RI Military in Urgent Need of Reform By Michael Shank and Hasballah Saad The Jakarta Post August 14, 2006
The United States Congress recently passed a contentious bill that allocates over US$6 million to Indonesia for military equipment and training in 2007. Two checks will be issued: $4.5 million under Congress' Foreign Military Financing program and $1.28 million under Congress' International Military Education and Training program. While these figures fall $2 million below the Bush Administration's request, they represent a multi-million dollar increase over 2006 totals.
The bill, passed by the U.S. House in June, sparked immediate controversy. Decried as one of the world's most egregious militaries, Indonesian troops have a reputation for being abusive, corrupt and largely above the law. With such a funding increase from Washington, one expects to hear of significant improvements in Indonesia military's ethical standards and practices. But that is far from the case.
In the months preceding the bill, Indonesia -- a critical ally in the U.S.-led "war on terror" -- was busy hosting notables as they congratulated the nation's democratic progress. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and World Bank President Paul Wolfowitz made high-profile visits to laud the "vibrant democracy" and "clean government". With the largest Muslim population of any nation worldwide, Indonesia received and will continue to receive special attention from Washington. Congress' $6 million is the latest manifestation of this commitment.
But where Congress falls short is in fully understanding Indonesia's people and the dynamics on the ground. If Congress wants to ensure that the Muslim populace remains peaceful and democratic, refraining from terrorist-like behavior, then they selected the wrong method and financed the wrong government agency.
Indonesians protest the military, which critics once dubbed "Exxon's Army", on a daily basis, criticizing its widespread corruption (from poorly managed self-financing policies) and its abusive security services which it contracts to mining and logging companies -- companies accused of pillaging local communities and environmental resources.
Congress failed to include sufficient parameters on how the money should be spent. Congress did not, for example, require that the military be trained in public accountability and transparency, democratic and participatory methodologies, human rights law, and respect for civil society organizations. Regulation and the capacity to sanction errant behavior were absent; the bill lacked any of these requirements.
At minimum, Congress could have mandated that a 2004 law -- requiring the military to withdraw from business by 2009 -- be enacted prior to receipt of U.S. funds. According to Human Rights Watch, civilian and military leaders have promised to implement the law, but no regulations have yet been adopted.
So how can Congress, in the same month that Human Rights Watch issues a damning report titled "The Human Rights Cost of the Indonesian Military's Economic Activities", pass legislation that gives the military the green light without clear parameters that show respect for human rights, democracy and civil society?
How could the State Department justify pulling caveats in the bill that stipulated specific reform requirements? Does Washington not realize that to guarantee Indonesia's peaceful and democratic state is to instead put restraints on their reckless and unsupervised military?
Moreover, if Washington is concerned about keeping the peace in this archipelago, then it would help Indonesians with more pressing needs like preventing and containing bird flu, rebuilding communities devastated by the Tsunami and recent earthquakes, sustaining the peace agreement signed in Aceh, reducing widespread poverty, and ensuring that U.S. mining and logging companies are held accountable for their misdeeds.
That's how Washington can help keep the peace in Indonesia. The U.S. must not continue to think that traditional anti-terror tactics --- i.e. funding militaries with a blank check -- will suffice in preventing terror from erupting.
If the U.S. genuinely cares about the world's most populous Muslim democracy then a radical departure from the norm is necessary. Keeping the peace will not happen on the military's watch as long as Congress continues to unconditionally fund its corrupt, abusive, and illegal practices.
Concomitantly, keeping the peace requires Congress to be more proactive on the social front -- i.e. returning to Aceh to rebuild the war -- and tsunami-stricken environment, bolstering the capacity of health workers to adequately prevent and contain bird flu, ensuring that U.S. companies operating in Aceh and Papua are socially and environmentally responsible, and assisting Indonesia in eradicating poverty.
A $6 million blank check written out to the military will not automatically keep the peace. At minimum, Congress should issue a directive stating that Indonesia's military receive training in public accountability and transparency, democratic and participatory methodologies, human rights law, and respect for civil society organizations.
Regulation and the capacity to sanction must accompany such a directive. Ideally, Congress helps Indonesia rebuild its society -- a people besieged by recent floods, earthquakes, bird flu, and civil war. While the latter option may be a radical departure from the norm, it is the only way to truly keep the peace.
Hasballah Saad is Indonesia's former Minister of Human Rights under President Abdurrahman Wahid and is currently the Commissioner for Indonesia's National Commission on Human Rights and the founder of the Aceh Cultural Institute. Michael Shank is the Press Secretary for Citizens for Global Solutions, a Washington-based foreign policy advocacy organization.