple case. I mean, Muslim in the world, not only Indonesia, is no ta homogeneous entity. We have a spectrum, you know, a difference, of a brand of Islamism that people believe in. There are the so-called moderates, there are the people that believe that violence is theo nly means to channel their views and all sorts of things but not all Muslims are similar. And this gets lost of course in the translation or whatever, in the reporting.

JENNY BROCKIE: Chusnul, what do you think about that? Did you agree with that?

CHUSNUL MAR'IYAH, UNIVERSITY LECTURER: Well, I'm not expert on the media but I think my understanding about Australia and Indonesia relations is, you know, Australian society is also divided between the Canberra policies and the Jakarta policies and also between the people.

JENNY BROCKIE: Dita, yes?

DITA SARI, TRADE UNION LEADER: Yeah, I think we have to be quite clear in this case because we have to make sure that there is a differentiation between the Government of Australia and the people of Australia. We cannot just mix it up. Most of the time, I think the policy of the Government of Australia, the Howard Government right now, can shape the attitude and consciousness of the majority of the people of Australia. For instance, like the participation of the Howard Government in the war in Iraq, the Australians also accepting troops to Iraq, it helps creating the understanding and consciousness among the Australians that because this war is against terrorism and it - most of the time, it's portrayed as the war against the Muslims' community - so the sentiment, anti-Muslim sentiment, then raised in Australia but I think it's not originally owned by the Australians but I think it mostly caused by the policy of the Government.

JENNY BROCKIE: And Indonesians feel that? You feel that, that anti-Muslim sentiment? Is that something you feel coming from Australia?

WIMAR WITOELAR: Well, even in your opening you said that Australians thinking that Indonesia 90% Muslim means they are trouble. So it goes, you know, even without thinking that the stereotypes - I know,that if you think hard, you know - I mean, these are not terrorists you have here and we are probably 90% Muslim - but somehow again,when you get on to that podium, into that thing called the media,you tend to generalise, maybe because it's harder to differentiate.

JENNY BROCKIE: But that is a fact too. I mean, that's just a fact.

WIMAR WITOELAR: That 90% are terrorists?

JENNY BROCKIE: Yeah, yeah - no. That's not what I said. That's not what I said!

WIMAR WITOELAR: What is a fact?

JENNY BROCKIE: That 90% are Muslim.

WIMAR WITOELAR: Sure. But that has no linearity with trouble making. I mean, in New Orleans, there was a lot of looting, they're not Muslims. Bush dropped a lot of bombs in Iraq, Afghanistan and he's not Muslim. So a lot of non-Muslims cause trouble - Northern Ireland, everywhere.

JENNY BROCKIE: I guess it's interesting because, when I think about the reason that we said that, one of the reasons we said that was because of the fear. It feeds on itself, doesn't it, in a sense?

WIMAR WITOELAR: Well, fear, of course, is psychological. It's your problem. I mean, Australians ask me, "Is it safe in Indonesia?" I don't know. It's not safe anywhere. It's not safe at my dentist,right? I mean, you can get AIDS or something. So it's very psychological.

JENNY BROCKIE: It's a good point. It's a very good point. Yes.

THANG NGUYEN, JOURNALIST: I'd like to go back to what Wimar and Yenny and other media leaders here have said so far about the gap between the understanding of Indonesia in Australia and vice versa.It's not just how the media portrays Indonesia in Australia and the rest of the world - what they portray, what they choose to show of Indonesia really matters. You sit in Canberra or Washington DC and you turn on your camera - your TV, I'm sorry - all you see is coverage of terrorist bombings. You don't see much of diverse Indonesia. You don't see coverage of the third largest democracy in the largest Muslim world on TV.

JENNY BROCKIE: But that's the nature of news, isn't it? Isn't news about problems?

THANG NGUYEN: Bad news sells. Bad news sells. Intelligent people will think for themselves, they will not rely on the TV to tell them what to think but unfortunately how many Australians or Americans for that matter... ..have that capacity to distinguish what is bad news from good news.

JENNY BROCKIE: Yes. Mr Sadjanan, yes, you. Former ambassador to Australia. What do you have to say about this?

SADJANAN PARNOHADININGRAT, FORMER AMBASSADOR TO AUSTRALIA: Well,being somebody who really has to gather all the opinion and try to articulate these opinions into strengthening relations between countries - that is my profession - I think when people oversimplify, simplify overly a certain issue, and react on this very simple mind of opinion, of reason, then that creates problems to people like us. Say, for instance, at the time when you remember probably in 2001 when hundreds of illegal migrants, they was transported by Indonesian ship. The reaction that is being made by the Australian Government at the time was that the Indonesian Government have to be held responsible for this. And then this, I think it is oversimplification of a response by somebody at the very high level of government official. I think this kind of attitude in many cases creates difficulty for people like us.

JENNY BROCKIE: Do you feel that's patronising sometimes?

SADJANAN PARNOHADININGRAT: Oh, well, unfortunately that's the fact.So saying that the Indonesian Government have to be held responsible for this case - I think this for the ordinary people in Indonesia is kind of accusations, baseless accusations. Because those people are not even Indonesian nationals and we do not know where they come from but why should we be held accountable for this while the fact is that those people are trying to get into Australia and we are the victim of the situations. Being the victim at the time when we feel we are the victim and at the time we are feeling as the victim, we are accused as being irresponsible and then it's hard for people like us to, you know, to redress the situations.

JENNY BROCKIE: Mmm. Hermawan, you wanted to say something. Now,you're a marketing consultant here. I'm interested from a marketing point of view what you think about all of this.

HERMAWAN KARTAJAYA, MARKETING CONSULTANT: Yeah, OK, in marketing, we believe that it is very often that perception is much more important than reality. But, you know, it is not fair actually. Sorry -Australia with 16 million to 20 million population, they are called continent and Indonesia with 220 million population, we are archipelago with 17,000 islands in the low tide and maybe 15,000islands in the high tide, but we are called only country. So there is a simplification about us, right? So maybe Australians, they have the perception that Indonesia is very simple because we are called 'country' so everywhere is the same, that's why they simplify the thing.

JENNY BROCKIE: Endi, you wanted to say something. Editor of the 'Jakarta Post'. What do you think?

ENDI BAYUNI, EDITOR, JAKARTA POST: I feel this is turning into bashing the Australian media or it sounds like it. But I think that Hermawan was right that perception is formed by the media and in that way I think the media is responsible for forming public opinions. You know, trying to play the devil's advocate, I think thereverse is also true - that Indonesian media is not helping to, is not giving a true picture of Australia nowadays. Australia is now a very multiethnic society but yet I think in the public's perception,Australia is still very much white man's country, you know, European traditions, values and prejudices and this is the way in which we see - I'm not talking about us here because we know better - but the public in general, they see Australia -

JENNY BROCKIE: You're saying it cuts both ways.

ENDI BAYUNI: Especially in the wake of 9/11, the Bali bombing, the war on terrorism, and Indonesians see Australia as, you know, very much a white man's nation with all its, you know, so-called hidden agenda.

DESI ANWAR: Sorry, Jenny, if I can go back to the poll that you mentioned and if this poll is pretty accurate and if most Australians think that Indonesia is full of extremist terrorists about to blow up Australians and that, you know, Bali should be part of Australia and not part of Indonesia, then I think it's really sadin a way because, I mean, if the polling is accurate -

JENNY BROCKIE: It's a small poll. It's a small poll.

DESI ANWAR: If that is true, then I think Australians are missing out on, you know - just Indonesia is so much bigger than Bali, it's so much more. There's so many things that they can actually - you know, if they like surfing, it's not just in Bali, you can go to Nias, you can go to Mentawai and you can go to Banda. And so, in away, I think it's the Australian media, you know, they are - I want to go back to the media. The media is actually doing the Australians a disservice because focusing on or basically pandering to sort of emotional outbursts, for example, or just focusing on the hopefully the vocal minorities that are sort of out to bash Indonesia is actually not doing Australians themselves any good because they are projecting themselves in a negative way, not just to Indonesia, but to the rest of the world. And I think it's a pity.


JENNY BROCKIE: Well, for many Australians, one of the strongest images to come out of your country recently was of Schapelle Corby,that Schapelle Corby drug trial, the woman who was convicted on drug charges and there've also been others since, other Australians, the Bali Nine, now facing possible death sentences, and Australian model Michelle Leslie, who is now also facing drug charges. Alpha, what do you think of the way Australia has reacted to those drug cases?

ALPHA AMIRRACHMAN: Corby?

JENNY BROCKIE: All of them, but Corby in particular, because it was the strongest.

ALPHA AMIRRACHMAN: Yeah, I think it's - I could say excessive. I think, um, it was overreaction and it was also, again, situated by the media. And in Corby's case, you know, it was so excessive. It was focusing only on that and then emphasising the difference between Abu Bakar Bashir's treatment and Corby's treatment. That is legal matters, legal matters.

JENNY BROCKIE: And you think that was OK? I mean, Australians did think that was an extraordinary difference between the sentence that Abu Bakar Bashir got and that Schapelle Corby got. You did not think that was unusual?

WIMAR WITOELAR: They're apples and oranges. You cannot compare them.First of all, as a parent, I would be greatly distressed if my daughter, if I had a daughter, be in a spot like that and it's a personal tragedy. You should not link that, I think, to a case of bilateral relations or a judgment of the Indonesian judicial system but, if you do so, you should compare the Corby case to other people involved in drugs.

SADJANAN PARNOHADININGRAT: Can I pick up your point? I tend to see that this is a matter of law enforcement that is being judged by emotions, a matter of implementations of law that is being judged by the perceptions of somebody who is young and innocent and things and that this influenced the articulations of the very strong judgment into our judicial system as if we did not do anything good in terms of implementing our own law. This is, I think, once again,oversimplification of things, of matters. That placing an issue of law enforcement in the context of defending somebody who is young,innocent, pretty and things like that and then is being cooked up by the media and this is gone wrong. Once again, this is a matter of implementations of law enforcement.

JENNY BROCKIE: There was some extreme reaction in Australia to the Schapelle Corby case in particular and especially on talkback radio in Australia. I'd like to play you something that was broadcast on a popular Sydney radio station in May this year about that case.

MALCOLM T ELLIOTT, 2GB: The judges don't even speak English, mate,they're straight out of the trees if you excuse my expression.

CALLER: Don't you think that disrespects the whole of our neighbouring nation?

MALCOLM: I have total disrespect for our neighbouring nation my friend. Total disrespect. And then we get this joke of a trial, and it's nothing more than a joke. An absolute joke the way they sit there. And they do look like the three wise monkeys, I'll say it.They don't speak English, they read books, they don't listen to her.They show us absolutely no respect those judges.

JENNY BROCKIE: Angelina, you wanted to say something.

ANGELINA SONDAKH: Yes. This is actually what we have talked about in the young leaders' discussion - you know, me and Nursanita - about how the media comparing our judges to the monkey and that it comes to our sensitivities. I mean, I believe that it's not the majority of the people in Australia think or voice but, in a matter of this case, I think media plays an important role in making the relationship to the betterment, not to damage the relationship to more worse.

JENNY BROCKIE: I should point out a lot of Australians were very offended by that as well when it was broadcast. Thang, you described in an online column, I think, about this case, you described the Australian reaction as being 'xenophobic'.

THANG NGUYEN: Yeah, right. And it reflects a certain attitude of racism which still remains in Australian society today. I think it's one thing to portray - for the media to pick on this image of a true-blue, beautiful woman to gain the sympathy from the Australian public, that's one thing. But I think it's beyond that, it's beyond the media playing that beautiful-woman-true-blue card. What I looked at in that article was why is it that there are 54 Australian criminals who face drug charges, including death penalty - death,not 20 years - why don't they get the same - why didn't they get the same attention from the public as well as the Australian Government that Corby did? For your information, she wrote a letter to Prime Minister Howard, who responded that, "Rest assured that I will take a personal interest in your case." Right?

JENNY BROCKIE: So why aren't the others getting attention? Why don'tyou think the others are getting any attention?

THANG NGUYEN: Because, guess what? Their last names are like mine -N-G-U-Y-E-N-, T-R-A-N, L-E-E, not Schapelle, not Corby.

JENNY BROCKIE: Do other people agree with what Thang is saying?

WIMAR WITOELAR: Well, the burden is on disproving his impression because it's a fact that so many dozens of Australians are facing death penalty and severe penalties in other South-East Asian cities and they are not of European origin so there has to be, you know, something disproved.

JENNY BROCKIE: So do you think Australia is racist?

DESI ANWAR: Jenny, if we read the articles in the newspapers, if we watch the programs or if we listen to that kind of radio broadcast,of course then we will think that Australians don't like us, they're racist and basically, you know, they don't like to be neighbours with us. But how true is that in real life? I mean, because we mustn't fall into that trap of stereotyping like all Australians are like that. Like you said, a lot of Australians were offended by statements that came out of that interview. So, I mean, let's be areful here -

JENNY BROCKIE: Not to generalise too much.

DESI ANWAR: Not to generalise or throwing petrol into the fire.

THANG NGUYEN: Don't get me wrong. I did not say in the article that the whole Australian society is racist. I'm saying through the reaction from the Australian public and the support from the Government, there is a reflection of certain racist attitudes that still maintain or remain in the society. I'm not saying the rest of Australia is racist, alright?

DESI ANWAR: No, but that kind of news coverage, or that kind of attitude will portray Australia as racist.

THANG NGUYEN: Excuse me. Have you heard of a former minister by thename Arthur Calwell? And you know what he said? "Two Wongs don'tmake a white." Here is a minister who said that.

DESI ANWAR: Well, I think that's more of a reflection on theminister.

THANG NGUYEN: Have you heard of a magazine called the 'Bulletin' in Australia? Only a few dozen years ago, the masthead of it still said "Australia for the white man". Now, if that is not racism, thentell me what it is.

JENNY BROCKIE: So that still bites for people in Indonesia?

DITA SARI: The policy, the immigrant policy of the Australian Government. I went to Australia in the year of 2002 and we had a picket line in front of the Villawood Detention Centre. It's animmigrant detention centre. And we saw that they were being treatedvery badly, children and mothers and old people. They're coming fromVietnam, they're coming from Bangladesh. They are poor people.They're not white. They're brown, they're yellow, but they're notwhite. And I saw how many of the Aborigines, for instance, in Australia are also very poor and how the policy of the Government treating them. I think this kind of public policy made by theGovernment affects the people, affects how the people look at the non-white Australians or the non-white people who live in Australia.So I don't say that Australians are racist, but the policy -

THANG NGUYEN: Sure, that's the reason why they see Corby as an innocent victim and they don't see other Australian citizens of Asian or Latin American descent as innocent. Maybe, maybe. We don't know, alright? They are saying the Indonesian judges are not being fair, the legal system here sucks. Now, let me tell you, the Indonesian judges gave Corby a very fair go. First, there was not enough witnesses. The High Court of Bali then decided to give her a second chance to bring witnesses to Bali to testify in her defence.Guess who showed up? One Indonesian law professor who defended her.Where were the Australian witnesses? If that's not fair, what is? You tell me that the first trial was unfair. I give you another one. Prove it.

CHUSNUL MAR'IYAH: Jenny?

JENNY BROCKIE: Yes.

CHUSNUL MAR'IYAH: I think we have to go back again. There are some differences between the people-to-people relations because I know there's still a lot of Australians that have, like, empathy to Indonesia, they love Indonesia, they teach Indonesian language there. So going back again to item of racism, I don't want Indonesia also to become racist to Australia but again we don't know much alsoabout the Australian society. You know, we don't have lot of, like, Indonesian people who study in Australia, they don't study Australian, they study Indonesian, something like that. But inAustralia we have so many Indonesianists there that learn aboutIndonesia. But at the same time I think we have to portray the wholeof the issue on the table and we have to discuss. For example, the policy of the Government in Canberra. They have good intention tohelp eastern Indonesia for the development. They give lot of aidsthere. But if there is no communication between Canberra and Jakarta, what happens? The good intention of Australia, we don't receive as good intention. This is the idea - that Australia wouldlike to disintegrate Indonesia. So there is a lot of thing from the policy point of view coming from Jakarta, Canberra and also the people to people. And I think also because I'm teaching Australian in the University of Indonesia, I feel so sad when Australian Government close their library in Jakarta, in Indonesian Embassy.You want Indonesia to understand about Australia but there is no access to information about Australia in Jakarta. So it's the whole lot of things that we have to learn each other.

JENNY BROCKIE: And I know we have a lot of students here in your yellow uniforms from the University of Indonesia and you all study Australia, don't you? You all study Australian politics, yeah? Whatare you learning about our country?

STUDENT: Desert. Large continent. Empty. 19 million people living there.

STUDENT 2: About the kind of state, about the political system in Australia, about the habits of Australians and a lot of more we study about Australia. But we have no access to know Australia morebecause the reason that the library in the embassy is closed since the Bali bombing.

STUDENT 3: The first impression I get from Australia is Australia isan arrogant country. Why? Because they try to bully Asia Pacificregion.

JENNY BROCKIE: They try to bully Asian Pacific nations?

STUDENT 3: They claim themself as a representative of a Western country in the Asia Pacific. So there is two policies of Howard I think is so arrogant. The first - he claims himself as the deputy sheriff of United States in 1999 and, in 2002, he...he made a policy about the pre-emptive strike as a legal right to self-defence.

PRIME MINISTER JOHN HOWARD, "SUNDAY" 2002: I mean, it stands toreason that if you believed that somebody was going to launch anattack against your country - either of the conventional kind or ofthe terrorist kind - and you had the capacity to stop it, and therewas no alternative other than to use that capacity, then of course you would have to use it.

JENNY BROCKIE: So that had a big impact on you? That comment about apre-emptive strike had a big impact on you? And others here? Yes?

WIMAR WITOELAR: Yeah, of course. We were scared stiff, yeah.

JENNY BROCKIE: You are scared stiff?

WIMAR WITOELAR: Yeah. Because we could get struck any moment just because somebody is suspicious. It's just like the guy on the Londonsubway who got shot because he was carrying a rucksack.

JENNY BROCKIE: Well, those -

MAN: The Australian support of the Iraq war also counts as adefining -

JENNY BROCKIE: Well, let's get on to that. We'll get on to that in aminute. Because the pre-emptive strike issue is an interesting oneand this issue of extremism comes up again and again. And the other very strong images, I think, that have had a big effect on Australians in recent times have been of the Bali bombings where 88 Australians lost their lives three years ago as well as obviouslyvery many Indonesians and the Australian Embassy bombing here inJakarta just a year ago. Do you understand Australia's fears ofextremism? Can you understand that fear?

WIMAR WITOELAR: We are just as afraid of those extremists asAustralians are. I wrote an article. I said, "When your dog hasfleas, don't think that the dog is enjoying those fleas." Don'tthink we like having terrorists. We are scared stiff. We've had todeal with them since I was 10 years old, which means 50 years agofor your information. We've always been bothered by terrorism and we can not get rid of them. So we know what terror is, we know what fearis and we hate them, we despise them. The Muslim majority is againstterrorism. And to be thought of that we are comfortable with theselies, these fleas, these terrorists - I feel sympathy for theAustralian people because they are good people, they're kind people,educated, but how come some of them are just so simplistic?

JENNY BROCKIE: Yenny, you were nodding your head then.

YENNY WAHID: Yeah. Like Wimar just said - Wimar put it succinctly -but we are as fearful of the threat of terrorism here in our own backyards as any other countries, I guess. And the fact that, like Dita said, us being a victim but also seen as being the aggressor really puts us off, you know? You know, instead of giving us anyhelp in dealing with terrorism, we're getting all this flak abouthaving them here. I mean, we don't choose to have these people here.They're just, they're here.

JENNY BROCKIE: Nursanita, is it a legitimate fear to have, do you think?

NURSANITA NASUTION, MEMBER OF PARLIAMENT: Yes, you are afraid aboutthe terrorism and I think that all the people in the world areagainst that. But I am very sad if terrorism is tied to the Muslims.You know, this is not true because, you know, in Indonesia, weare...most of us are Muslims but we are moderates. But I think thatIslam is not the same is terrorism. If there is terrorism, I think that's because they act as the result of the international policy -maybe international policy to the Muslims so they don't like that sothey act like that. But my party, the Prosperity and Justice Party,sometimes we act and make demonstrations and demonstration I thinkis part of the democracy. So I think that - I heard that this evening that the Prime Minister of the Australia said he wants revisions about the regulation of terrorism. I hope that Australianot be panic and change the regulations and don't obey about the human rights and also the democracy.

WIMAR WITOELAR: Sorry, sorry, my son asked me specifically to saythis to the forum. Yesterday we went to this book store, a great big book store, I won't say the name. Now, it's almost fasting time so there's a big section of Muslim books. About 50% to 60% of theMuslim books all had a theme of how to fight terror, how to curtailterror, we are against terror. So the Muslim community is fighting very hard against terrorism. Yenny's institute, the Wahid Institute, also is doing that. So we are doing our best but it's an uphillbattle. It's no help if we are accused of helping the terrorists.

JENNY BROCKIE: Yeah and it's interesting too because I mean Islamicextremists may be a minority but when they speak out they certainlyhave a big impact. And I'd like you to have a look at this reportfrom SBS in Australia recently which includes an interview with oneof the men who was convicted of the Australian Embassy bombing inJakarta. Have a look at this.

SBS NEWSREEL: Amidst the gangsters, corruptors and drug dealers, the terrorismtrials attract very little interest. Iwan Darmawan, alias Rois, issaid to be the one who selected the suicide bomber for the embassyattack.

REPORTER, (Translation): I read that you said that you regret therewere no Australian victims.

ROIS, (Translation): That's not what I regret, I regret that thevictims were Muslim and Indonesian. That's what I regret.

REPORTER, (Translation): But as I asked, do you hate Australians?

ROIS, (Translation): I don't hate Australians. I hate people any where who oppress Islamic people. I don't hate Australians, but anyone who oppresses Muslims.

JENNY BROCKIE: Ahmad Syafi'i Ma'arif, what do you think of thoseviews when you see those views?

AHMAD SYAFI'I MA'ARIF, MUSLIM LEADER: I think if we talk about terrorisms, we have to make a clear distinction. There are at least three types of terrorism - individual, groups and state-structured terrorism. I think what Mr Bush and also Israel have made is some kind of state terrorism. Therefore -

JENNY BROCKIE: Do you understand those views? I mean, do you support those views?

AHMAD SYAFI'I MA'ARIF: No, no, no, no, no, no, no. I think, if youtalk about terror, we are on the same boat - we have to hunt the terrorists, all kind of terrorism, to the end of the journey. So I have made a very strong statement about this many times - terrorism is the real enemy of humanity.

DESI ANWAR: Jenny, the man behind the bars is not representative of Muslims. He is a criminal. That's why he's behind bars. For the rest of us, when the Bali bombing happened, when the Australian Embassy bombing happened, when 9/11 happened, we were devastated, we were very, very - I mean, the whole thing was very, very tragic and we were extremely sorry and more so because of it happening to our guests, you know, these are the guests of Indonesia. And if it happens, say for example - we've seen so many tragedies in Indonesia, so many conflicts, so many bombings that they hardly make headlines any more but when it happened to the Australians in Baliand also the attempt at the Embassy, we in the media made it very sure that we showed our sympathy and we were extremely sorry. And that's all in sincerity because we are as disgusted, you know, when we see violence, when we see murders, when we see senseless killings. I mean, we are just as terrified of terrorism as anybody else.

JENNY BROCKIE: Do you think Muslim leaders in Indonesia have been strong enough in their condemnation of those acts of violence? Syafi'i, yes.

AHMAD SYAFI'I MA'ARIF: This is the problem. OK, we have made very strong statement many times to condemn strongly all kinds of terrorism.

JENNY BROCKIE: You don't hear a lot of that in Australia.

CHUSNUL MAR'IYAH: Because the media is never interested in the moderate people. They just like to have the radical, very few unspoken. That's the problem, the problem I think is why.

DITA SARI: Why the perception is built that way? Why the opinion is built that way by the media and also by the authority? I think because the foreign policy, the Australian foreign policy needs somegood ground...

JENNY BROCKIE: Just let her finish.

DITA SARI: ..needs some strong justification so that the kind offoreign policy that is chosen by Howard, by the authority of theAustralians, is justified by the people. So they -

JENNY BROCKIE: Are you talking about Iraq and Afghanistan? What areyou talking about?

DITA SARI: Foreign policy. And also local policy. So this kind ofperception is built so the Australian people can be convinced thatwe need less immigrants, we need more troops sending to Iraq, weneed more military budget so that more troops will be sending toIraq.

JENNY BROCKIE: Very quickly. We are going to have to wrap up.

DR HARIMAN SIREGAR, FORMER PRESIDENTIAL ADVISOR: You Australian gotused to Suharto. When Suharto here, Australian is very polite to Indonesia because Suharto is strong. And you need people like thatin Indonesia now. It's impossible.

JENNY BROCKIE: Ah. You need Suharto now?

DR HARIMAN SIREGAR: No, no, no. What you expect - like what you said.

JENNY BROCKIE: We need Suharto?

DR HARIMAN SIREGAR: You expect condemnation, strong condemnation. You need Suharto. We haven't got Suharto anymore.

JENNY BROCKIE: A diplomat here. Yes, A diplomat's voice.

SADJANAN PARNOHADININGRAT: Let's pick up a few points being made by my colleague, Dita. I think she pointed out very rightly in sayingthat the foreign policy that is being made by the AustralianGovernment should be formulated in such a way that it's alsosensitive to its neighbours, like us, like Indonesia, for instance. It's not only for the purpose of satisfying their constituents, that government like Prime Minister Howard that have to say something -

JENNY BROCKIE: And you don't think it is? You don't think thatpolicy is formulated that way?

SADJANAN PARNOHADININGRAT: Well, rather than considering therelations between the two countries, I think they consider givingmore emphasis on how to satisfy their constituents and -

JENNY BROCKIE: Harry, you have to stop. You have to stop! Just let him finish.

SADJANAN PARNOHADININGRAT: But I have seen so far, within this last few years, I thought there had been an improvement in the relations between the two countries, at least in the government-to-governmentlevel. And where in almost every issues that cropped up in thecontext of relations between the countries being communicated behindthe bar, behind the scene, rather than being said, as we qualify it,as megaphone diplomacy.

DR HARIMAN SIREGAR: I remember in Suharto times - Let me speak. The intelligence of Australia always coming down with our boat. There is our fishermen always come to Australia but they never take action.They just put some intelligence there, they take a note. But now,they just burn our boats!

JENNY BROCKIE: Woah! Woah! Woah!

SADJANAN PARNOHADININGRAT: Something about future relations between us and them.

JENNY BROCKIE: I'd like to wrap up on that note. Reni, you teach Australian politics and I'm interested in knowing what you think could be done to improve the situation.

RENI SUWARSO, UNIVERSITY LECTURER: Yeah, good question. First, Iwant to give a comment. I want to be more fair, you know. I agree with all the previous speakers about terrorism. Islam against terrorism, yes. But we should fair to express that all religionsright now tend to be more militant - it is also for Islam and alsoother religions. It is the first point. And the second point is Iwant to raise issue, the basic issue whether - we are talking aboutstereotyping, about Australian perceive Indonesia, and how aboutIndonesia perceive Australia? How many people in Indonesia realisethat we have neighbour, Australia is our neighbour. We didn't talkabout the extremists, no, no. We just realise whether - do werealise that Australia is our neighbour? How many people? Is it upto 50% of the Indonesian people? I don't think so.

JENNY BROCKIE: OK, so there's not an awareness of that. How can weimprove the understanding between the two countries?

WIMAR WITOELAR: More people-to-people contact. When you have people-to-people contact, it's all right. I lived in Geelong for three months, never an unfriendly face. I travel in Melbourne, friendly.Never. I get my nasty moments on radio talkback shows and I get myuncomfortable moments in shows like this but, if you have people-to-people contact, everything's peachy. Australians are great.

JENNY BROCKIE: Final comment, yes.

ALPHA AMIRRACHMAN: We should have more opportunity. This is to showhow we Indonesians do not really understand Australians. We might ask like, "Are you Westerner from the east or easterner from the West?" That expresses that we actually don't really know Australiansand we need as Wimar said, people-to-people contact.

DESI ANWAR: Sorry, Jenny, to answer your question, maybe you should have more Australian journalists here in Indonesia. I mean, the fact that Australia is so close, you have so few journalists and mostlyif they come here it's because of a particular trial. You know,Indonesia is so huge. There's so many stories to cover and I think Australians, the Australian public is missing out on a lot of great stories. And, trust me, Bali is not the only place for Australians to go on holiday to. You know? So I think it is important for moreinformed programs about Indonesia. Likewise, I mean, we should havemore kind of exchanges, people-to-people. But definitely, I think the media does play a huge role and if the Australian media is only interested in focusing on sensationalist stories and in generating audience or readers' response by printing out emotional and sensationalism story, I think, you know, it's doing a great disservice to the Australian public that is now portrayed as, Iwouldn't say arrogant, but simply sort of, in a way,well... ..unsophisticated, I'm sorry to say, with all the kind of,you know, emotional outbursts we're seeing. It's, you know, quite embarrassing.

JENNY BROCKIE: It's a very interesting note to end on. We do have to end, I'm sorry. We are going to have to finish because we are out oftime. I would like to thank you all very much for joining me tonight. It's been really interesting to hear your views here inJakarta. Thank you very, very much for being here. And that is Insight for this special edition from Jakarta.

Taken from Insight Transcripts