+62 811 1088 854
Civis Vol. 2, No. 3, Dec 2010
Sources of social conflicts arises from differences in perspective when looking at diversity, and not from social diversity itself.
Two perspectives on the role of social diversity in Indonesia surface from time to time, although the influences of these two perspectives are not equally as strong in the life and travels of the nation-state of Indonesia.
The first perspective posits that social diversity is a strength which is useful if managed and used wisely. Indeed, social diversity is a complex phenomenon and contains the potential for conflict between groups. However, with proper conflict management, social diversity will turn into the glue of social cohesion. This view is based on the fact that Indonesia is not a nation that has reached its final stage, but is a result of an imagination (an imagined nation) that requires continued strengthening in reality. Imagination is implicit in the Youth Pledge in 1928 during the Second Youth Congress in Jakarta.
The young people from different ‘nations’ in the Indonesian archipelago took the oath (i.e. imagined) about the existence of a new nation, the people of Indonesia. A very long-term vision of this imagination is a nation of Indonesia that is intact and solid. The essence of a nation’s strength as a whole lies in the search and recognition of the similarities between groups, while respecting the differences among them. On the practical level different groups cooperate to achieve common goals as a one nation.
The second perspective views social diversity as a threat to the unity of the nation if not controlled by a dominant group (big brother). This view shows the anxiety of certain dominant groups. They worry about losing influence and advantage when having to share with smaller groups.
Culture acculturation, the unification of ideology, the existence of mix-minded groups, and even the existence of the state are considered threats to the existence and uniqueness of groups and individuals. The long-term vision of this perspective is the emergence of a dominant social group, which will be able to shape the character of the nation and unite all the groups. This perspective is clearly contrary to the motto “Unity in Diversity”. However, the struggle of a group that believes in this perspective still felt today. The sharpening of divide-and-conquer ideology, group-based economic development and strengthening of primordial sectarian political power into the main menu is highlighted in a variety of slogans and actions.
Both these perspectives are compared side by side, wrestling, and interacting intensively in various social domains in Indonesia. Sources of social conflicts arise from differences in perspective, not from social diversity itself. From the phenomena of social conflicts that arise in the field, it can be seen which perspective should be promoted in Indonesia.
Related to that, this paper will focus on a particular social phenomenon, namely the Maluku Riots (1999 – 2004) as a case to demonstrate that social diversity in Indonesia is able to reduce differences between groups, and is not a threat to the existence and role of existing groups in community.
Historical Review of the Maluku Case
In brief should be submitted chronological occurrences of riots in Maluku to provide background events that will become the benchmark further discussion. This explanation is based on the knowledge of the author while he was in Ambon and was active as a board member of a foundation that focuses on field data collection and documentation of unrest in Maluku, in cooperation with the a legal aid foundation in Jakarta. To make it easy to follow, this chronology is divided into 3 (three) phases:
1. Early Stage
The Maluku unrest started with a fight between the transport car driver at the Terminal Mardika Market on January 19, 1999 afternoon, which coincided with Eid al-Fitr. The drivers involved are Muslim (from the Bugis tribe) and Christian (from the Ambon tribe). Only less than 1 hour later, a body of mass appeared in the name of Christian and Islamic groups, armed with sharp weapons and attacked the houses of worship as well as fighting on the main streets in the city of Ambon. At the same time, there were simultaneous riots at three points in the city, with the other two points being quite a ways from the Terminal Mardika Market. The issue that was disseminated through word-of-mouth, leaflets and banners was that there had been an attack against the Bugis-Makassar-Buton tribe (known as the BBM tribe) by the Ambon tribe.
In fact, the fighting was not by groups on behalf of the tribes, but by groups who identified themselves either with Christianity or Islam. The majority are young teenagers so much that many members of the community were just watching or avoiding areas of conflict. Allegedly they were the thugs who got returned to Ambon by the government after a big fight that broke out in the area of Ketapang, Jakarta. Late in the afternoon, panic began to rise because of murders and religion-based expulsion of citizens. Tense atmosphere continued until 7 days later. At this stage, the government’s National Human Rights Commission sent a fact-finding team to Ambon.
The situation was finally brought under control by police officers and soldiers who guard the main roads so that within 1 week there was no more rioting. The issue of a deliberate attack against to BBM tribe turned out to be unfounded. However, inter-religious suspicion had increased. The presence of refugees, casualties, and loss of property added to the atmosphere of anger on both sides. The religious leaders, local government officers and members of the security forces socialized together to calm the public, either directly or through the mass media.
2. Escalation Stage
Because the ethnic-conflict issue was not successful, then the issue was replaced with the issue of oppression of Muslims by Christians. This change of issue made sense because the atmosphere of mutual suspicion between the two religious communities had been heightened. This issue also allowed the bringing in of other parties (particularly Laskar Jihad) from outside Ambon, by reason of solidarity. After about 1 month of peace, riots again broke out at last after the arrival of Laskar Jihad from Java. Even though President Abdurrahman Wahid ordered the military to block shipments of weapons to the human and the Moluccas, armed groups still passed through the ports that were supposed to be guarded by police and soldiers.
The presence of Laskar Jihad in Ambon and divisions from within the police forces and army on the ground, caused a very rapid escalation of the fighting. Intensive fighting lasted about 3 years. Ambon city communities have been separated geographically based on religion. Christian communities were located in the southern parts of Ambon island, while the Muslim communities were based in the northern parts. Communities in the City of Ambon itself were divided apart on the village level, either ones with a Christian or a Muslim majority.
At the same time, various leaders and groups from Maluku made efforts in advocacy and mediation for both religious communities to stop the hostilities. The Pela-Gandong (bond brother) approach was used as a basis to bring together people of both religions qho qwre actually brothers genetically or by customary law. In fact, different communities of religious customs but brotherhood-bound were protecting each other during the riot. This cultural phenomenon coupled with the increasingly decisive actions of police and soldiers to apprehend armed groups, finally were able to reduce unrest.
In 2002, Laskar Jihad group resigned from the Moluccas and those who survived returned to Java with the facilitation of the National Maritime ships. Furthermore, populations of the two religious communities in Maluku started doing events for peace and recovery. The summit of the peace agreement between the two sides was conducted in Malino (South Sulawesi) in 2002. But it was not only in 2005 there were efforts to return refugees to their home communities, even when they do not share religion.
3. Final Stage
After the issue of religion was not capable of causing discord and war, a new issue was raised, namely the issue of nationhood. Local and national mass media vigorously voiced the opinion that the riot was the act of a group of South Maluku Republic (RMS) separatist movement. Muslim groups who claim themselves as nationalist groups rallied against Christian groups who were accused as belonging to the RMS separatist group. But protesters RMS were not many in numbers, and enigmatically were able to pass through the territories of the Muslim communities without interruption during the marches, and even gain additional mass from the Muslim regions on the way to the Maluku Police Headquarters. Police then escorted these marches and riots did not happen again.
Initial efforts to confuse the atmosphere were carried out by a group of terrorists (among them also numbered some police officers) who attacked a police post in Seram Island, causing casualties to both the attackers and police groups. This act of terrorism sparked outrage from all communities towards the police. Since then, the Maluku unrest practically ceased to exist, but anxiety was still felt until the end of 2005. After that, the atmosphere gradually returned to normal as seen from the number of refugees who return to rebuild houses with government assistance.
Utilization of Social Diversity as Triggers to Riots
From this brief chronology some important info can be gleaned in the context of social diversity in Maluku riots:
1. Exploitation of the issue of inter-ethnic hostility in the early stages of the riots did not work and caused profound mark among ethnic groups in the city of Ambon. In the city of Ambon can be found almost all ethnic groups, and all of them became victims of the riots.
2.The issue of inter-tribe hostility were not relevant to the social reality in Maluku because non-Ambon tribes had been accepted as part of the social units of the Maluku society since the days of Hindu kingdoms. Even on the social level, the settlers were given the honor in a traditional village council representatives. In contemporary society in Maluku, almost all ethnic groups spread across the populated islands. Many migrants from Buton, Bugis and Makassar already had children and grandchildren up to four to five generations in the Moluccas.
3. Ethnic groups diversity in Maluku is also related to the economy. Immigrant tribes are usually active in trading activities, fisheries and agriculture, while the indigenous tribal areas usually hold government and education posts. The dichotomy of these roles was not likely to cause hostility because they do not compete and even are in need of each other (complementary).
4. Exploitation of the issue of hostility between Muslim and Christian religious groups succeeded in worsening and extending the escalation of unrest. Amongs factors supporting the escalation is the presence of Laskar Jihad from Java, because in essence, local communities of different religions have grown accustomed to respect and protect each other because of the customary fraternal bond. In addition, local communities that were being devastated by damage and loss of property would not have been possible to finance the fighting.
5. Exploitation of issue related to nationhood that is associated with religious differences were not able to successfully restore the atmosphere of hostility between the people of both religions. Maluku people know that the RMS was founded by people of Maluku from both Muslims and Christians backgrounds. Although the President of the RMS was Christians, but there were figures of Muslim intellectuals and religious customs in the Cabinet of RMS. Even the proclamation of the RMS was done in a Muslim village on the island of Ambon. Moreover, for the contemporary society in Ambon, the separatist issue is a government affair (i.e. a security matter), and was irrelevant to daily life (hard to find food).
6. Diversity of tribes and religions in the ranks of security forces (police and army) led to a split within the security units. This division is thought to have resulted from the solidarity by members of police and soldiers towards their fellow ethnic and religious communities. However, this factor does not amount to much influence on public attitudes in regards to other tribes and religions.
Social diversity as a Driver for Peace
Efforts to reconcile the warring parties during the riots of Maluku is the result of the various peace movements by utilizing the diversity of social groups in Maluku, namely:
1. Christian and Muslim religious leaders who were respected people of the Moluccas. Their cooperation and their examples inspired local people to believe in peace.
2. Groups of Maluku intellectuals and academics of different faiths in and outside Ambon continued to claim that the riots were not because of hostility between the people of Maluku and indicated the involvement of a third party who intentionally masterminded the incidents.
3. Indigenous groups, non-governmental organizations, and academia in Maluku encouraged inter-religious dialogue among indigenous groups. This consistency led to various peace agreements in small groups that were accumulating into larger groups.
4. Maluku society groups in Jakarta and in the Netherlands had consistently shown that outside the Moluccas, people of Maluku ties were not hostile.
5. Christian and Muslim merchant groups supported each other in their trade chain of basic commodities so that mutual respect and mutual dependencies beat sentiments of envy and resentment.
6. Groups of educators, especially university lecturers from the Pattimura Ambon University, still taught students from both communities. The lecturers sometimes were sent to the border regions in order to meet students on both sides on neutral territory.
7. Groups of non-governmental organizations that did advocacy and assistance for refugees regardless of religious differences accelerated the acceptance of different religious groups.
Analysis of what happened from the beginning to the ending of Maluku unrest in the period 1999 – 2004 showed that efforts to utilize diversity as a driver of social unrest were to no avail. Ethnic differences cannot be a source of hostility if the quality of relations between ethnic groups is to complement each other in everyday life .**
Author
Samuel A.M. Littik, Ph.D. is the Vice Rector for Academic, Student and Alumni Affairs at the University of Satya Negara Indonesia (USNI). He was Team Leader of the Research on the Status of Justice Post-Riot Maluku (with cooperation with universities such as UNDP, UGP, and Unpatti).