Relationships between the different
groups within this multi-ethnic and multi-religious social mosaic are not as
harmonious, equalitarian, and friendly as one would have expected them to be
Thousands
of people participating in a rally in Jakarta on Nov. 20 to show their support
for diversity. Indonesia's society is deeply fractured along ethnic, religious
and economic lines, and its fragile social cohesion easily cracks when tensions
between groups arise, resulting in numerous conflicts, some of them violent.
(Reuters Photo/Iqro Rinaldi)
While
exploring Indonesia, foreigners are often greeted by the warm hospitality of
its people, who will present visitors with friendly smiles and generous help to
make the experience of discovering their beloved homeland a memorable one. This
archipelago of over 17,000 islands with exuberant nature, high volcanoes, deep
jungles, glittering beaches and dark caves has all the attributes to be a
wonderful experience. When it comes to its peoples, Indonesia is much like a
colorful mosaic of dozens of cultures, religions and ethnic groups that, at
first glance, appear to harmoniously cohabitate and share the land and
resources.
Once we take a closer look at Indonesia's
eclectic society, however, we cannot help but notice that the relationships
between the different groups within this multi-ethnic and multi-religious
social mosaic are not as harmonious, equalitarian, and friendly as one would
have expected them to be. There is a sharp contrast in how Indonesians treat
each other depending on whether they belong or not to the same ethnic and/or
religious groups. For instance, ethnic Javanese might treat each other in an
equalitarian and respectful way, but look down on ethnic Dayaks, who look down
on Flores people, who, again, in turn look down on the indigenous peoples of
Papua.
These social fractures become deeper and
sharper across religious lines. It is not unusual for the relationships between
people who share the same ethnicity and land to be significantly undermined if
they hold different religious believes. Moreover, these fractures are further
widened when two groups are of different ethnicity and religion, such
as the case of Acehnese Muslims and Ambonese Protestants. If to these
ethnoreligious social fractures, one adds economic success along ethnic lines,
such as the case of the Chinese Indonesians, social relations between them and
the rest almost vanish. These multiple social divisions result weak social
cohesion, leaving numerous pieces of the Indonesian eclectic social mosaic
frailly bonded.
Indonesia's society is deeply fractured
along ethnic, religious, and economic lines, and its fragile social cohesion
easily cracks when tensions between groups arise, resulting in numerous
conflicts, some of them violent. If not addressed appropriately, these
interethnic and religious clashes will continue to happen and could continue to
grow in intensity. While the source of these tensions are complex and might
differ from case to case, the historical evidence shows that after a period of
incubation, tensions build up and can trigger in recurring local and national
violent outbursts, such as the countrywide anti-Chinese riots in 1998 and the interreligious clashes in Poso, Central
Sulawesi, in the early 2000s. I use the concept of a social earthquake to
describe this type of violent event.
Inspired by my background in earthquake
engineering, I define social earthquake as a violent social conflict resulting
from the (sudden) release of tensions existing among groups that have been
formed by the deep fracturing of a society along ethnic, religious, economic,
ideological, or political lines, or a combination thereof. Tectonic social
plates are formed when two or more distinct groups of people share a common
space, but share little when it comes to values, principles, and objectives.
Moreover, given their physical proximity, these groups are often competing for
local resources and power, making their coexistence difficult. If the
commonalities that unite the groups are reduced below a minimum, these groups
might start looking at each other as different, strangers, or even as evil
others.
Indonesians are mostly unaware that their
society is divided into conflicting social tectonic plates that are fractured
along ethnic, religious, and economic faults. The few who are aware of these
divisions and tensions seem to have internalized them as the normal state
of affairs in the country and do not seem to see a need to worry about
them.
More importantly, Indonesians are
unwilling to openly discuss their interethnic and interreligious relations
despite the numerous violent events occurred in the last two decades that left
in their wake thousands of deaths, hundreds of burnt-down places of worship,
and dozens of destroyed villages. And when these violent events are discussed
in the media, it is in a superficial manner and often blamed on manipulations
or misunderstandings, rather than on the deep-rooted interethnic and
interreligious tensions that fracture Indonesian society.
By declining to honestly look at the
existing tensions and genuinely explore ways to defuse them, conflicts continue
linger, hampering the formation of an Indonesian national identity. This refusal
is also reflected in Indonesia's education system, which focuses on promoting
Indonesian's fundamental ideological concept of Bhineka Tunggal Ika
(Unity in Diversity), but ignores to educate students about the interethnic and
religious conflicts that undermine it. Thus, the fractures that divide
Indonesian society can grow deeper and wider to the point that the different
groups become much like social tectonic plates that are struggling against each
other. This struggle undermines Indonesia's sociopolitical stability, economic
development, and, ultimately, the wellbeing of the Indonesian people.
Indonesia has all the attributes needed to
build a prosperous society where its peoples can proudly and warmly welcome
foreigners and, more importantly, Indonesians belonging to different religions
and ethnicities too. However, if the ethnoreligious and economic tensions are
not openly discussed and understood, and addressed in an effective and
sustainable manner, tensions will continue to intensify and result in recurring
social earthquakes.
Patrik K. Meyer is a visiting professor at
Universitas Muhammadiyah Yogyakarta and a New America Security Fellow. He holds
a Ph.D. in politics and international studies from the University of Cambridge,
an M.P.A. in development from Harvard Kennedy School, an M.S. in structural
dynamics from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and a B.S. in civil
engineering from the University of California, Berkeley.
No comments:
Post a Comment