~THE HERMIT KINGDOM~

On January 27, 2008 in the RSPP Hospital – Jakarta, a former president and the ruler of the Indonesian New Order has passed away. He leaves so many legacies, not only the memory of prosperous economic Indonesia in the past, but also the problem of authoritarianism that created fearness bystate which until now still complicated to solve. The judicial disputes for example corruption alleged, human right violation, and the abuse of power is a few problem that still debatable in the court. Besides the negative side (the failure and past mistakes owning by the Soeharto’s administration) there are positive side that (may be) affected by the people of Indonesia in the present day-to-day politics are lacked to feeling. The New Order’s Soeharto has shown the stability, security, and development. Something that in present day difficult to see.

Strong Government

The Soeharto’s administration able to bring the political stability and the economic growth because this administration are supported by the strong leadership and backed-up by the military as one pillar of the New Order fundament of bureaucracy. With Golkar as political machine (in the context of maintenance the vote-gathering and civilian-base bureaucrat), the military played important role to keep the status quo. So the developmentalism of New Order keeps going and spread across the nation.

The value of Armed Forces in the Soeharto perspectives is meaningful. Soeharto are the most senior military officer in the Army on the post 1965 decade, where the chaos threaten State, the only organized power in thus era that ready to take over after the failure of Soekarno’s manage-states is only the military. Why military? Not only because the “Dwifungsi” doctrine [ABRI’s dual function doctrine of fighting external enemies and participating in domestic security and politics] but also the civilians are unprepared to take over. The economic instability not only creates the political ruptures, but also impact to the national succession. Theabsent of middle class in the 1965 decadehad rising the more solid military intelligentsia as a response to the civilian failure to take control of the state operators. As the most senior services in the Armed Forces, the Army dominance put their officer to fill the succession of national leader.

The important question in this paper, the author noted that in the 1965 decade, Soeharto military ranks still Major General (that later increased into Lieutenant General), several level behind the General A. H. Nasution (as later Minister of Defense and Chief of the General Peoples Assembly), why in the final destination Soeharto became the most senior in the Army and pass the President of Indonesia? To see the rivalry and the march of Soeharto career, is not only just see the objective ranks and tour of duty the Armed Force apparatus, but also the other instrument that some scholar called “intelligence analysis”.[1]

The rise of Soeharto in post 1965

To see the dynamics in the internal army friction, we must traced back to the early 1960 as Salim Said (2006) wrote that the political involvement of the Indonesian military during the independence revolution, are impact to the contemporary Indonesian politics.

Beginning in 1957, martial law legalized the entry of the officers into politics. But Lt. Gen. Nasution –who had been reinstated as the Army Chief of Staff in 1955- still needed a doctrine to justify the political role of the military in term of its own history and experiences. In 1957, Prime Minister Ali Sastroamijoyo had proclaimed nationwide martial law. The reasons for this state of siege were the developments in the regions and vis-à-vis the capital. The bad relations developing between the center and the regions ultimately ended in the PRRI rebellion in several parts of the country.[2]

Martial law gave the military an opportunity to exercise more power. Together with the President Soekarno, who under the parliamentary government was constitutionally weak but personally very influential, the military initiated a return to the strong presidential system of the revolutionary period. In 1958, after being returned as the Chief-of-Staff of the Army in 1955, Nasution had declared in November 12, 1958 the soldiers “Middle Way” principle. The declaration by Nasution was on speeches without text in the annual celebration of cadet ceremony in Military Academy, Magelang.[3]

The problem of civil-military relation in Indonesia’s post independence period is highly politicized of the Armed Forces (TNI) by President Soekarno. To balance the domestic stability, in the political system, Soekarno adopted the politics of NASAKOM (Nasionalis-Agama-Komunis — Nationalist-Religion-Communist) to keep the national entity balance based on political sect (politik aliran).

Besides the several of ideological thought in the political system, there is the power exist in guided democracy era. There are: first, the element of President RI, there is Ir. Soekarno as Chief of State, Chief of Government, Prime Minister, Great Leader of Revolution, and long-life President. The member of Dwikora Cabinet included to this element.

Second, the element of internal Army. Army separated by the influences of clique between Nasution (Lt. Gen. Abdul Haris Nasution) faction and Yani (Lt. Gen. Ahmad Yani) faction. Soeharto, in the beginning include with the Nasution faction, although later leave and build the independent clique.

And Third, PKI with all of onderbouw organization under communist influences. Forces with three millions member of core PKI as a party, and supported by more than seventies millions of member onderbouw organizations. With this estimates, PKI is a third ranks Communist party in the world under China Peoples Republic and Soviet Union. In the 1955 general election, PKI had four ranks result and placed their minister in the Dwikora Cabinets. Closed with inner cycle of Soekarno’s power, PKI becoming the brightest star and scariest element for the communist opponent.

This condition getting worse, with the friction in the Army (AD), where the General A.H. Nasution as Chief-of-Staff of the Army didn’t like the affair between Soekarno and PKI. The anti-communist view of Nasution carries involving in the behind-scene of regions rebellion supporters. The case of Dewan Banteng (Buffalo Council) and Dewan Gajah (Elephant Council) in South Sumatra. In the beginning, this council just a mass-supporting beam by the Nasution clique, but in the grass-roots, they later declaring self as an opposition of government. This is caused because they do not like to see the intimate relations between Soekarno with PKI.

The Nasution’s clique not only provokes the civilian mass, but also influences the high rank military officers to support his movement. The method is by infiltrate the Perjuangan Pembebasan Irian Barat—West Irian liberation Movement with build Front National Movement that played in the political activity. This is the first involvement of military in the political realm. In the other sides, Nasution supporting mass sympathy with build BKS that involved peasant, youth, and political party under influences of Army. So, this is a regional-level warfare doctrine because using the struggle of liberation West Papua until the village districts.

Soekarno’s administration knew that Nasution is play-director behind this movement. Soekarno think that Nasution movement will bring the Armed Force became “state- within-the state”. So he limited the Nasution role in the Army and put Nasution into boxes with just responsible in the administration only and not leaves Him to interfere the soldier operational, although he still take hold of the current position. With the promoting Lt. Gen. Ahmad Yani as Menpangad (Army Minister), the format duty is to lead the Army. But besides his formal duty, he got a special assignment of President Soekarno to limited the Nasution clique’s by replaced the Pangdam (Regions Commander) which later known as “Nasution man’s”. It’s like “intelligence operation”. These conditions make the relations between Nasution and Yani getting worse.[4]

In the political realm, in the end of 1963s, Soekarno and Soebandrio (Deputy I Prime-Minister) replaced the Nasution’s position from Chief-of-Staff of the Army into just “Presidential Adviser”. The last, Nasution’s influences in the PARAN (Panitia Retooling Aparatur Negara—some commission of anti corruption investigation founded by Nasution) disband and changed into KONTRAR (Komando Tertinggi Retooling Aparatur Revolusi— Highest Command of Replacing Revolution’s Apparatus), headed by Soebandrio, and to Strengthen, Yani appoint by Soekarno as Chief-of-Staff KONTRAR. At least, Nasution’s influences in the real politics (military and politics) are fading away.

This condition frightens the Armed Forces leaders. They afraid, if the conflict penetrated into grass-root soldiers. If this happened, the PKI will get the benefit. So, they asked Soekarno to reconcile Nasution and Yani. Soekarno appoint Maj. Gen. Soeharto and East Java Military Commander, Brig. Gen. Basuki Rachmad go to meet Nasution. The duty is to suggest Nasution to adapt the tour-of-duty and do not contrary with the President appointment.

This reconciliation is not easy. From several meeting scheduled, both of Nasution and Yani never attended the meeting, they just sent their adviser. In meeting on the mid April 1965s, attended by 200 high officers in the Army Headquarters, they (at least) doesn’t come (the means that this meeting failed to reconcile both generals), but this meeting declaring the new Army doctrine, called “Catur Ubaya Cakti” concepted by Maj. Gen. Soeharto. The point is a declaration of loyalty and honest-promise of Army Soldiers, which in substance the TNI as one of the force element of state have rights to give an unlimited suggestion and political duty to the President.[5]

This doctrine was rising the new worried in the circle of political elites and intellectual society; because the Army is clear defend the “state-within the-state politics”. This doctrine implied that Armed Forces had independent authority to control their own resources and won’t interfere by the external. This doctrine also consequence Soeharto as the new rising star within the Armed Forces officers, that in this era bridging the two strong personalities (Nasution and Yani) which the most senior officers in the Armed Forces.

With the lacked influence of senior officer above Soeharto (as the consequence of friction the Army by Yani and Nasution), Soeharto had chance to start unifying the internal Army with build his own clique. This condition implied that Soekarno doesn’t have choice in the post 1965 tragedy (which Yani and others high officer were killed) to give Soeharto a wider authority to restore and command the security as Pangkopkamtib which Nasution (as the highest officers) it self were untrusted by Soekarno.

In the realm of constitution, the issued of an extra-judicial and ad-hoc institution like Pangkopkamtip are unconstitutional because it dismissed the regular norms and political ethics. In the tragedy of September 30, 1965, after the kidnapped of General Yani, the President as the supreme commander should replace the Yani position (as Menpangad) with caretaker to doing the day-to-day duty. It is enough to fulfill the vacuum of power in the Army as constitution has noted to regulate it. In fact, Soekarno has appoint Maj. Gen. Pranowo to represent Yani as caretaker, but many of the Army officers refused the appointment and Pranowo just like symbol that later delusional.

Soeharto enter to the stage of power. There are so many controversial version during the appoint ofMaj. Gen. Soeharto to became Pangkopkamtib. As Pangkostrad (Army-Strategic Reserve-Chief-of-Staff), Soeharto ought to obey the supreme commander and accept the command under Maj. Gen. Pranowo, but in the reality he refuse and -utilize his own clique network- provoke the majority Army officers to stand up to the line to support him.[6]

Soekarno doesn’t have any choice in the chaotic situation like thus time, so he give the Pangkostrad Maj. Gen. Soeharto with a wider authority that passing-over the real job that Soeharto should take over. This is a psychological warfare between Army (Soeharto clique) and Soekarno, utilize the Army intelligence network to support Soeharto. The Pangkopkamtib founded in October 10, 1965. It is too odd, because Soeharto accept the Supersemar in 11 March 1966. [7]

With the position of Pangkopkamtib, the main duty of Soeharto is to take any action he felt necessary for the country on behalf of Soekarno. But in the reality, Pangkopkamtib and Supersemar became tool to transfer the authority, transfer of sovereignty. Soon and possible, Soekarno’s role in the political realm delusional.

The Formative Period: Building a Power Base in Indonesia

AFTER MONTH of intensive psychological warfare between Soekarno and the Army, on March 11, 1966, Soekarno finally authorized General Soeharto, then Commander of the Army, as trusted officers after the murdered of Yani in the tragedy of 30 September, to take any action he felt necessary for the country on behalf of Soekarno. The first action Soeharto took was to disband the PKI (Indonesia’s Communist Party). With no PKI and a weak of Soekarno, the Military stood unchallenged on the stage of Indonesian politics.

Using his position as the undisputed leader of the Army folowing of the abortive coup of -public well known- the leftist officers in the presidential palace guard in association with the leaders of the communist party, Soeharto consolidated his power over the military. Soeharto apparently learned valuable lessons from the previously experiences of General A. H. Nasution -the most important military leader of 1950s and early 1960s- especially from Nasution’s unsuccessful efforts to control the heavily politicized Armed Forces during Soekarno’s Guided Democracy.[8]

In 1967 Soeharto started to reorganize the Armed Force by downgrading the services chief of staff, eliminating their power to command their troops, disbanding their intelligence sections as well as their planning, budged, political section, and reducing their elite troops.

THE SOPHISTICATED of Soeharto as an administrator and master spies to create domestic stability is about craft the intelligence services. In the nature of war, intelligence same with sniper. They silent and deadly. In the battle of war, the strategy to win the battle (especially to collapse the opponent morals), in the first priority by Sniper is destroy the sniper personnel (counter-sniper) and second destroy the sub-machine operator/missile facility and later catch/kill the platoon commander. It’s known as the priority attack. So the first time to erected the new administration of the New Order, especially in the security sector, it is important to use the counterintelligence tactics, with disband the Soekarno’s intelligence services BPI (Biro Pusat Intelijen—Centre Intelligence Bureau).[9]

BPI under Soebandrio (also Deputy I Prime-Minister and Foreign Minister) is a second generation of intelligence services in the post-independence era. Before the existence of BPI, in the pre-independence, the father of Indonesian intelligence, Colonel Zulkifli Lubes craft the intelligence community and founded BI(Badan Istimewa—Special Services). BI not long serves the secret mission. Which the low experiences and unskilled agent, BI changed into BRANI (Badan Rahasia Negara Indonesia—Indonesian State Secret Services). This replacement solidly the Services as a part of defense and security element as tool for sake the independence struggle.[10]

As a responses to the BRANI as combat intelligence, which influences with military dominance, the Department of Defense under Amir Sjarifuddin build Badan Pertahanan B—Defense Service Number B, which reflects of civilian wonder’s in the realm of Military dominance to the Services. But, with this new fusion, the Military wing, also afraid, because Syarifudin is a leftist, which represent the left-wing interest and had a secret agenda to put the military in the peripheral. So in the Armed Forces Headquarters build BISAP (Biro Informasi Angkatan Perang—Armed Forces Information Bureau) to balance the Syarifuddin influences. This is a condition where the military still want control the Services. [11]

IN 1947s, When Amir Sjarifuddin become Prime Minister (the cabinet also dominated by the left wings) put the military in peripheral and Indonesia’s sovereign authority has been separated by Renville Agreement (which the implication the Siliwangi Division under Colonel Nasution withdraw from East Java). This condition rising the unsatisfied of the military officer’s, which also decline the Amir Sjarifuddin Cabinet. Disappointed because kicked from His position, Syarifudin joint the hardliner leftist wing’s (Communist Party) in Madiun and planed to rebel the Hatta’s Cabinet in Yogyakarta, that’s known as “Madiun Affairs”. The rebellions are fault and many of the leftist elites arrested and it is the first blunder by the leftist in the modern Indonesia.

The defeat of leftist wing’s in the Madiun Affairs are implied the lack of leftist element in the Intelligence Services. Soon, the Badan Pertahanan B disband and the function of state intelligence roles by combat intelligence where dominated with the Army Intelligence personnel. With the lack of leftist element in the state intelligence, this condition make a chance to the elites military intelligence (Army) to make a technical cooperation with the US intelligence agency (CIA). The cooperation is to endure the Indonesian interest to be less dependent with the socialist nation. The point is a secret mission to gain Indonesia not fall into communist state.[12]

After Soekarno consolidated his power and amendment the constitution into 1945 Constitution in the 1959, a new intelligence services are needed to build under appoint of President. With the dominance of military intelligence, this is a difficult era of Soekarnos’s administration to build a single and coherent coordinator of Intelligence Services with a central command to take a single services to maintain the duty of intelligences, there is to obey the President’s will. So in the first, he must put a trusty a “Soekarno Man’s” or a loyalist on behalf Him in the new intelligences bureau. The appointment of Soebandrio as Soekarno loyalist maybe affected by the nature of political realm that Soekarno as civilian want put a civil officer as new intelligence director to keep the Army stay on the path way and not to interfere the political affair like what Nasution does.

After the long and various intrigue within the intelligence community, Soebandrio build a new fusion intelligence offices named BPI and headed the services to fulfill the president interest. All of the intelligence community transferred to BPI, including Saipan Alumni. The military intelligence also fusion into BPI, although the elites of Army Officers disappointed. It is mean, that there is only one authorized intelligence services in this period. In the Soekarno’s era, when the pendulum of foreign policy and homeland security move to the left, BPI politicized because Soebandrio hired and take the intelligence officers from the leftist. Although not all BPI officers is communist (or communist sympathizer) but in the march of institutionalized intelligence services became difficult. The officers lack the energy and professionalism because they roles as tool of regime (political affiliation) not as tool of state.[13]

As the intelligence services, BPI lack of early detection and late to analyze the situation. The friction within Army and the rise of Soeharto are less became main interest of BPI officers, in addition they also not understand the nature of global politics. It is time when the Cold Wars rise in the peak. The war of silence between USA and Uni Soviet are the wars of ideas. The wars of influences. The USA had interest in Indonesia not fall into communist influence. In the global context, the politics of NASAKOM placed Soekarno’s administration in the left position. It is not good for the foreign policy of Indonesia’s non-aligned movement, neither to the US interest.

With the political of containment, USA spread the penetration and covert action in many third world countries. The case of Allan Pope, an American Pilot who helps the PERMESTA rebellion and planning to murder Soekarno is the worst (failure) covert action. In the other case, the invitation of Gilchrist document indicates that something doesn’t work done in the elite Army officers.[14]

IN THE EARLY PERIOD of New Order, Soeharto disband BPI and create the new intelligence institution clear from communist influences named KIN (Komando Intelijen Negara— State Intelligence Command) headed by Maj. Gen. Sudirgo (former head of provost military-police intelligence). On May, 22 1967 KIN changed named into BAKIN (Badan Koordinator Intelijen Negara—State Intelligence Coordinating Body). But, Soeharto feel that Sudirgo quietly is Soekarno sympathizer. It is not good. So Soeharto fired Sudirgo and replace him with Lt. Gen. Sutopo Juwono. The reorganization and depolitization of the Armed Force and Intelligence Services is important to erect the New Order and to get out the political opponent of Soeharto.

Following this reorganization and depolitization, Soeharto entered the 1970s as the undisputed military and political leader. But it was precisely at this time as well that two of his lieutenants, Major General Ali Murtopo and General Soemitro entered the stage as competing powers. Ali Murtopo from Soeharto‘s own Diponegoro division in Central Java, was a long time subordinate who for many years had served as trusted intelligence officer. He occupied no significant military position after Soeharto took over the army, but was always on call as a political operator and adviser, together with other member of small group confidantes known as Aspri (Asisten Pribadi—Personal Assistant). In the early of 1970s there is a small reorganized BAKIN office with the adding of Deputy III and the office of Opsus.

Murtopo also headed a litle unit and elite operation called Opsus (Operasi Khusus—Special Operation). As non conventional and core-specialist unit, Opsus had a wider authority and irregular task to screening and doing covert operation including infiltration and propaganda to the alleged hardliners movement to maintain the status quo of Soeharto’s administration. As deputy of BAKIN and Aspri, Murtopo had direct line to Soeharto and doesn’t have obligation to give report BAKIN Chief or even to the Commander of Armed Force. In some case it placed Sutopo Juwono as BAKIN Chief doesn’t have authority more than Murtopo did. Slowly and certainly, Sutopo Juwono just a shadow under Murtopo influences. But in different situation, it makes a friction with the Deputy of Armed Force Commander, General Sumitro.

Soemitro, an East Javanese from the Brawijaya military division based in Surabaya, was the Deputy Armed Force (Wapangab) and Commander (Panglima) of the martial law-like Command for Restoration and Security (Kopkamtip) in the early seventies. The conflict between Sumitro and Ali Murtopo was a clash between two strong personalities in their competition to be closer to the center of power, Soeharto. Their competition ended in a huge riot that engulfed Jakarta during the visit of Prime Minister Kakuei Tanaka in mid January 1974. This tragedy known as Peristiwa Malari. A little more than a month after the riot, on March 6, Sumitro asked Soeharto to relieve him from his position as Deputy Armed Forces Commander. On March 15, Soeharto approved the resignation, which ended Soemitro’s military career. The office of Aspri was abolished on the same day that Soemitro was dismissed as Pangkopkamtib. Unlike Soemitro, Murtopo continued to serve Soeharto, although his importance slowly diminished.

After dispensing with Soemitro and Ali Murtopo, in the mid-seventies Soeharto restored his full control of ABRI. Officers occupying important positions in the military were officers whose loyalty was trusted by Soeharto. He appoint two officers where very closed from long time, this was General L.B. Murdani and General Yoga Sugama. Soeharto recalled Yoga Sugama from Ambassador Post in Yugoslavia to become the Head of BAKIN. In Before the replacement of BPI into KIN, in the Army training center have institution named PSiAD (Pusat Psikologi Angkatan Darat—Centre of Army Psychology) owning by MBAD (Markas Besar Angkatan Darat—Army Headquarters) to balancing the BPI under Soebandrio as military intelligence.

Pararel with the screening of BPI from communist element, The Department of Defense and Security (Dephankam) build Pusintelstrat (Pusat Intelijen Strategis—Centre of Strategic Intelligence) with staff from former PSiAD training centre. Pusintelstrat headed by Chief G-I Hankam Brig. Gen. L.B. Moerdani. These positions keep by Moerdani until he became Commander in Chief (Pangab). In this era, the military intelligence have operational intelligence body named Satgas Intelijen Kopkamtib—Kopkamtib Intelligence task. In the 1980s, Pusintelstrat and Satgas Intel Kopkamtib mergered into BAIS (Badan Intelijen Strategis ABRI—Armed Forces Strategic Intelligence Agency)

In the era of Sutopo Juwono, BAKIN has Deputy II under Colonel Nicklany Soedardjo, the Military Police officer (POM) graduate from Fort Gordon, USA. In the early 1965s, Nicklany build POM intelligence unit, there is Detasemen Pelaksana Intelijen (Den Pintel) POM [Detachment of Intelligence Task]. Officially, Den Pintel POM changed into Satuan Khusus Intelijen (Satsus Intel—Intelligence Special Unit), and then in early 1976s become Satuan Pelaksana BAKIN (Satlak—BAKIN Task Force). In 1980s, Satlak BAKIN changed named into Unit Pelaksana (UP) 01. UP-01 often called Unit Pengintai 01 (Surveillance Unit of 01). This is known because the embryo of UP-01, Satsus Intel, is a leading counterintelligence unit. In the peak of Cold War, Satsus Intel is a distinguish intelligence body that have a counterpart with the world-class intelligence services like CIA (USA), MI-6 (British) and many more. The counterpart including intelligence gathering about Soviet spies and frequently the foreign partner of Satsus Intel give the facility such as bug-telephone and other reconnaissance equipment.

In the era of Yoga Sugama, he had important role to develop BAKIN into leading counterintelligence unit with extensive cooperation, although in the grass-root his roled often friction with Moerdani that became his deputy in BAKIN. The reason is Moerdani as BAIS Chief,priorities the BAIS as task force of every information that he got. The BAIS always leading task of the every information’s that come from BAKIN. In the name of Kopkamtip (which were Moerdani also the Commander) Kopkamtib personnel (with core BAIS) step ahead than BAKIN because as combat intelligence they trained well and had a better experience than BAKIN intelligence agent. This competition resulted the frustated Yoga in the era of 1980s asked Soeharto to relieve him from his position as BAKIN Chief. Soeaharto accept the resignation and Moerdani as single powerful commander rise to the peak after no competitor in the field of secret agency.

Intelligence as Instrument of Fear

The fear created by intelligence apparatus is a dominance realm in the political life in Indonesia. Not only to the political realm, but also in the social life, or even in the private area. This is a consequence of the massive-power-accumulation in the security sector to keep the status quo. Intelligence services provide a political estimate by analyzes the socio-political situation and political development. The agency disseminated their field agent to the society and collect information as much as possible. The real duty, for the Services, not only for the neither field agent nor analyst, is to craft the information and produce the “foreknowledge” intelligence product which useful for the User.

The President as Chief-of-States, in some position represent of the end user. In this position, the making of information is to develop and supported the end user to use the information as instrument of the decision-making process. But, Indonesia’s Intelligence Services in the Soeharto era is a body without lawful legitimating. This condition maybe as impact during the formative era when the duty to defense the country are in the strained situation. The Author noted that in the first formative era, when Soeharto is a Commander of extra judicial martiall-law Kopkamtib and the chief of KIN. After he consolidated his power, he put the trusty’s person in the inner circle of his power to the strategic position. Both in State Intelligence and in the Kopkamtib.

The authority of both extra judicial institutions is wider to the regions. With the build of Laksusda (Pelaksana Khusus daerah—Regions Special Task) or Litsus (Lembaga Penelitian Khusus—Special Research Institute) to screening and monitoring the ex communist sympathizer’s and political opponent, both from the Left or Right wing. This function and scope are supported by ad hoc institution like Kasospolda (Kepala Sosial Politik Daerah—Chief of Region Sosial Politics) to keep the status quo and security stability with the concept of teritorrial command by off-shore the military district or regions police into the level of village (Babinsa).

To maintain the vote-gathering, after fusion many party into only two gray party and one Golkar (like a group-work of anti communist base) the apparatus of intelligence services off-shored function by State Intelligence, Kopkamtib and others Ad Hoc institution monitoring the political participation and general election. The trial of election also held in the government office and Golkar must be win. If there is a critical voice questioning the single voters, the Services (with military and police personnel) uses the violence apparatus to dismiss the critical element that potential became future threat of the Soeharto’s New Order. [15]

More than an ordinary apparatus, when General L.B. Moerdani became Pangkopkamtib, according various source, he believed build a Killer Squad named Petrus (Penembak Misterius—Mysterious Shotter) to reduce the criminality and to make a terror for the regime opponent so the security able to control. The Petrus until now still mysterious and can not bring along the court. Besides that, the intelligence personnel also infiltrated into mass organization, religious organization, until youth and education institution.[16]

As we see in the earlier part above, Soeharto rise in the peak because as a master spy, he uses the intelligence instrument to raise the Presidential chair. He also utilizes intelligence as instrument of fear to keep the New Order status quo. Ironically, his decline in the earlier is a late anticipation of the situation analysis, because he fired his best intelligence officer in the 1989s. L.B. Moerdani, a loyalist that known of “Soeharto’s golden son” fired because he questioning the sentry duty of the Soeharto’s children business family. More than that, Soeharto feel acute phobia, learning in the early of 1966s he replaces Soekarno as President of Indonesia because he consolidate his intelligence personnel’s. Soeharto was afraid Moerdani doing same action to Him.

This is very ironic because Moerdani is a true loyalist. Post Moerdani put in the box (which previously after had position in the Armed Force Commander and Minister of Defense) he put just president adviser a position like Nasution in the 1964 era. Tour of duty, to secure the President position from the rising stars that potentially threat the Presidential Chair. With the lack of democratic framework of the scope and function the intelligence services, and with the successor system not free and fair, many of the observer in thus era believe the cyclical historic of end Soeharto as same with the end of Soekarno, where the lack of solid civilian middle class, the military will enter the stage of central power. And Soeharto quietly became afraid with his junior Mordant.

Post Moerdani put in the Box, BAIS that supported Kopkamtib transferred into narrow institution and changed name become BIA (Badan Intelijen ABRI —ABRI’s Intelligence Agency) as a movement known “de-Moerdani-sasi” to dismiss the Moerdani influences in the Armed Forces and military intelligence. Besides that, Laksus replaced with narrow Bakorstanas as a response of the civil protest and indication of democratization wave impact in Indonesian life. This small reorganized intelligence services still had a problem, because the democratic framework is not a basic foundation and the function just calculate the effectiveness of the section. In spite of that, the lack of coordinator between state intelligence, strategic intelligence, until the judicial and crime intelligence like court and police intelligence agency still difficult to solve. The Soeharto’s intelligence service with the various and dynamic role has colored the journey of security sector in the Indonesia. The sector that in the future must put under civilian supremacy, and serve the country. Not serve the regime. []

OKTA UNDANG-SUHARA, Currently Student on the Political Theory at the Department of International Relations, UPN “Veteran” Yogyakarta.

Many scholars argued, that corruption is a result from the weak states and the failures of bureaucratic institution. The solutions, they argue, is strengthen the instrument of law and proceeding the supremacy of law to fixed the institution. In this paper, I oppose most of this scholar, and I believe that corruption is better analyzed with economic approach.

Nowadays Indonesia’s faced a crucial problem about the abuse of law and the institution failures by the corruption. According from various report (like International Transparency and Global Corruption Barometer), Indonesia now take the high(est) ranks in corruption. The Police and Judiciary are positioned in the number one and two of the most corrupt institution. The cases of office of the counsel for the prosecution, general attorney are the worst cases which the office needs fundamental and comprehensive reform. How did the JAMPIDSUS (Young General Attorney of Special Crime Act) allege in the BLBI scandal? And now (end of June 2008, still process) the JAMINTEL (Young General Attorney of Intelligence) also involved in the conspiracy of thus cases? Unbelievable.

Is Corruption are moral problem?

Why Indonesia doesn’t break out from corruption? Is corruption are moral problem? Is corruption rooted from the indigenous tradition and social habit from the peoples of Indonesia hundred years ago? In this paper, the Author would argue that besides the classical approach (about sociology of corruption or something like that) and the problem of law enforcement, the corruption is clearer if we see with the instrument of economy. In this Paper, I oppose the classical approach (law-instrument) that dominates the corruptions eradication campaign.

Maybe, there are two way for combating corruption. First, is Law Enforcement. But I will explain why this method (systemic approach) needed an expensive cost and long time to make sure that the instruments of law (including the institution reform) installed in the new system. Officers in the some of public office doing corruption. Because State issued so many permit regulation that should divided in the many division. For example, to the business permit in Indonesia, you may need three (3) month and pass approximately twenty (20) table officers in thus office. It shown how the regulation created by-state is inefficient and waste time so much.

In these cases we also questioned: “Why the officers doing corruption? Is the salary are insufficient? Or the rule of engagement is not so rigid, so they able receive an illegal income from the task that should they do?” These questions prove that raised salary for the state-officers or changes the rules is not important and meaningless exactly.If we stressed the law enforcement like use the external supervisors, or build a new super-body institution like KPK (commission for eradicating corruption) we need more budged and “fresh money” to fulfill the new institution or replace some law/ local ordinance, it means the government must turn back to the starting point when the law legislated by the parliament. In the end of this method, (or the systemic fashion like this) it is need a long time and much cost. It is not good for the efficiency and effectively of the state institution (and for the APBN margin too). So the simply conclusion for the method like this: costly.

The origin corruption based on human “state of nature”: benefit or disbenefit

We enter the Seccond instrument, economic approach. Why peoples doing corruption? Because corruption is benefit. It is funny and strange if someone corrupted but he doesn’t earn the benefit from the activity that he did. So it’s about the mechanism of economic. There is a demand and supply problem, or advantage or disadvantage from the corruption activity. Rationally, in the system like Indonesia, where the regulation is so bureaucratic and rigid, the matrix of public choice regard the corruption is an instrument for the shortcut to the efficiency and effectively (especially) for the most businessmen. It is not fault, for instance, by the private sector (i.e. businessman) if they grafted officers in the tax office. They just follow the market mechanism (where the international factor about efficiency and effectiveness are the main capital to wining the global competition). They need stability and conducive situation to guarantee their business activity.

So, there is an incentive why people corrupted. In this way, corruption is a variable of the public choice that people free to choose. In the extremes view, corruption is a “public good” that supply by the system like Indonesia to cut the cost of transaction. It is like effective shortcut, that it’s depending you.

For example, if you want a passport you need 5 hours in immigration office with the cost only 50.000 IDR. But if you doest much time (because this evening you must fly soon and make a million dollars business deal in New York) you should pay 500.000 IDR and your passport finish in the 10 minutes. You may pay more (500.000) but you get the future benefit that replaces your present financial loss. This is about the principle of “opportunity cost”. We can’t choose everything that we want. But we always chose the best option for the maximum benefit.

The others example is Court. If you suddenly broke the traffic light, the policeman will stop you. In the police-shelter, you must make a decision: follow the session in the court (that at least you must waiting for two weeks later) or pay the police so you can go from horrible place like police-shelter as soon as possible? Most of riders answer the second option. It is shown why the corruption is so benefit because there is an opportunity cost besides the corruption. Graft is advantages because the actors involved in previous example (the police and rider) need a benefit. The police need extra-income, and the riders need extra-time. No body loss.

So the core problem is about incentive and disincentive. Why people corrupted? Because there is some incentive backgrounder their activity to gain the benefit. If the passport finished in 10 minutes only 50.000 IDR, or there is no session in the court if you broke the traffic light, there is no corruption. If there is no incentive that officers/ apparatus systemic to earn illegal income as their extra benefit, (that means this public facility are disincentive to the situation to support for illegal activity to get extra money) structural and cultural corruption are stopped. As simply as that.

In this case, the Author believes about market mechanism as rooted in the (basic) logic of economy. Human being thousand years ago growth as homo economicus. The market mechanism that rooted in the demand-supply principle as the basic logic that always on the human instinct. Francis Fukuyama called status naturalis (state of nature) that struggle for recognition. The passion that need to fulfill.

In the last of my argument, the Author noted, that the program of eradicating corruption must based in the economic realm and some of economic instrument like opportunity cost, public choice is important to fulfill the gap that law instrument fault to fill. The programs of eradicating corruption must root in the incentive: “why thus programs could give a much benefit for the officers that operationally?”. If there are no incentive from selling regulation (because now no need to pay for the permit cost, or absolutely FREE), the officers naturally stopped corrupt.

And last but not least, the market mechanism must be a parameter in the state management. The failed states root in the mismanagement by statesman to balancing between public choice and market trend. Why the private sector step ahead from the government because the instinct of private is “efficiency and effectively”. This is the true facility, from the private sector for the wider public will, across the globe. The customer is a King isn’t? []

OKTA UNDANG-SUHARA, Student on International Political Economy

Who Killed Benazir Bhutto?

By: OKTA UNDANG-SUHARA*

On December 27 2007, in Rawalpindi City of Pakistan, The former Prime Minister of Pakistan and chairperson of the Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP), Benazir Bhutto was assassinated. She just after addressing a public meeting in the garrison city of Rawalpindi on the campaign rally before the general election. This attack not only injured the people surrounding Bhutto (at least killed 30 supporters of PPP) but also attack the future of democracy in Pakistan.

According to reports from various media sources, the attack was carried out in two phases. The assassin first shot her point blank in the neck and chest area as she got into her vehicle to leave the rally, and subsequently he detonated the bomb tied to his body. So, from this event we can assume that the blast is to blur the situation and make the condition getting worse into chaos.

Some analyst and expert from various think-tank analyze that Al Qaeda and its allies are take responsibility with this lethal attack. The reason is, one; although Benazir Bhutto is an exile leader of Pakistani opposition, she oppose the Islamic extremism and militancy in Pakistan and supporters of the Musharraf policy against terrorism in the massacre of Masjid Lal (Red Mosque) where Musharaf use the military option to solve the extremism around Pakistan (with the military operation code named “operation silence” to against Lal Masjid activist).[1]

In the aftermath of the operation, Al Qaeda number two Ayman Al Zawahiri and another prominent leader Abu- Laith al-Libbi vowed to avenge the deaths of Abdul Rashid Ghazi (The head cleric) and others in the military operation. Subsequently, Benazir Bhutto became the target of local and foreign militants based in the Pakistan-Afghan border region.

Second, the Bhutto’s educational background from West (she took education in Oxford and Harvard, where less religious) with secular legacy from his Father, Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, make She came from the same narrow elite as many of Pakistan’s democratic politicians, an elite whose corruption tainted democracy and paved the way for Musharraf’s takeover. As a first women leader in the Muslim world, the Bhutto’s administration in the past are faced a number of resistance especially from the conservatism and the militant side in the Pakistan. They argued “a country that leads by a woman is unlucky” (which the true, this argument is not come from Quran).

By these analysis from the expert in the top, we can see that the involvement of Al Qaeda (and its allies) or the “presence” of its group in the tragedy in Rawalpindi is by designed and planned-well by number of Al Qaeda leader that took revenge the death of Abdul Rashid Ghazi and to disarray the political realm in Pakistan and failing the general election (where by some groups of Muslim are not Islamic).

Before we pass the next conclusion, better we see who gain the benefit with the death of Benazir Bhutto. Is true that Al Qaeda behind this assassination? Is the motif “just” revenge and to enforce the “Islamic way” against democracy and to eliminate the “Islam’s enemy”? The writer doubted this argument, because this hypothesis is still around in the normative side and yet touches the core problem in the rivalry of Pakistani leader to reach the power in this country.

Who’s the true rival of Benazir? The Musharraf’s administration does. If we used the comparative politics to analyze the tragedy in Rawalpindi, we can see the global pattern (with this analysis) to cutting down the complicated problem in this sub-continent.

First, the fact that Benazir Bhutto’s return after long exiled in foreign country had rising a new hope for the alternative leadership in Pakistan. Despite the notorious corruption of Bhutto’s administration, in many ways she represented the best that Pakistan has to offer. Despite the corruption charge with the past Bhutto’s administration, if we let the military take over the civilian life, there is unproductive and make the future of democracy in Pakistan on peril. Use patronage with the stabilization and security-order (especially claiming to clean the corruption and at least to combating terrorism and insurgency), The Musharraf’s administration is not less an authoritarian regime that difficulties the more democratic and transparency in the realm of Pakistani life’s. So, the prime beneficiary of the assassination of Benazir Bhutto is Pervez Musharraf. Benazir Bhutto is a rival that hard to defeat by Mussharaf in the next general election.

The comeback phenomenon of former Pakistani leader such us Benazir Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif are treating the status quo of Musharraf. The other key opposition leader, Nawaz Sharif —whose government was ousted in the 1999 coup that brought Musharraf to power, quickly announced he was boycotting the parliamentary elections, which are meant to usher Pakistan toward civilian government after years of military dominance. The assassinations also give Nawaz Sharif a momentum to makes this former prime minister become Pakistan’s top opposition figure. Sharif has attempted to appeal to Islamic militants, arguing that Pakistan needs to pare down its cooperation with the United States. Sharif has already capitalized on Bhutto’s death, visiting the hospital where she was declared dead, blasting Musharraf for providing Bhutto with insufficient security, and calling for a reunification of Bhutto’s Pakistan Peoples Party and his own Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz.[2]

In another side, the global trend lead by US, the GWOT (global war against terrorism) is spread across the globe and Pakistan, with the thousand of Madrasah (religious school) is a front line target in the war against terrorism. The fact that this Madrasah is a potential conveyor-belt to the recruiting process and spreading the radicalization and militancy interpretation used by radical movement (that closed to Al Qaeda and its allies) is a determinant key to measure the effectively of GWOT.[3]

Second, if we see the series attack by Al Qaeda, we never see before that assassination by single-shoot to kill a political leader is an Al Qaeda modus operandi. The suicide bombing just after the shooting target, sturdily the assumption that this blast is to blurring the real fact. This suicide bombing, often related with the [religious] militant and fundamentalist movement that used this martyrdom as religious sacrifice and correctly by the religious legitimating.

From this side, thus argument almost convincing, because the political (based on secular or nationalism sentiment) is seldom use the suicide attack. But, if we see, that the first suicide attack in this sub-continent (including India, Kashmir, and Sri Lanka) is doing by LTTE (Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam movement) that came from secular motif that is to separate with Sri Lanka’s government. So we came to the latest question, who killed Benazir Bhutto?

The Presence of Intelligence?

Al Qaeda as a group often charged by some lethal attack to take their responsibility to confess. In this premise, we see that Al Qaeda is an omnipresent and omnipotent, so they can take the attack in every where around the globe.[4] Is true that Al Qaeda is the “super organization”? If we utilize social network analysis (SNA) to cover the area of conflict and investigate how the relation between the government and the radical group that establish before Al Qaeda rise in this region, we can see the connection between the intelligence agencies as a representative the government with the interest of radical aspiration.

The case of Osama bin Laden as a significant figure during the occupation of Soviet Union in Afghanistan as a financing donate to funding some training and arming Arab-Afghan fighter’s is a determinant key to distinctly the role of state-supporters to the wars. If we look previously, in thus decade, the cold war are reach in the culminating point and the US Government have a foreign policy to blockades the communist influence using the political of containment. The implications, the US Government pass trough CIA (US intelligence services) flow the infrastructure (money, arms, and instructor) via third state, there is Pakistan.[5]

Why Pakistan? Because as a land-locked country, the securer gateway to Afghanistan is only Pakistan that in thus time have a good support infrastructure to backed-up the military operation (covert action) like clandestine and intelligence activity. The visas to enter the Pakistan (as a main gate way to Afghanistan) are easy to get and by the support of Zia ul Haq administration (as a president of Pakistan of this era) the Mujahideen (Islamic Warriors) accept an access to enter Afghanistan. The coordination and radicalization going on the Madrasah around Pakistan. Before going to the battle field several Mujahideen from foreign country also use the Madrasah as a transit place that spread surrounding Peshawar territory.

Not only legal access to enter Khyber Pass (a main gateway to Afghanistan) via Peshawar (nearest city, closed to Afghan border) the Mujahideen also accept a training from several agent (that have a good military education) and receive an arms and ammunition from the government. Shortly, the writer note here that in thus time, the Mujahideen financed and armed by the US Government pass trough Pakistani officer with the intelligence agency as an operator in the field.

From this chronicle, we can see how the global pattern in Cold War era, the counter communism trend influences the Pakistan foreign policy. The ISI (Inter-Service Intelligence) -as an operator in the field- played important role to build a close relation with the some Islamic groups that later involve in Afghan War as a Mujahideen. ISI’s first major involvement in Afghanistan came after the Soviet invasion in 1979, when it tandem with the CIA to provide weapons, money, intelligence, and training to the Mujahadeen fighting the Red Army. The intelligence agency planning, directing, and giving some instruction to Mujahideen and also recruiting a new member of Mujahideen (give a transit place) from surroundings Madrasah and Masjid in Pakistan and outside the country (such us India, Yemen, Saudi Arabia, Mindanao-The Philippines, Indonesia etc). This is a sophisticated method uses by US and Pakistan Government. They used Mujahideen as a Muslim Mercenaries to avoid the direct contact (in the context of open-battle of Cold-War era) with the Soviet Union.

Still the Agency recruit and maintenance relations with the radical ones?

This is a main thesis of this paper. The writer note that to explain the involvement of Al Qaeda and its allies, is do not ignore the involve and presence of ISI in the process of radicalization of several Islamic groups linked to Al Qaeda. Because as in the earlier part of this paper, the role of Osama bin Laden (the leader of Al Qaeda) had important linked with this intelligence service.

Pakistan has long used the ISI’s active role in Afghanistan as a means of controlling the Afghan Mujahideen and shaping its own regional foreign policy objectives. The important things to note here, after the defeat of Soviet occupation, the Taliban rise in Afghanistan (and finally replace the Mujahideen government) are part of the ISI involvement. Using resources and contacts left over from the resistance to Soviet occupation (including former Madrasah, a place where the Mujahideen come) and with ISI support and training, the Taliban bribed local tribal warlords and conducted guerilla tactics in their efforts to gain power in Afghanistan. In 1996, after two years of fighting, the ISI-backed Taliban managed to defeat most of the warring factions and gained control of approximately ninety-five percent of the country.[6]

These facts indicate that the ISI still playing important role to the “radical connection” in this sub-continent. Aparna Basu, an Indian analyst use the social network analysis (SNA) to cover the “terrorism map in India” has found interesting genealogies. “Using the centrality and between ness centrality indices we were able to mark out the key players such as the ISI of Pakistan. An important point to note here is that the ISI was correctly identified in spite of the fact that it did not have a large number of links (Basu: 2004).” Its rank in terms of link frequency was 12 (Table 1), well below some of the J&K organizations. The role of ISI in terrorism in India is well known and borne out by conventional analysis (Fig. 1 & 2).[7]

Table: Between ness index for Terrorist organizations[8]

Organization Betweeness

Inter Service Intelligence, Pakistan 12.60

Jamiat-e-Islami 5.25

Taliban 4.34

Sipah-e-Sahaba 4.14

Jaish-e-Mohammad 3.00

J&K Jamiat-e-Islami 2.96

United Liberation Front of Asom 2.69

Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam 2.35

Harkat-ul-Jehad-al-Islami 1.74

Lashkar-e-Tayyiba 1.64

Hizbul Mujahideen 1.35

Hizbullah 1.35

Al Badr 1.09

Students Islamic Movement of India 0.91

Peoples War Group 0.90

Central Military Commission 0.90

Jamiat Ulema-e-Hind 0.83

National Conference 0.76

Al Qaida 0.66

But why ISI may “alleged” on the Benazir Bhutto’s murdered? Beside the SNA Analysis, the writer found interesting links with the chronicle in the past that ISI have an “objective hatred” with Bhutto’s administration. The ISI senior officer it self had a “traumatic senses” with the Bhutto’s administration, where in the past (1988-1990), tried to bring the ISI under control. Bhutto had appointed to look into ISI’s activities concluded that the organization “had the makings of a de facto government.”

She had already taken steps to curb ISI’s role. Tried to bring the ISI under her control by promoting generals loyal to her into Pakistan’s two other intelligence services, the Federal Investigation Agency (FIA), which launched attacks against ISI-backed Islamic extremists, and to the Intelligence Bureau (IB). Unfortunately, this exertion is failed. When she became Prime Minister in the second times (1993 to 1996), Bhutto once again tried to regulate the ISI’s power by transferring its responsibility for clandestine operations inside Afghanistan to the Ministry of the Interior. Sections of the ISI close to then-Pakistani President Farooq Leghari had Bhutto’s surviving brother, Murtaza Bhutto, murdered outside of his house in Karachi in September 1996. The ISI then undertook a propaganda campaign within the Pakistani media blaming Prime Minister Bhutto and her husband for Murtaza’s murder. The cloud of suspicion surrounding Bhutto afforded President Leghari the impetus to dismiss her in November.[9]

From the chronicle in the past, we can say that the ISI is still tied and linked with several radical movement that may alleged involve in the Benazir Bhutto’s assassination. With the combine goals, where the Musharraf’s administration want to keep the Pakistan under status quo. Musharraf sustain Islamic militants to have a mutually beneficial relationship. Musharraf uses them to excuse his dictatorship and to hit them up for donations (from the GWOT trend). He able to “use” the radical group because the intelligence service has long ago infiltrated the group. He also uses them for assassinating political opponents. The military domination also keeps by ISI senior officers, with the fact that ISI military intelligence services always support the military regime and in some case involve to dismiss of civilian government. From this analysis, at least, we ask again: Who killed Benazir Bhutto? []

OKTA UNDANG-SUHARA,Currently student on Political Theory at the Department of International Relations, UPN “VETERAN” Yogyakarta.

The separates between Police and TNI (national armed forces), are raising the new hope to the security sector reform. With the civil status, Polri (Indonesian Police) is now changing to the new paradigm to the civilian framework on the democratic era. The Baintelkam (Badan Intelijen Keamanan Polri; Polri intelligence security agency) faced the challenge to change the mind-set of authority to the social order of society.

As long as Baintelkam include to the intelligence community that have the responsibility to take the civil and local security issue, there is a lot of security approach that must change. On the historical crossroads, Baintelkam have expanded -leaning to the wider issue that in fact is out to the security authority that Baintelkam had to take. For example; the areas of authority of Baintelkam in the New Order era is include the PAKEM (Pengawas aliran kepercayaan masyarakat; society-sect believe-group surveillance), this is mean that the security posture are wider to the main duty of the Baintelkam.

The impact of this authority is able to the wider scope that Baintelkam should do. According to Francis Fukuyama in the State Building: Governance and World Order in the 21^st Century (2004; 17), to match the state building are the main agenda to reform the constitution order. It’s mean we need to rationalize the scope of institutional function with the sufficient capacity. Because of the limit of power, we should limits the scope of the duty-area.

If we used the institutionalization analysis, the framework of Polri area duty is should civilian “security” with the little “s”. The wider area that should acquire about defense (with the big “S”) is the area of TNI and the Department of Defense. Same in the intelligence area, the security domain with little “S” is a duty of Baintelkam, and the big “S” is the authority of BIN (Badan Intelijen Negara; state intelligence services).

The question is how wide the duty and the scope that Baintelkam should do? As a part of the intelligence community and later the KOMINDA (komunitas intelijen daerah; district intelligence community) Baintelkam should back to basic as a crime division investigation to detect and doing intelligence gathering with the other intelligence community such as BIN and the territorial intelligence in KODAM (Komando daerah rayon militer; district branch military intelligence) that including combat intelligence such as BAIS (Badan intelijen TNI strategis; Indonesian armed force strategic intelligence).

This is important to note here, if we watching the rivalry between TNI and Polri, it’s unproductive because in the some case the esprit de corps is more dominant. The inferiority complex are tasted by the Polri as long decade ago, as one pillar of Matra within ABRI, the function and scope of Baintelkam in the some cases are reduced by the intelligence agency of BAIS (as a part of territorial-defense building) or even BIN that have the civil agent. In some case it result Baintelkam reluctant to make an across-sector cooperation with the other intelligence community, because in the past decade ago the combat intelligence had a more authority on the covet action in field.

This is a serious problem that had to solve by Polri and especially Baintelkam as an intelligence agency within intelligence community. The intelligence gathering is crucial factor, in the case of dismantle of Bali Bomb I, the Kapolri (previously era) Da’i Bachtiar are consider as the success of thus operation is a result that information gathering with other intelligence agency.

Fact later, last development in the field, Polri agent (including detachment of 88 counter-terror) are clash with the BIN agent  in dismantle of Dr Azahari network in Batu, Malang. It is unproductive because it is indicated that we may reconstruct again the dividing role and function of every agency on the field.

Policing Community and pro-cop justitia?

In the post cold war era, when the conflict are substitution of war, the nature of battle is changing from the open-clash to the 4-GW (four-generation of war) where the terror as an instrument is part of the war. These conditions need a new paradigm to face. The question later is, how avoid and counter this new variant of 4-GW? (Including counter-terrorism and insurgency as a result of “limited-war” like this). The battle now is not in the front line or open clash anymore but rather an asymmetric war; the urban war, guerrilla warfare and hit-and-run are a favorite models to be a last choice for combatant group.

The terrorist group prefer use this models, because they could maximizing the capacity and avoid the lose-out personnel/ logistic rather than faced the army that have a stronger power in the open battle. From this premise we can analog with the terrorist network that prefer use the clandestine operation to influences and take a supporting-beam the people. The wider community maybe is not a part of terrorist group nor the radical ones. But they able became a potential supporter or –in the limit amount- a potential sympathizers that terrorist group are gain a sympathy and complicate the Authority to enforce the law.

If the terrorist use a “public diplomacy” to influences the people, the police must use the same method to counter this public diplomacy. The command of Kapolri (Skep Kapolri No. Pol: Skep/737/X/2005 about policy and strategy of implementation policing community in the organizing the Polri duty) explicitly, that in the next three years, the police human resources must ready to realize and understand substantially and operationally policing community.

Although the policing community (memolisikan masyarakat) as a conception still impress a discourse that “on the sky”, but the issued of this command explicitly the commitment of Polri to develop a policing community as a strategy on the 4-GW era.

But this condition emerge the new question about the capability of police human resources to handle the concept of policing community. It’s about the acceptable of the people for the Polri as an institution that had authority and model of how the supremacy of the law is a guide-line in the life of people. The latest survey of International Transparency (2007) had ranks the Polri as the most corrupt institution upper another justice institution like judicature and office of the counsel for the prosecution.

As a Joseph s Nye wrote in the Soft Power: the means to success in the world politics (2004; 39), the writer argued that the impress and political image is an important key to “wining the head and heart” of the people. Because, before we talk about concept of policing community, in the Indonesian case we must look at Polantas —traffic policeman, as a determinant factor to measure the degree of acceptable the institution of Polri in the life of people.

Compare the policing community that still a discourse and waiting the real implementation, the religious sentiment as a public diplomacy to gain the wider sympathizer in the people by the terrorist group is leading more than what police does. Now, the question again, if terrorist group move with clandestine operation and use a religious sentiment as a public diplomacy (they very expert to provoke and influences the people) in the open space, who must built and manage the mass to obey the law? The intelligence of Polri should.

With the capacity and the skill of covert operation to disclose the clandestine, the intelligence agent had a capacity more than average of mostly regular policeman. They should include in the community and disseminate the concept of policing community for example the alertness and awareness to the people as an early detection if there is a new comer that suspicious. So in this case, community as an effective alarming to the intelligence instrument by the policing community.

In the last of this paper, the writer noted that in the future, the security sector in Indonesia are impact by the role of police (without minimize the role of armed force) as a front-line guard to safe and guarantee the law and order especially the law enforcement (the fairness of the law) and the general orderliness in this country. Why it could be? Because, different with another Intelligence body, the Polri intelligence agency had an authority of pro-cop justitia. It’s meaning only the police that have a duty and authority (as a constitution noted) to investigate, catch, and arrest a criminal suspect under the law of orderliness or law and order.

Baintelkam as a part of intelligence body among the Polri division and a part of a more wider intelligence community had to responsibility to gain the calm condition of state. Like the motto of Baintelkam; “Indera Waspada, Negara Raharja” (sensory-senses aware, the state are welfare). []

OKTA UNDANG-SUHARA, Currently is student at the Department of International Relations, UPN “Veteran”  Yogyakarta.

On the Islamic community, there are still faced the most crucial problems about acceptance of democracy as a paradigm that more responsible to the human rights enforcement. A particular of some Islamic groups still assumed that democracy is unislamic because this “system” is kufr (unbeliever). This view came from conservative group that still dominated the mainstream of Islamic community.

In my view, it is unproductive. On the condition of post cold-war era, where the great ideologies such as communism and fascism are decline, and the rise of liberal democratic as a champion on the war of ideas, there are no significant (until now) faced the liberal-democratic as a system and governance style, so there are a universal consensus about democracy is a world ethic today, to gain cooperation on the multicultural reality.

Why we still skeptics about democracy?

Despite democracy today rising as a world consensus, there are a critical and skeptics about how democracy works. These view comes from western thinkers and philosophers that debating the root and development on history of idea, where democracy growth from the basis of philosophical idea. Beside the utilitarian and romanticisms philosophers,Winston Churchill, a states man and defender the liberalism it self critic about the less-omnipotent democracy to be a “system embrace-all” problem of the world. He say’s “democracy is a worst system that ever since. The problem is, today, there is no better system except democracy…” So we can conclude, that in the realm of world politics today, we difficult to avoid democracy as a framework to formed a more “fair rule” that guarantee the valued of human rights ethic.

The other resistance comes from a part of Islamic communityit self, that argued how democracy comes from infidel system that may destroy the basic foundation of Islamic principles such us re-questioning the Islamic law (syari’ah) where its principles is a finish-formulated so cannot questioned again. They argued too, if the democracy is a “vox populi, vox dei”, so if the community is evil and infidel, there is a used legitimize God voice to rule the majority evil against the minority pious.

This argument is not come from a solid and coherent theory. If we still talk about democracy as a procedural way, we can trap on the hermeneutic cycle and it just a tautology that never true. We must search from the earlier historical trajectory when the Islamic principles are codified and compare them with the enlightenment tradition where the democracy comes. If we search carefully, we can see the connection about Islam and democracy. We should not use dichotomy worldview so we can able to explain the relation between Islam and democracy is not only compatible, but –on the some limit- Islam support democracy and democratic culture are the main basic principle of Islamic live.

The more important agenda is how to analyze and developed comprehensive study about substance of democracy and compare it with basic Islamic view. Some of the part that cannot match in the “body” level occasionally, can find in the esoteric level.

Acceptance of democracy, a next undelay agenda

Our problems today is a war on ideas, where the GWOT, global war against terrorism, spread across the world and shaping the international order. The bad effect of GWOT campaign and counterterrorism operation is the abuse of human right (the non-derogable rights) that occasionally neglectful by the security apparatus or by the “special operation” usually are intelligence apparatus that “untouchable” with the law. It is a consequence of the security and defense approach to solve the urgent and cannot-wait-to discuss problem like terrorism, because the strategic studies are the mind-set of how counterterrorism operates. But in other sides, perhaps there is an innocence victim as a result of the violence apparatus state sponsored. Its fault maybe comes from careless operation that some over-generalize of some individual or such group on the one line with the terrorist. How to avoid thus abuse of power? With the more democratic regulated of course.

So this is the urgency to implemented democracy as an operational frame-work by rule the mind-set of how security officers work. It is important to pay attention in the RUU Intelijen Negara (rancangan undang-undang Intelijen Negara; law plan of state intelligence). On the several months ago, some group from academic, civil society and human right activist are make application about alternative draft to be compared with the parliament product. The important key to be note here is, the alternative draft is more talk about operational base of how the more democratic mind-set could be a main frame work to the rule technical operational in field.

It is important to noted here that the democratic paradigm is not only a procedural system or just useful for the general election only. From its case we can learn the important of implement more democratic principle to the realm of world politics today. We hoped that this framework (democracy) is not only bylaw but this is able to become a normative ethic but impact on the real life today. []

The Problem of
Defining Terrorism; the lack deep Analysis from the “Expert”

BY: OKTA UNDANG-SUHARA*

For
several times during this month I doing research about some field in the
International-Relation have called the International Security Studies (ISS).
The ISS is a branch of the IR theory that influences from the realist school of
thought. For a review, the mainstream of “big narration” IR theory are divided to
the two great traditions, there is Liberalism (idealism) and Realism. From the
realism, the nature of international relations is anarchy. Its mean like the
Hobbesian describes: the world is poor, nasty, brutal, short, and WAR. The war
man against all (homo homini lopus) are permanent condition. This conclusion is
caused that the arm race and developing national interest to preventing from
the external threat are rational.

For it’s interpretations of the
shaping world order, the realist tradition see that the future war is a threat
that must faced by every nation in the world. So, on the mid 1970, the
think-thank supplement for centre of security studies are founded in many
countries and region. The strategic studies are an institute for developed and
conduct research of ISS. From its institution many scholar from civil
intellectual (that have specialist on security issue) join affair with the
diplomat and military officers. They doing research and developed the new way
to solve the problem of security on the future.

Terrorism and insurgency

 Post
September 11 (the 9/11 tragedy), the world faced a new problem from
non-traditional security issue. The enemy is not from occupation of fascist
state, but the threats are come from the terrorist. This problem on the many scholars
of ISS is still debatable, but actually, post 9/11, there are many terrorism
research institute and counter-terrorism study are founded to prevent from the
future threat. On the one sides, it’s good to develop the foreknowledge to prevent the next threat. I think, the strategic
studies in elsewhere must focusing the concentration of prescription, so it’s
the main function of the institute to calculate and prevent the insurgency that
caused by terrorist attack. The capacity and capability of intelligence for the
collecting information and manage the data result is the vital one so that
foreknowledge about good analysis is could be implemented and can be used for
the decision maker (ex: Government or defense minister). If it works well, the science
is not standing-single on the ivory tower, but the science (especially politics
or security studies) must solve the problem. I think these conditions are hopes
by many people in the countries.

But, I disappointed, that some
of the report from the some of scholar that called “expert” or “specialist” on
terrorism is still have biased and prejudice. On the one example, the defining
“Jihads” now shift from the “Muslim-fighter” to the “terrorist”. I think, it’s
too myopic. From its conclusion, we can say that the origins of terror are evolutes
on the concept of jihad. So the genealogies of its violence are correct. This
interpretation caused that Islam is the religion of violence because one part
of this pillar are supported violence.

The pejorative can cause the
fundamental problem. That I guest the Analysis from expert like them is lack to
see the constellation of the problem about political motives and religious
symbol. Anything else happened on the world I think can not escape from such legitimate.
Mohammed Arkoun said: “religious concept, Islamic concept is noting; the true
is POLITICAL concept”. So everything on the world must be seeing with the
framework of political-economy perspectives. The lenses of IPE (International
Political Economy) can connect: “how get what? And how much?”, but if we use
security perspectives the first must we do is: “what is the threat? From where?
And which spectrum sides?” so the mainstream threat are priority to banned.

Like or dislike; now we have a
problem how to secure our home from insurgency caused by the terrorist attack
(?). On my opinion, we must see this problem carefully. On the one case, a
Singaporean based strategic studies (ICPVTR; International Centre for Political
Violence and Terrorism Research) now listing and watching thousand webs in the e-world
that potential gave support or make propaganda on jihad. This list, if isn’t good
manage; can caused the blame the innocence’s. Jihads are the “hard power” of
the Muslim community legacy from the classical. By its heritage, this community
still struggle and adapting the changing world. The word of Jihad is from Ja-ha-Da; that’s mean “truly to
exertion” so by a good Muslim, jihad is regulated and influences many aspect
not only on the bloody-battle, but the genuine one’s is to work and to life on
the world.

Over generalize to the moderate Muslim
can effort a bad effect. The concept of jihad is still influence on the realm
of Muslim community as long as “ Al-Amr
ma’ruf Nayhi-munkar” (upright the Good and prevent the bad/ crime) is still
and always on the memory of Islamic society.

The problem of Radical Islam and its relation with Political Islam

From its
line we can see how the polarization shifted, from the secular-crime insurgency
to the religious-fundamentalist threat. The terrorism can not separate from its
root and development. If we use the security-perspectives to analyze the
genesis of terror, firstly that must we do is to find the origin of violence
from the structure of violence.

How Islam can be radicalized? I
think if we use the caused approach
than result approach, we can see that
the medieval mind-set is still shaping the realm of how Muslim and non-Muslim
relations today. It’s like the hereditary revenge from the crusade on the
medieval. The problem, both from some Muslim and the non-Muslim community, the
past are present and it is hard to avoid conflict that causes by the different
perception about co-existence. We still keep suspicious on our mind and from
its condition, distrustful can result the clash between its community. So the
main problem is about trust and paradigm how we see the world today?
Domination? Occupation? Or co-existence? It’s important to see the variable of
violence from the lowest level, there is from the cultural perspectives and
socio- historically context.

The over-generalize used by some
observer or analyst to see Islam (political Islam) as a main threat are the
core problem that must faced. The threat-perception is too myopic because the
final conclusion is all the parts of Islamic (political Islam movement) are
dangerous and need to be watched. I think it’s a seriously problem because this
condition is not a new interpretation post 9/11 but it came from medieval
perception. The question is, are they still relevant on the global situation
like now where the multilateralism and cooperation during nation-state are
rapid?

The War is a potential threat on
past, present, and future. Leon Trotsky said; “You may be not interested on
war, but war is interest in you”. But the problem is, if we use the wrong
analysis to see the next threat, it can make a bad effect because we lack of
the main problem and failed to anticipate the true problem about terror and
insurgency. []

*) Mr. OKTA UNDANG-SUHARA Currently is student On Political
Theory at the Department of IR, School of International Studies, UPN “Veteran”
Yogyakarta. He still does research about Philosophy of Liberalism. During his
research he has interest about strategic-studies and counter-terrorism studies.

Francis Fukuyama, Me and the
project of Political Theory

By: OKTA
UNDANG-SUHARA

Working
on the political philosophy is very tired! When my friends are passing the
final examination, I still doing of some project to translate the classical
inscription –the legacy of medieval philosophers thinker- to be a “raw” data on
my thesis. Well, I think, when I choose this challenge, my “intellectual ego”
is dominated of my reason so that I don’t think any longer to accept this
project.

Wrote about critic theory one the some cases; could make
us develop our wide-range-knowledge to see the global aspect. But on the same
times, the energy needed to finish the work is (must) to do more besides than another
various topic on the branch of Political Sciences such as comparative politics
system (including general election and democratization studies), local
government and social change, and at last but not least political-sociology
(including theory of integration and nation studies).

My supervisor maybe look not is patient anymore. Because
next semester they will on leave from this department –Jurusan HI UPN; my
beloved department- first, Mr. Nicolaus Loy will take a PH.D on Political
Economy in

Germany

and the
second, Mr. Aryanta will take the Security Studies in

England

. And
me? Still became “illegal Kantian” on this city. How poor me.

Why I choose this subject?! Huh! I think complaint is not useful
now. I just have one choice: do it NOW! Well, yesterday Anang “Junior” My Roommate in El Hambra University
give a nice Photoshop editing for me, especially to remembering the deadline
limit: DO THE FINAL PAPER NOW OR DIE. It’s scary huh?! Well, I don’t think so…

On this article I want explore the summary of my thesis on
the End of History. If you won’t read I do not blamed you. I write these
articles for “canalization of my stress- catharsis” so, if no-one read this
article; I do nothing to lose. Well, let’s get it on….

Mr. Francis Fukuyama, especially for the student of
International-Relation’s had a special place. He wrote “The End of History and
The Last man” (publish 1992); a phenomenal and most controversial book at this
age.

May be, his master pieces only could compared with Samuel P. Huntington
that in the same decades wrote “The Clash of Civilization and The Remaking of
the World Order” (publish 1996). Both of thus political scientists are the
leading distinguished thinkers. Not only on the normative legitimacy on the
strong tradition of theorizing, but also, their project are the same shaping
the new world order.

There are many aspect influenced by the work of

Fukuyama

and

Huntington

,
especially on the foreign policy of

America

to the third-world country.
Some observer said, both of them are intelligence-officer-analyst which has had
duty to setting the academic opinion about the future of political order.

THE GREAT INTERESTING AND FASCINATING if you ever read
thus Book is fell the experienced dramatic meaning “lost in History and reach
the top of civilization”.

Fukuyama

is not only a visionary on political science, but also he is a strategic
thinker. The latest book of

Fukuyama

’s on 2006
titled “

America

at The Crossroads: Democracy, Power, and The Neoconservative Legacy”.

This book
also controversial because he criticize the failed of Bush administration on
Iraq case, the disable of democratization project around the middle-east, and
thread of the NeoCon tradition, especially to the Jewish-intellectual group
that Fukuyama said “they have a bloody-hand”.

***

On the End of History, [My thesis is titled: “Development
of History on the Idea of Francis Fukuyama, a Political-Philosophy Analysis”], I
try to proofed that

Fukuyama

is combined the two great tradition; there is Kantian and Hegelian. The both are
great Philosophers on the enlightenment tradition. But the most fundamental
problem is: if Immanuel Kant is a pioneer of freedom, civil society and
republican tradition; how it can be legitimate the Hegel perspective on the
state exceptionalism, where the GWF Hegel is a Pioneer of power, legitimacy,
and strong-state tradition? Are this basic of philosophy are coherent and comes
from valid concept and precept? So there is my duty; find the basic philosophy
of Francis Fukuyama thesis on The End of History. The second is, find the
empirical basic of political-economy (to know how is the rise of capitalism
make a single-coherent world and influences the single of mass-consumption in
developing countries).

If I look to the past where I start this project from the
beginning, I waste one year (during July 2006 until August 2007) just for
search and read many journal and magazine from the foreign publication that
contain “Fukuyama” or “End History”. At least I collect e-book with various articles
on the “Kantian Constructivism on Moral Theory”. I do not know, after I
finished this thesis, are my knowledge on the political philosophy could be useful?
Well, man proposes God disposes….

Now, my progress research arrives on the core argument of
this project. Natural law, the contractarian tradition, and the utilitarian are
“terminology” that caused my head dizzy. I am not kidding, at last day’s ago; I
feel insomnia and my body getting worse. My health is drop and I must take a
bed rest at home for a moment. How poor me. But I do not give up! Until I know
what is “the motor of History” that lead the global changing on the dramatic
phase. I think it’s my culmination point, that my expertises on this field are
tested. I must stake all of my knowledge on the political-economy and the
political-philosophy to answer that challenge. I hope, I can finish this work
on time and I not waste time anymore. Hopes……….[]

NB: I swear, if I finish this project, I will spend times
with read some “light-reading” like Novels or newspaper he..he… but I serious!
I think I must enjoyable the life with doing sport like bicycled around the
city with my colleague on NBC –Nurrut Taqwa Backpacker and Culinary Community-
or doing traveling on East Java; tracking Semeru Mount and make a devotional
visit to memoir Soe Hok Gie on this Mount (Mahameru, the highest mount on Java
Island). Who joint us?

*) Mr. OKTA UNDANG-SUHARA, is currently student on Political
Theory at The Department of International-Relation’s, UPN “Veteran”

Yogyakarta

. Becomes Kantian and Hegelian, he fell “stress”
until now.

Ke-BENAR-an

”……………..keBENARan seringkali terkubur dalam level-level struktur
dan wacananya,  atau oleh pemBACAan dalam
keterDIAMan pemBICARAan…….”

Dari sanalah, sebabnya;
Kebenaran di muka bumi (sifat ke-duniawian) tidaklah berdiri tunggal (kebenaran yang tunggal hanyalah yang ada di
Lauh Mahfudz). Oleh karena itu ada Ragam wajah kebenaran yang multi-tafsir
dan amat kondisional serta berlakunya secara temporer. Karena sifatnya yang
berupa laten dan menaungi, kebenaran tidaklah dapat kita lihat secara garis
kaku: Hitam dan Putih. Akan tetapi, Kebenaran tersebut merupakan Wilayah
Abu-abu, yang mana tiap Individu berhak untuk mendapatkan sifat dan nisbat dari
Klaim Kebenaran tersebut. Makanya, tidaklah mengherankan,dalam 17 Raka’at
minimal dalam sehari-semalam kita
membaca Redaksi ayat; ”Ihdinas-Shirath
Al-Mustaqim”; ya Tuhan kami, tunjukilah kami Jalan yang Lurus. Sungguh
inilah pengharapan seorang Hamba kepada Rabb-nya untuk senatiasa di beri
petunjuk.

Karena Kebenaran
tersebut berlakunya Relatif, Maka saya menyebutnya dalam kajian kali ini;
”Teori Kebenaran Relatif”. Atau ”Wilayah Abu-abu dalam Garis lurus-tegas
Hitam-Putih Kebenaran”.

Oleh karena itu tugas kita sekarang selaku salik dalam mencari kebenaran
ialah membongkar selubung-selubung permainan kebenaran yang di mainkan oleh
wacana Kebenaran didalam teks (atau dalam ujaran seseorang). Didalam hal ini,
ada strategi tiga dimensi yang dapat dipergunakan; menafsirkan (interpretasi),
mentakwilkan (hermeneutik), serta membongkar secara dekonstruktik yang
dilakukan secara bersama-sama sekaligus. Diharapkan Wilayah abu-abu akan
tersingkap, dan hitam-putih kebenaran akan terkuak.

Atau cara praktisnya:
Memperlebar Ruang dialog, Memperbayak jam membaca, serta memperluas cara
pandang kita. Menempatkan sesuatu pada posisinya: itulah Islam. 

19/05/’05

2:00

Menanti fajar