| Home > South-East Asia >> Indonesia | |
People’s Democratic Party resolution on the Aceh question
January 2004
[The following is a translation of one of several major resolutions taken by the People’s Democratic Party (PRD) at its fifth Congress which was held in Salatiga (Central Java) on December 16-19. Translated by James Balowski.]
The entry of capitalism and colonialism into the Indonesian archipelago through European mercantilism, which was accompanied by colonial oppression, interrupted the maturation of feudalism. The historical consequence of this was that a national bourgeoisie which would have destroyed the feudal class failed come into existence (it had not yet been established). This historical setting meant that there was no democratic revolution to replace feudalism and create a nation and no national development in the modern sense of a state.
The development of the concept of an Indonesian nation (bangsa) did not result through a change in the makeup of the productive forces and the social relations of production, but occurred as a consequence of colonial oppression against the people of the archipelago by the Dutch. This began with the conquest of local kingdoms starting with Banten (West Java), the western door of the archipelago. On the other hand, it was not until 1913 that the Dutch succeeded in conquering Aceh in de facto and de juere terms. Within Aceh itself at that time, the power of the Acehnese sultanate kingdoms was divided across a number of small regions, which were different in breath and the size of their populations, headed by a hereditary Uleebalang (government official). Acehnese society was divided between three elite power groups: the sultans and their families, the Uleebalangs and the Acehnese religious leaders (Ulama). During this phase (1469-1905) the leadership of the mass struggle against Dutch colonialism was held by feudal nobles (feudal Ulamas) who in economic and political terms hindered access to the accumulation of capital.
The entry of capitalism into Indonesia not only changed the structure and character of the social structure and the economy of the archipelago, but also advanced the productive forces. It was at this time that new ideas and concepts emerged, both as a result of the “illegitimate children” of the Dutch political elite and as a logical consequence of the development of the productive forces, and as a result of its interaction with the international situation at the time. This phase crated a class structure, that is a bourgeois and proletariat class. But the emergence of a bourgeoisie, one which was born out of the loins of Dutch colonialism, maintained the old feudalism structures resulting in in it becoming deformed. As a result its economic and political interests were also distorted, being dependent on colonialism and unable to hold authority in its own right.
This was different to other parts of Indonesia. Dutch colonialism's conquest of the Acehnese sultanates was not followed with a restoration of the kingdoms as its proxies and as a result the centres of local power (the sultanates) was destroyed. Thus the political machine which was used by the Dutch was the Uleebalangs which during the period of the sultanate was an elite force whose role was as worriers and businesses people. This resulted in the Acehnese bourgeoisie being divided into three groups. 1) The Uleebalang, who held structural power and were provided with facilities and preferential treatment by the Dutch. They were allowed to establish their own army, and even establish their own legal structure and buildings (traditional courts). This resulted in the Uleebalang becoming established as the bourgeoisie as such the sole authority in Aceh. The character of this bourgeois class was one which had a dependency on the state since it was established and provided for by the Dutch, the traitors and local representatives of colonialism. 2) The royal family (the aristocrats) who's power was paralyzed because some sections of it joined the radical Ulamas while another opportunist sections joined with the Uleebalang. 3) The radical Ulamas which during the period of the sultanate had very widespread authority and credibility, and were respected by the ordinary people because they had a high level of social legitimacy. These Ulamas became extremely radical during the period of struggle against the Dutch and it was these Ulamas who became the locomotive of the people’s struggle. Guerrilla fighters usually gathered around these charismatic Ulamas. This spread throughout the territory of Aceh. It had a radical disposition, character and ideology, but its ideas stagnated because of the character of the war (guerrillas fighting in the mountains), because it was isolated (was not orientated to the outside world) and was far removed from the newly emerging ideas of enlightenment. This grouping tended towards romanticism (mostly drawn from the Indian aristocracy and feudalistic forms of the state) and had a radical character to its struggle being anti-foreigner and having a high and ideological stamina in its struggle.
Nation building phase (1905-1945)
With the political victory of liberal forces over the conservatives in Holland (1840-1870) a new era of modern capitalism began in the Dutch East Indies. Modern capitalism depends on the exploitation of modern management which requires skills and training, requires an infrastructure to transport agricultural produce, requires an efficient bureaucracy which does not hinder the accumulation of capital, requires more advanced productive forces which can raise the quantity and quality of production in order to compete on the European and international markets. These changes brought with it an extra burden of economic and political oppression and resulted the emergence of new levels of resistance by the people of the Dutch East Indies, a struggle which leapt in qualitatively as well as in terms of its methods, issues and the demands. It was this process which was lead by nationalists and Islamic political leaders between the years 1840s-1870s and which was accompanied by the development of an anti-foreign sentiment. In Aceh itself, an embryonic nation had already emerged following the declaration of war against the Dutch. The anti-Dutch sentiment had a strong Islamic character, that the Dutch were infidels, colonialists. The colonial state was unholy and whoever supports the colonialist are a part of this infidelity themselves.
This process of consolidating the preconditions for a nation, developed in accordance with the development of capitalism. The Dutch political elite provided a significant contribution to new and enlightening ideas, building of schools (although in the initial period they could only be enjoyed by the aristocracy and the noble families but in the end ordinary people were able to go to school and obtain and education), sending indigenous students to study in Holland as well as the growth of national liberation movements in other number parts of the world, all of which influenced the character and nature of the struggle itself. The struggle had already shifted from maintaining the feudal authority of the nobles to one of national liberation. This was marked by the uprisings in 1926 in Java, Solo (Central Java), the capital Jakarta, Banten (Central Java), Priangan (West Java) and in Aceh (Bakongan). Capitalism not only linked local regions into a single united economic unit but the widespread oppression throughout the territory also made the people’s struggle become a national one and simultaneously created a collective psyche throughout the colony. The 1926 rebellions represented the year of the emergence of the Dutch East Indies people’s nationalism. It’s character then went through a process that took shape in 1928 though the declaration of the Youth Pledge. One nation, one language, one land and took on a national character and culture, that is the culture of the Indonesian nation.
In Aceh itself a shift in political leadership also occurred. In the beginning resistance to Dutch colonialism was lead by progressive religious leaders (Ulamas) and the radical aristocracy. By the 1930s this had been taken over by religious leaders from the PUSA (the All Aceh United Ulamas, Persatuan Ulama Seluruh Aceh) and educated youth who brought ideas of enlightenment to Aceh and which was centered in the city regencies. These youths established schools with modern religious ideas such as Muhammadiyah and Jamiyatul Diniah (1930) along with ideas of nationalism and communism which were brought by non-Acehnese people or people of mixed decent. It was in these years (1920-1945) that the Indonesian language (Bahasa Indonesia, Malay) was adopted as a national language as indicated by the various organisations, meetings and symbols which had already begun to use Bahasa Indonesia. The entry of modern religious ideas and the establishment of modern schools in Aceh put the traditional ideas of religion and education under pressure. In 1939 religious leaders established PUSA with its head being Tengku Daud Beureuh. In 1940 the organisation was not only filled with religious leaders but was also able to attract educated Acehnese youth. Between the years 1930-1045 there was a polarisation of political forces in Aceh. The first of these was PUSA, which was lead by the bourgeois classes who held religious authority (the leaders of Islamic boarding schools, the Pesantren) and whose class base was with the peasantry, educated youth, the middle class and the noble families, the Uleebalang families and the children of the rich who were able to attend school. PUSA represented the dominant political force and had a broad base of support among the people. The second was the urban middle class (the nationalists and Pesindo) and the third the left who's base of support was among plantation and railroad workers. The other political force was the traditional Ulamas who maintained the trust of the people because of their moral integrity and the consistency of their struggle. They were the guardians of the sprit of the people’s struggle but because their struggle was based in the villages and mountainous areas (a guerrilla struggle) and isolated, this resulted in the charisma of the Ulama’s struggle becoming fragmented within itself. Indeed the political leadership was taken over by the modern Ulamas while the traditional Ulamas became their political base of support.
Following the defeat of the Japanese at the end of World War II in 1945 by the Allies, a political vacuum developed in the Dutch East Indies. The Indonesian bourgeoisie hoped that the political momentum would create the opportunities and preconditions to establish their own nation, their own culture and their own government. But the Indonesian bourgeoisie were cowards, hesitant, opportunist, and did not have the courage to take a clear position in the existing situation. It was the courage of the proletariat (the youth which were a product of the proletarianisation of Dutch capitalism) which pushed the bourgeoisie to immediately make a proclamation declaring the establishment of the Indonesian nation. But in Java this revolution was interrupted and unsuccessful in replacing the colonial administrative structure (the civil service and the aristocracy). This was different from Aceh and East Sumatra where the Uleebalang were destroyed and as a result the Indonesian state came into being in Aceh.On October 15 a statement was issue by the PUSA Ulamas which called on the people to support the republic and unite behind the leadership of Sukarno (who became Indonesia's first president) and together with the Youth of the Indonesian Republic (Pemuda Republik Indonesia, PRI) they asked Jakarta to delegate authority to local governments (Teuku Nyak Arief). But the Jakarta political elite did not take a clear position on this issue and as a result the people, lead by the People's Militia (Laskar Rakyat) and the PUSA Ulamas, conducted a simultaneous purge of the Uleebalangs who saved themselves by fleeing from Aceh. It was only then, following this social revolution, that the government of the Republic of Indonesia was established in Aceh.
The retreat of the Indonesian nation and the emergence of Acehnese nationalism
It was in fact in the 1960s that the process of national development and consolidation began with the local regions only just starting to link up and form the greater nation of Indonesia. Political and ideological conflicts between the existing political forces caused this process to proceed unevenly, particularly in regions outside of Java. At the national level, this political conflict also hampered the process and was taken advantage of by the regional bourgeoisie to rebuild their national identify, as a reaction against their lack of economic and political access to the central government. The social contract and principles of voluntarism which originally built national unity began to be betrayed and forgotten. This is what provoke the regional bourgeoisie to form their own states. The rebellions in Aceh were able to draw in the masses because firstly, it was lead by a well known and charismatic leader from the Ulamas, T. Daud Beureuh, who had moral and social legitimacy in Aceh. Secondly, the betrayals of the promises by the national government in authorising the dissolution of the province of Aceh and including it as part of the province of North Sumatra (1950). A policy which was a-historical and tore apart the self-respect of the Acehnese people. This disappointment was like a repeat of history at the beginning of independence in 1945, when Jakarta was unclear in seeing the new Republic of Indonesia which was lead by the Uleebalangs and refused to acknowledge the social revolution by the national elite.
For 32 years the fascist government of the New Order regime of former president Suharto prioritised security and stability to safeguard foreign and domestic capital. The priority areas of investment were centralised in regions which were rich in natural resources (oil and gas), one of which was Aceh. The concentration of capital in North Aceh and Greater Aceh was dominated by a number of large companies such as Mobile Oil, Arun oil and gas, Pupuk Iskandar Muda and PT Kertas Kraft Aceh. Meanwhile in the southern parts of Aceh the economy was dominated by agriculture and plantations which were owned by the state plantation firm PTP and plantations owned by the Suharto family and their cronies. The local bourgeoisie meanwhile, which had significant amounts of capital, had been destroyed by the social revolution, although there were sections of the local bourgeoisie who owned a number of small businesses and were subordinate to the national bourgeoisie. The military is concentrated in two regions at security posts located near factories and plantations. Villages in a number of industrial areas are tightly guarded. The people were experiencing a new form of colonialism with high levels of economic disparity between local people and outsiders who worked for these companies. One of the reasons the proclamation of Acehnese independence by the founder of the Free Aceh Movement (GAM), Hassan Tiro, in 1975, failed to get broad support is because widespread social disparity has yet to occur outside of these two regions.
The period 1982-1989 were the years of war between the Indonesian military and GAM and a period of the expansion of the zone of conflict. Massacres, murders and the destruction of villages which were considered to be GAM strongholds during the military operation, truly broadened the people’s hatred of the Indonesian military.
This anti-Indonesia sentiment has grown and is not just restricted to anti-government sentiment but also to all symbols of the state of the Republic of Indonesia. The nationalistic sentiment has strengthened in all layers of the Acehnese society but the expression of this nationalism was not able to manifest itself under the barrel of the military’s guns because for the Acehnese people to openly express a desire for nationalism means death. Before the fall of Suharto, the nationalistic sentiment and its indicators had not appeared on the surface, living only in the minds of the Acehnese people. The nationalism of the Acehnese people at that time was defensive and because of the isolation of Aceh by the military from the outside world it also prevented the spread of democratic ideas among the Acehnese people.
Only after reformasi in 1998 did we see clearly the nationalistic sentiment of the Acehnese people. The most advanced form was the democratic movement which in general carried out the struggle. The support and involvement of the people in the democratic struggle for national liberation was absolutely massive, and we could see this in the success of the referendum campaign by Aceh Referendum Information Centre (SIRA) and the call for a national strike with almost 2 million people rallying in the capital of Banda Aceh in November 1999. The people converged on Banda Aceh from the regions and the villages, they walked on foot, rode busses and came in mini-busses, all the time with the threat of the military which was tightly guarding the location, not just in Banda Aceh but also at the regency level and the villages. The repressive attempts to thwart this mass meeting proved to be a failure and the symbols of the identify of Acehnese nationalism were evident to all.
The restoration of the New Order forces both during the period of Gus Dur (former President Abdurrahman Wahid) and its growing strength during the period of the government of President Megawati Sukarnoputri resulted in Acehnese expression of nationalistic sentiment retreating, both politically and in terms of the movement. The “special” policies of the New Order have begun to be used by the present government. On the other hand the international community has also obstructed the Acehnese people’s struggle which is considered to be a separatist movement and an internal problem for Indonesia. This is just a justification by the owners of capital and a concession to nationalistic chauvinism. The essence is that Aceh remain in the hands of the Indonesian bourgeoisie class who represent the slaves of international capitalism who, for the sake of the accumulation of capital and exploitation, are protected.
In order to be able to see the genuine wishes of the Acehnese people in material terms, the PRD supports the right to self-determination for the people of Aceh through a referendum as a democratic and non-violent mechanism to resolve the Aceh problem. The choices in such a referendum would be for full independence for the Acehnese people or integration with Indonesia.
Before holding such a referendum there are a number of preconditions which must be fulfilled first: