http://www.fpif.org/commentary/2004/0410indonesia.html
FPIF Commentary
Balancing Security and Democracy:
Lessons from Indonesia
By Frida Berrigan | October 25, 2004
Editor: Miriam Pemberton, Institute for Policy Studies (IPS)
Foreign Policy In Focus www.fpif.org
The Bush administration heralds Indonesia as the world's largest Muslim
democracy and a crucial ally in the war on terrorism. Since 9-11 it has pushed
Congress to allow it to bolster the Indonesian military with weapons and
military training. For many years, the United States was Indonesia's largest
weapons source, equipping the country with everything from F-16 fighter planes
to M-16 combat rifles. But during the 90s the spectacle of how Indonesia was
using these gifts--to repress and brutalize its own people--provoked an
international outcry. The U.S. Congress responded by cutting most military ties
with the Indonesia.
In recent years, pressure from human rights activists has kept members of
Congress wary of the Bush administration's efforts to restore military aid and
training assistance. In October 2004, 45 members of the House of
Representatives wrote Secretary of State Colin Powell to oppose restoration of
foreign military aid to Indonesia, citing "grave concerns over the prospects of
real military reforms" in a "massively corrupt" institution riddled with
"impunity." They call the administration's efforts "premature, unwarranted, and
unwise."
The repression continued, and so did the efforts of the White House and
the Pentagon to restore full military relations.
These efforts illustrate the tension between security and democracy in
the "war" on terrorism. Washington needs Jakarta as a Muslim ally in this "war"
and a source of intelligence on Islamic extremism, which means strengthening
its military infrastructure. On the other hand, to uphold its image as a beacon
of democracy and freedom, the U.S. must act to loosen the stranglehold of the
Indonesian military over politics, justice, and culture. Washington cannot
erect a security state and foster democracy at the same time. Rhetorically
supporting and encouraging democracy in Indonesia while actually strengthening
the anti-democratic tendencies within its military is a dangerous contradiction
that is likely to create more of the very problems it seeks to solve.
Members of Congress who actively oppose resumption of military aid to
Indonesia understand that security flows from vibrant democracy. Nations are
more secure when human and civil rights are protected, laws are enforced
equally for everyone (even those wearing uniforms), the political process is
transparent, and military power is curtailed.
The administration behaves as if it does not understand this. In return
for Jakarta's vowed cooperation in the war on terrorism, Washington is turning
a blind eye to the Indonesian military's long track record of human rights
abuses, brutal repression of independence movements, involvement in sectarian
violence, and relationships with terrorist networks.
Thus, aid to Indonesia is on the upswing. For fiscal year 2005, President
Bush is requesting $600,000 in military training, up from the $459,000 that was
frozen in 2004. Even if Congress does not release these training funds,
Indonesia is slated to receive $70 million in Economic Support Funds. This
benign-sounding program is supposed to "promote economic and political
stability" for infrastructure and development projects. While it is not
intended for military expenditure, many recipient governments use it as a
backdoor method of freeing up their own money for military programs.
An embargo on commercial sales of "non-lethal" weaponry has been lifted
and contact between the two militaries is on the rise. Indonesia's military
will participate as an observer in military exercises scheduled for this Fall,
even though Congress had banned Indonesia from receiving U.S. military training.
In addition to the naval exercises, Indonesian security forces are
getting other significant help under the aegis of the war on terrorism.
Indonesia benefits from the Regional Defense Counter-terrorism Fellowship
Program, a $17.9 million military training program for Asian militaries, and
more is in the offing. Through the Anti-Terrorism Assistance program,
Washington is arming and training SWAT-like police forces in Indonesia. With
initial funds of $12 million, the program has funneled new high-tech weaponry
and communications equipment into the country's arsenal. Indonesia hopes to
have six units of 325 elite force members armed and trained by the end of 2005.
Background: A Legacy of Military Ties and Repression
The history of post-war U.S. support for the Indonesian military provides
the "war" on terrorism with an important cautionary tale. In December 1975,
Indonesia invaded neighboring East Timor, which had just declared itself
independent from Portuguese colonizers. Over the next five years, the
Indonesian military killed more than 200,000 people, one-third of the
population. Declassified U.S. documents point to Washington giving Indonesian
leader General Suharto the green light for invasion. In the months that
followed the brutal takeover, the United States signaled its approval by
doubling military aid to Indonesia and preventing the United Nations from
taking effective action against Suharto.
From 1975 through East Timor's referendum for independence in 1999, the
United States continued its military support, transferring over a billion
dollars worth of weaponry to Jakarta.
Washington was forced to break off military relations with Jakarta
because of the military's abuse of power, violations of human rights,
massacres, and extrajudicial killings. In 1992, Congress suspended military
training aid after the Santa Cruz Massacre, in which Indonesian security
officers fired into a peaceful crowd of protestors, killing 271 people.
Classroom military training was restored in 1995. And then, in response to
military and paramilitary violence after East Timor's vote for independence in
1999, Congress strengthened the ban, establishing a set of criteria Indonesia
must meet before military ties can be resumed. To this day, none of the
criteria, including the transparency in military budget and the prosecution of
soldiers involved in human rights violations, have been fully met.
Congressional controls on U.S. origin weaponry and military know-how are
crucially important, especially because the Indonesian military regularly
rebukes international controls placed on the use of imported weaponry. As
Indonesian General Endriartono Sutarto remarked when asked about his military's
use of UK-origin Hawk fighters, "I am going to use what I have. After all, I
have paid already."
U.S. Weapons Used to Crush Aceh
In May 2003, Indonesia launched a military campaign to "strike and
paralyze" separatist rebels in the Aceh province. Soldiers parachuted onto the
island from six C-130 Hercules transport aircraft manufactured by Lockheed
Martin, the United States' largest defense contractor. As many as 45,000
Indonesian troops, backed up by warships, fighter planes, and other high-tech
military equipment, invaded the island. Their adversary, the Free Aceh Movement
(GAM), is thought to have about 5,000 guerillas armed with automatic weapons,
mortars, and rocket-propelled grenades. For 27 years, Jakarta has been trying
to squash GAM's quest for independence in a war that cost 12,000 civilian lives
and forced tens of thousands more to leave their homes.
The attack, which is Indonesia's biggest military campaign since its
invasion and occupation of East Timor in 1975, followed the breakdown of five
months of peace talks between GAM and the Indonesian government.
Two thousand Acehnese have been killed in this latest round of violence.
President Megawati downgraded military power from imposition of martial law to
responding to a "civil emergency" in May 2004. This is a shift in name
only--the violence continues and 400 Acehnese have been killed since the
"downgrade."
While Indonesian military officials claim to be targeting armed rebels,
they are employing "drain the ocean to kill the fish" tactics, with brutality
and indiscriminate killing. According to Amnesty International, the Indonesian
military has engaged in extrajudicial executions of civilians--even children.
The human rights group also charges that there is widespread "torture of
detainees in both military and police custody."
The attacks are being carried out with U.S.-origin military hardware like
the C-130 military transport aircraft and the OV-10 Bronco attack planes
manufactured by Rockwell International.
With the aim of adding more C-130s, Broncos, and other weapons to the
volatile mix in Indonesia, the White House is failing to balance the need for
security with a commitment to democracy, thus jeopardizing both.
Arguments for resuming full military ties highlight Jakarta's
contributions to the war on terrorism. As President Bush's request to Congress
for military assistance notes, " Indonesia has demonstrated its resolve to
fight terrorists and violent extremism." But John M. Miller, an activist with
the East Timor Action Network, counters that the military there, "continues to
terrorize Indonesia 's residents; the military's human rights record remains
atrocious. Who are the real terrorists?"
Success in the war on terrorism depends on answering Miller's question
honestly and crafting foreign policies that are based on the response.
(Frida Berrigan is a senior research associate with the Arms Trade
Resource Center, a project of the World Policy Institute. She writes regularly
for Foreign Policy In Focus (online at www.fpif.org).)
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
In low income neighborhoods, 84% do not own computers.
At Network for Good, help bridge the Digital Divide!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/S.QlOD/3MnJAA/Zx0JAA/uTGrlB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~->
Post message: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subscribe : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Unsubscribe : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
List owner : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Homepage : http://proletar.8m.com/
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/proletar/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
