Our bloody coup in Indonesia

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2001/aug/01/indonesia.comment
Isabel Hilton
Wednesday 1 August 2001 02.49 BST

Britain colluded in one of the worst massacres of the century

As Megawati Sukarnoputri struggles to hang on to control of Indonesia in the latest round of political upheaval, news has been published of how the British government covered up one of the worst massacres of the 20th century. The slaughter in 1965 - of up to a million alleged communist sympathisers - was carried out by General Suharto, who ousted Megawati's father, President Sukarno, to become Indonesia's military dictator. What is still less well known is that the British and American governments did not just cover up the massacre: they had a direct hand in bringing it about.

In the era of decolonisation and the cold war, ex-colonial powers were intent on preserving their economic interests in former colonies while setting up nominally independent governments. But the natives, inconveniently, did not always see their interests as consonant with those of their former colonial masters. Patrice Lumumba in the former Belgian Congo, Su-karno in Indonesia - both argued for economic as well as political self-determination.

Lumumba was assassinated with the connivance of Belgium, the US and the United Nations. In Indonesia, the British and American governments succeeded not only in engineering the result they wanted (the replacement of Sukarno with General Suharto), but in selling a false version of events that persists to this day.

Roland Challis, a former BBC south Asia correspondent, has described how British diplomats planted misleading stories in British newspapers at the time. But there is also evidence that the British and US responsibility for the fall of Sukarno goes back to the event that triggered it - an alleged left-wing coup attempt in 1965. The British were keen to get rid of Sukarno because he was pursuing a policy of confrontation with Malaysia. The US was convinced that Sukarno would drift towards communism - a far bigger potential headache for US interests than Vietnam.

Sukarno was hugely popular and an assassination would have unpredictable consequences: at worst, it might benefit the Indonesian Communist party, the PKI. The army was divided on the merits of a move against him. There was one man, though, who was willing to help - the commander of the strategic reserve, General Suharto. The challenge was to engineer Sukarno's downfall and, simultaneously, the elimination of the PKI.

In October 1965, a group of what are still described as "progressive army officers" kidnapped and brutally murdered six army generals, apparently in preparation for a coup. The motives of the group remain a matter of dis pute. At the time, they were alleged to be in sympathy with the PKI. They have subsequently been described as pro-Sukarno nationalists in revolt against their rightwing superiors. But a study carried out at Cornell University in 1966 discovered that what most of the officers had in common was not any association with the PKI, but a connection with General Suharto.

Lt Col Untung, the alleged leader, was a successful military officer who was a known anti-communist. Some of his colleagues had been trained in the US where it is unlikely that any communist sympathies would have escaped notice. Suharto subsequently dismantled the unit and the group's alleged links with the PKI became the pretext for the massacre of up to 1m people. After a series of closed show trials and staged confessions, the leaders were said to have been executed, but there is no independent evidence that the executions took place.

It has been known for more than 10 years that the CIA supplied lists of names for Suharto's assassination squads. What is less widely known is that the supposed pro-communist coup that triggered the crisis was almost certainly also the work of the CIA. Sukarno was finally removed from power in 1967. Suharto, meanwhile, was offered economic aid and the British lifted their embargo on sales of military aircraft. Suharto's massacres were whitewashed in a campaign of disinformation in which the British government willingly participated. The operation to "save" Indonesia, according to enthusiastic reports in, amongst others, the Atlantic Monthly, was a resounding success. "Suharto," Atlantic Monthly assured its readers, "is regarded by Indonesians who know him well as incorruptible ... In attacking the communists, he was not acting as a western puppet; he was doing simply what he believed to be best for Indonesia."

Best for Indonesia, in Suharto's view, was the granting of lucrative concessions to western mining and oil companies. It was the beginning of a post-independence economic order that continues today. After 32 years, Suharto was finally overthrown. By then, even the US government had to admit that he was one of the most corrupt dictators of the 20th century.

comment@theguardian.com

Why We Won’t See Trump-Like Nationalism In Indonesia

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/trump-nationalism-indonesia_us_59c010e8e4b06f9bf048855f

David T. Hill,  Professor Emeritus, Southeast Asian Studies, Murdoch University
Krishna Sen,  Professor Emeritus, School of Social Sciences, University of Western Australia

“America First” is based in exclusivism, but Indonesia’s nationalism has far more pluralistic connotations.

NURPHOTO VIA GETTY IMAGES

Supporters of ethnic Chinese Christian Jakarta governor, Basuki Tjahaja Purnama, gather after he’s charged with blasphemy.

PERTH, Australia ― In recent years, the United States and Indonesia have witnessed the emergence of large-scale, right-wing, ethno-religious movements. Both nations have experienced a surge of populism ― that essentialist political ideology that operates in simple dichotomies, where a leader aligns with the “good,” the “deserving,” the “ordinary” people against a corrupt “privileged elite.”

Yet their brands of populism have different roots and directions. In America, populism has gained ground by appealing to marginalized, mostly white, Christians under U.S. President Donald Trump. In Indonesia, it has appealed to majoritarian Muslim aspirations. In America, white supremacists have capitalized on this marginalization. In Indonesia, Islamists have exploited a sense of global religious identity.

Although Indonesia shows some alarming parallels to America under Trump, ultimately, there is little likelihood that Indonesia will succumb completely to right-wing nationalism in the way many fear it could in America. “America First” ― Trump’s foreign policy vision ― is based in exclusivism. Indonesia’s nationalism has far more pluralistic connotations.

"In America, white supremacists have capitalized on marginalization. In Indonesia, Islamists have."

In addition, Indonesia is increasingly intertwined in a global Islamic internationalism. Unlike the restrictive populism of Trump’s support base, Indonesia’s Muslim citizens can be just as easily mobilized to support the Rohingya in Myanmar or Syrian civilians fleeing civil war.

In order to understand how Indonesia got here, we have to look at how the country’s current strand of populism came about.

AFP VIA GETTY IMAGES

Jakarta’s governor, Basuki Tjahaja Purnama, was the first non-Muslim to hold that office in 50 years.

In 2014, Basuki Tjahaja Purnama ― known widely as “Ahok” ― became governor of Jakarta, Indonesia’s capital. As the deputy, he inherited the post when then-Governor Joko Widodo ― popularly referred to as “Jokowi” ― won the presidential election by a margin of just over 6 percent.

Jokowi’s campaign highlighted his impoverished roots as an underdog who had risen up the ranks, from a domestic furniture manufacturer to a successful politician. The media portrayed him as a provincial leader free of corruption ― noteworthy in Indonesian parliamentary politics ― who was taking on the discredited national political party elites head-on.

Ahok is ethnically Chinese, and the first non-Muslim to hold the office of governor in 50 years. In Indonesia, home to the largest Muslim population in the world, Muslims make up about 87 percent of the population. Ahok’s governorship was thus significant because of his religious and ethnic minority status.

"The pluralist values that are deeply engrained in Indonesian identity make the country resistant to right-wing nationalist surges."

His position of power was also noteworthy for another reason. Ahok is a member of an outsider community that has for years generally been regarded as wealthy compared to native Indonesians. Scapegoating of the ethnic Chinese is a historical pattern in Indonesia. According to a Reuters report, the group makes up less than 5 percent of Indonesia’s population, yet controls much of its wealth. Tension came to a head nearly two decades ago in 1998. Frustrated by a larger economic crisis, rioters targeted Jakarta’s Chinatown area and ethnic Chinese residents, leading to massive property damage and the deaths of around 1,000 people.

That uprising had well and truly passed by the time Ahok came to power. He enjoyed relative success and was seen as an example that progress had been made on ethnic tensions. But problems persisted. Islamists saw his rise as a threat to a long understood status quo and attempted to co-opt the public against him.

PAULA BRONSTEIN VIA GETTY IMAGES

Riots in Jakarta in 1998 targeted the country’s ethnic Chinese community

Through his urban renewal programs in his two years as governor, Ahok had alienated populations of Jakarta’s vast urban poor, who had to evacuate slum areas to make room for his development projects. Islamists seized on the opportunity to unite the masses against the elite, and, characteristically, used the relocated, disenfranchised shantytown dwellers as the grist to drive the reactionist populist mill.

In 2016, they had their chance to push change with Anies Baswedan, the candidate who was challenging Ahok’s re-election. Baswedan is Western-educated and has a reputation as a moderate Muslim intellectual. However, in the lead-up to the election, he was said to have collaborated with Islamists, such as the Islamic Defenders Front, to boost his popular support.

Tensions boiled over when Ahok criticized his Islamist opponents for misinterpreting a verse in the Quran in order to undermine him and to convince the public not to vote for a non-Muslim leader. His remarks were taken by many as outright criticism of the Quran itself, which falls under Indonesia’s strict blasphemy laws, and he was charged with blasphemy.

BARCROFT MEDIA VIA GETTY IMAGES

A Muslim protester stands in front of a banner of Ahok outside a courthouse during his trial. Jakarta. Jan. 2017.

This incident gave Islamists more momentum against Ahok. People took to the streets calling for his removal. His campaign was derailed, and Baswedan won the election. The courts subsequently convicted Ahok of blasphemy and sentenced him to two years in prison. 

Baswedan’s victory was, in part, the product of an Islamic ethno-religious mobilization, albeit in the capital of one of the most tolerant and pluralist Muslim nations on earth. However, the protests in Jakarta died down once Ahok was removed. Unlike the movement that Trump forged into a solid support base for his national political ambitions, the anti-Ahok mobilization has not  ― at least for now ― become a movement with power to transform Indonesian political institutions. This is a testament to how deeply pluralist values are engrained in Indonesian identity and how resistant they are to right-wing nationalist surges.

Will Populism Continue To Thrive In Indonesia?

OSCAR SIAGIAN/GETTY IMAGES

Former presidential candidate Prabowo Subianto has hinted that he will run in the 2019 presidential election. 

Still, in Prabowo Subianto, the politician who has been linked to the anti-Chinese violence in 1998, we see some distinctly Trump-like qualities.

Prabowo just barely lost the 2014 presidential election against Jokowi, and is already said to be preparing to run for president in 2019. In his 2014 campaign, he advocated for a return to the nation’s original 1945 constitution, which emphasized presidential rather than parliamentary power, and which he claimed would tame self-interested political elites occupying the nation’s bureaucracy and political parties. He attacked “Western” values, and promised a new consensus, articulated with deep suspicion of the established order.

In preparation for his assault on the presidency in 2014, he sought leadership of farmers’ and market traders’ organizations, using these as platforms to claim a mandate in the name of the exploited masses. Significantly, he has also been reported to have supported the Islamist groups who united to depose Ahok.

But while the disenfranchised working classes fell in behind Trump’s nostalgic cry to “Make America Great Again,” in Indonesia, the less educated rural masses were not quite fooled by Prabowo’s megalomania. Jokowi consequently won the presidency. And it is doubtful whether Baswedan, who came into political prominence in the anti-Suharto reform movement, can ever transform himself into a populist ally for Prabowo.

Is Pluralism Stronger Than Populism? 

SPENCER PLATT VIA GETTY IMAGES

Donald Trump campaigned on the populist promise to “Make America Great Again.”

Looking at the upcoming election in 2019, there are signs that Jokowi will struggle to hold out against Prabowo and populism could continue to thrive in Indonesia.

As president, Jokowi has been unable to stem outbreaks of Islamist populism with which politically ambitious Indonesians have continued to toy. This has been partially exacerbated by Saudi funding ― politically influential in steering Indonesia’s tolerant brand of Islam in a conservative direction. Such funds have been flowing into Indonesia for two decades, paying for mosques and promoting significant growth in Islamic schools and universities.

Although hard-line Islamist groups in Indonesia are not new, in recent years, prompted by the anti-Ahok protests, the tone has intensified, potentially leaving the future open to politicians like Prabowo, who, the fear is, could potentially take the Islamist influence further if it helps him achieve his goals and keeps up his ratings.

"Destructive populism has no permanent home in Indonesia"

But Indonesia has still maintained its uniquely pluralistic Muslim-majority society. As is often the case, extremist groups have routinely seized on moments of instability like these ― a financial meltdown in 1998, or a minority leader who attempts to change the status quo in 2017 ― to use religion as a mechanism to foment riots, mob mentality and radical reactive populism.

In Indonesia, there have historically been many countervailing forces. As Hillary Clinton said during a 2009 visit as secretary of state, “If you want to know if Islam, democracy, modernity and women’s rights can coexist, go to Indonesia.” The famously syncretic culture remains a dominant force in Indonesian society. And the hard-fought democratic institutions built after the fall of the kleptocratic Suharto dictatorship in 1998 will not be easily surrendered by the majority of the Indonesian population.

Whatever happens in the 2019 presidential election, current trends are not sufficient to predict that a right-wing-led radical reactive populism will usher in a Trump-like figure in Indonesia. Instead of allowing radical Islamists to dominate the political agenda, the largest Muslim country may well put Islam over Islamism and community over nation to ensure that such destructive populism has no permanent home in Indonesia.

sweet potatoes

Rob Allyn, Guru Saracen

http://obsessionnews.com/rob-allyn-guru-saracen/
Editor: Fira

Pilpres Indonesia 2014 tercatat sebagai kontestasi pemilihan Presiden yang paling sarat dengan kampanye hitam, mungkin harus segera disebut nama satu orang yang sangat – kalau bukan paling – bertanggungjawab.

Orang itu adalah Rob Allyn. Warga negara Amerika Serikat ini adalah tukang plintir (spin doctor) yang merancang segenap propaganda hitam untuk menghancurkan Jokowi.

Dia memang bukan orang main-main. Dia adalah perancang kampanye George Bush untuk menjadi Gubernur Texas, dan berada di tim pemenangan Bush untuk menjadi Presiden Amerika Serikat pada 2000 dan 2004.

Namun yang paling penting dalam catatan prestasinya adalah ketika ia menjadi konsultan politik calon presiden Meksiko, Vincente Fox, segera sesudah Bush menang di AS. Berkat tangan dinginnya, Fox berhasil naik ke tampuk kekuasaan dengan menumbangkan Partai Revolusi Institusional yang sudah berkuasa selama 71 tahun.

Rob telah malang melintang di dunia periklanan dan public relations di AS selama 25 tahun. Ia pernah menjadi Presiden dan CEO Allyn & Company yang dikenal sebagai salah satu perusahaan konsultan politik, public relations dan iklan terkemuka di AS. Pada 2000, perusahaan itu diambil alih Omnicom.

Allyn tidak bekerja untuk memenangkan ideologi tertentu. “Saya pebisnis, bukan politisi,” kata Allyn di majalah D Magazine pada 2001. Yang dia layani bukan saja klien politik namun juga perusahaan-perusahaan besar seperti Coca cola, Seven Eleven, dan AT&T. Sekadar catatan, perusahaan yang ia pimpin dikenal aktif mempromosikan hak kaum gay dan lesbian baik di AS maupun di negara-negara lain di dunia.

Namun, karena percaya dia dibayar untuk memenangkan klien, dia bisa melakukan apapun untuk memenangkan pertarungan. Salah satu keahliannya yang khas adalah merekayasa kebenaran untuk menghancurkan lawan.

Apa yang terjadi di Indonesia saat ini khas karya-karya Allyn: penuh kebohongan, fitnah, rekayasa dan plintiran. Jokowi misalnya dituduh sebagai komunis, kafir, anti-Islam, Kristen, memiliki orangtua Cina-Singapura. Begitu juga, konsep Revolusi Mental dituduh sebagai gagasan komunis. Di sepanjang proses pemfitnahan ini, beredar bukti-bukti hasil rekayasa, seperti foto, akte kelahiran atau bahkan surat nikah palsu.

Di luar itu ada pula pembuatan tabloid Obor Rakyat, penyebaran kabar palsu soal transkrip wawancara Megawati dengan Jaksa Agung untuk membebaskan Jokowi dari tuduhan kasus korupsi TransJakarta, serta penyebaran surat palsu Jokowi yang meminta penangguhan pemeriksaan oleh Jaksa Agung.

Kecanggihan kampanye itu juga terasa melalui media baru seperti Youtube: manipulasi dalam film Prabowo Sang Patriot, rekayasa wawancara dengan Jokowi yang seolah-olah disiarkan stasiun televisi internasional Bloomberg, serta rekayasa pengunduhan video yang memuji Prabowo oleh ilmuwan terkemuka AS, Geoffrey Robnson.

Kehebatan kampanye hitam itu pun terlihat dalam rekayasa pemberitaan tentang hasil penelitian lembaga survei internasional Gallup yang memenangkan Prabowo. Terakhir adalah kehadiran empat lembaga survei yang melansir hasil-hasil Quick Count yang sangat meragukan.

Kampanye hitam yang penuh kebohongan ini sangat luar biasa. Namun itulah keahlian Allyn. Dia adalah master rekayasa.

Selain berprofesi sebagai konsultan politik dan bisnis, Allyn (tahun ini berusia 55 tahun) adalah seorang produser film, penulis naskah film, perancang iklan dan penulis novel. Novelnya, Front Runner yang ditulisnya pada 1990 pernah menempati posisi buku terlaris menurut New York times selama 13 minggu.

Di Indonesia dia terlibat sebagai produser dan penulis naskah dalam trilogy film yang didanai oleh keluarga Prabowo: Merah Putih (2009), Darah Garuda (2010), dan Hati Merdeka (2011). Ia juga membuat film dokumenter tentang kehebatan Prabowo dan program revolusi putihnya berjudul Hungry is the Tiger, yang dapat disaksikan di Youtube. Belakangan ia membuat film komersial bertema aksi, Java Heat.

Hampir semua film tersebut disutradai oleh anaknya sendiri, Conor Allyn. Trilogi film revolusi yang mereka buat berbiaya sangat besar (dikabarkan ketiganya menghabiskan dana di atas Rp 40 miliar), tidak begitu meledak di pasar Indonesia namun mendapat penghargaan di sejumlah festival internasional. Salah satu kekuatan film-filmya adalah dalam hal kedahsyatan efek visualnya.

Kehebatannya dalam menciptakan kehidupan imajiner di layar lebar itu juga terlihat dalam kampanye yang ia rancang dalam kehidupan nyata.

Ia dianggap berjasa dalam memenangkan George Bush sebagai Presiden AS pada 2000 karena ia berhasil merancang kampanye negatif yang efektif menjatuhkan reputasi pesaing Bush, John McCain.

Kehadirannya di Meksiko sejak awal sudah diwarnai kontroversi. Negara itu sebenarnya tidak mengizinkan keterlibatan orang asing dalam masalah politik dalam negeri. Ratusan jurnalis dan aktivis HAM luar negeri diminta keluar Meksiko karena aturan itu. Namun Allyn dengan cerdik bisa terus bertahan di sana selama pemilu.

Kisahnya bak cerita spionase tingkat tinggi. Ia berkeliaran di Meksiko dengan berbagai nama palsu, seperti Jose de Murga atau Alberto Aguirre. Peran Allyn sangat besar dalam kemenangan Fox. Ia terlibat dalam hal jajak pendapat, menyusun pidato sampai menentukan pakaian yang dikenakan Fox.

Setelah kemenangan spektakuler Fox, ia sempat menjadi konsultan Perdana Menteri Bahama, Perry Christie dan juga calon presiden Haiti, Dumarsais Simeus; serta membantu Bush di masa pemerintah Amerika menyerbu Irak dan Afghanistan.

Allyn kembali membantu Fox pada 2005 untuk melobi kepentingan Meksiko di AS. Dia juga membantu keberhasilan Calderon menjadi Presiden Meksiko pada 2006. Di Meksiko, Allyn dibayar US$ 720.000 per tahun.

Media di AS yang secara khusus meliput Amerika Latin, menggambarkan Allyn sebagai orang yang lazim mengembangkan kampanye hitam dengan beragam cara: iklan-iklan provokatif, polling palsu, berbagai berita yang didasarkan pada kabar burung dan fitnah, untuk menciptakan ketakutan dan kebencian; serta juga menggelar demonstrasi bayaran dalam skala raksasa.

Untuk memenangkan Fox, misalnya Allyn menciptakan LSM bernama ‘Democracy Watch’ yang berperan sebagai seolah-olah pemantau pemilu. Di masa Fox berkuasa, Allyn juga merancang sejumlah kampanya rekayasa.

Salah satu kejahatan Allyn adalah memanipulasi peristiwa Atenco di Meksiko, Mei 2006, dalam peristiwa tersebut 30 dari 47 tahanan politik perempuan diperkosa polisi. Allyn disebut membantu Vicente Fox menentukan langkah yang harus diambil supaya kasus itu tak sampai menggoyahkan posisinya. Ia juga membantu Fox mengatur pemberitaan dalam media agar kasus ini tidak menjadi besar.

Di masa Presiden Fox, Allyn berperan besar dalam upaya membangun citra positif tentang Meksiko di AS. Salah satu keberhasilan dia adalah ketika melancarkan kampanye agar AS tidak menerapkan kebijakan yang akan memperketat arus imigran ilegal dari Meksiko.

Setiap tahun sekitar 500 ribu imigran legal dari Meksiko masuk ke AS. Hanya saja, yang sebenarnya terancam oleh kebijakan tersebut bukanlah hanya para imigran miskin dari Meksiko melainkan juga operasi penyelundupan obat bius berskala raksasa yang dilindungi pemerintah Meksiko.

Yang dilakukan Allyn adalah mengarahkan opini publik Amerika untuk bersimpati dengan nasib para imigran Meksiko dan mengabaikan isu utamanya, yakni soal arti penting pengamanan perbatasan AS-Meksiko bukan saja dari arus imigran tapi juga peredaran obat bius. Untuk itu, Allyn melakukan berbagai kegiatan lobi, jajak pendapat, iklan dan kunjungan tur pejabat Meksiko ke AS.

Allyn juga memobilisasi demonstrasi-demonstrasi yang melibatkan ratusan ribu orang di kota-kota di AS, seperti di Los Angeles. Ini sempat menimbulkan kekacauan dan huru-hara yang melibatkan kebencian ras dan etnik. Kekacauan ini turut diprovokasi oleh berbagai media berbahasa Spanyol di AS yang dibayar oleh Allyn.

Di masa kampanye Calderon (yang menggantikan Presiden Fox), Allyn juga menerapkan propaganda hitam. Pada awalnya, Calderon dikenal sebagai politisi yang jujur dan patriotik. Namun elektablitasnya tertinggal dibandingkan lawannya. Di bawah arahan Allyn, Calderon mengubah taktik kampanyenya dengan melancarkan kampanye hitam terhadap pesaingnya, walikota kota Mexico City, Lopez Obrador. Nyatanya taktik ini berhasil. Calderon menang.

Dengan reputasi semacam itu, wajar bila Allyn sekarang menerapkan hal serupa untuk menghancurkan Jokowi.

Allyn sendiri membantah bahwa ia berada di belakang kampanye hitam Prabowo. Ia mengaku hanya menjadi pembuat iklan politik televisi bermuatan pesan positif. Namun dengan reputasinya yang sedemikian mengemuka, kehadiran Allyn untuk sekedar membuat iklan tentu tak masuk akal.

Allyn sudah membantu Prabowo sejak pemilu 2009. Ketika itu, iklan-iklan Gerindra yang sangat atraktif – antara lain dengan visualisasi garuda– membantu perolehan suara partai sampai 4,46%. Sejak saat itu branding Prabowo sebagai seorang pemimpin yang nasionalis, berani menentang dominasi asing, dan peduli pada rakyat kecil secara konsisten dikembangkan.

Prabowo dan Gerindra juga secara khusus mengarahkan kampanye mereka pada generasi muda yang tak pernah mengalami penindasan politik ala Orde Baru dan tak memiliki kenangan buruk tentang kejahatan militer.

Hanya saja, kalau Allyn hanya mengarahkan kampanyenya pada pembangunan citra positif Prabowo, tentu tak akan ada masalah. Yang jadi persoalan, sang master kini kembali menunjukkan keahliannya dalam kampanye hitam yang memecahbelah bangsa.

Bagi Allyn, ini barangkali sekadar permainan. Namun bagi Indonesia, dia sungguh membawa malapetaka.

Himbauan:
Sudah sepatutnya negara melarang keras orang asing ikut serta campur tangan dalam bentuk apapun terhadap perhelatan resmi negara yang notabene mereka tidak memiliki beban moral dan tanggung jawab apapun terhadap dampak buruk yang mereka timbulkan bagi bangsa dan negara berdaulat ini.

Diposting oleh: Dr Ir Pandji R Hadionot MH

Pada: 31 Agustus 2017