|
|
Suharto
|
The
death of Suharto: Epitaph on a crook and a tyrant
The
Economist
02 Feb
08
http://www.economist.com/opinion/displaystory.cfm?story_id=10608377
Free
to mourn or cheer, Indonesians have moved on since Suharto
stepped down in 1998
He was a despot, a cold-war
monster cosseted by the West because his most plausible opponents
were communists. Behind his pudgily smooth, benign-looking face
lay ruthless cruelty. The slaughter as he consolidated his power
in the mid-1960s cost hundreds of thousands of lives. Tens of
thousands were locked up for years without charge. After the
invasion of East Timor in 1975, the Indonesian occupation led to
the deaths of perhaps one-third of its people. Meanwhile, he was
robbing his own country blind. Perhaps no leader's family
anywhere has ever amassed so much ill-gotten loot. When he was
forced to quit at last, the economy was in a tailspin and the
stability he had boasted of creating proved an illusion.
So
it seems all wrong that after Suharto's death this week,
Indonesia declared seven days of national mourning. Television
stations (some controlled by his kin) showed laudatory
documentaries. The streets were lined with crowds for miles on
the way to the hillside family mausoleum he had built, in
emulation of the Javanese kings whose successor he seemed to
think himself. Other statesmen from the region trooped to his
funeral to pay their respects: Singapore's Lee Kuan Yew,
Malaysia's Mahathir Mohamad and even Timor-Leste's prime
minister, Xanana Gusmão.
In Mr Gusmão, from
a tiny young nation needing good relations with its neighbour and
former coloniser, such magnanimity might be wise. Mr Lee and Dr
Mahathir also had reason to honour Mr Suharto, who ended his
predecessor's "confrontation" with Malaysia, nurtured
regional unity and, like them, shrugged at the West's preaching
about human rights. Yet for Indonesians themselves to push the
boat out so far for the old kleptocrat suggests a failure to come
to terms with the scale of his crimes. Yes, their country made
huge economic strides under his 32-year rule, thanks to his
delegation of much policymaking to competent technocrats, and
superficial political calm prevailed. But at a very high
cost.
The government of President Susilo Bambang
Yudhoyono—himself a Suharto-era former general—has
been a success in many ways. But it has not fostered a culture of
accountability. In 2006, when Mr Suharto seemed to be on his
deathbed, it dropped criminal proceedings against him. It then
instigated a civil prosecution. But neither Mr Suharto nor any of
his family has faced trial for corruption (though his son, Tommy,
was jailed on a murder charge). Nor has there been a determined
attempt to bring to justice those army officers who oversaw
atrocities in East Timor and Irian Jaya (now known as Papua)
after Mr Suharto fell, let alone those who committed them while
he was still in power.
A different country
Yet,
if the bad that Suharto did seems to have been buried with him,
this week has also shown how far Indonesia has moved on. It is
not in thrall to the former dictator's memory. A dozen years ago
the death of his greedy wife, Tien (known, inevitably as "Madame
Tien per cent"), provoked an outpouring of real or synthetic
national grief. This week even Suharto-family television channels
were soon back to normal programming. Newspapers vigorously
debated his legacy.
Some may hanker for the old
certainties of his rule, but not at the expense of their new
freedoms. To make sure those freedoms endure, Indonesia needs to
face up to the past, and to make a proper accounting for the
murky atrocities and untold thievery of Mr Suharto's reign. The
rosy nostalgic glow bathing his obsequies is no substitute for
true reconciliation. As elsewhere, that needs to be built on
historical truth, in which no one in power seemed much interested
this week.
Forgiving
Suharto?
Joanne Tomkinson
The Christian Science
Monitor
02 Feb
08
http://www.alertnet.org/db/an_art/47985/2008/00/31-111340-1.htm
The
death of former Indonesian president Suharto has ignited a
vigorous debate about the legacy of his period of bloody rule.
Over half a million people are thought to have died while
Suharto was in power, yet many commentators still talk of the
positives aspects of this period. A.M. Hendropriyono a
commentator for The Jakarta Post sees Suharto's "flaws"
as inevitable given the difficulties associated with running a
country as diverse and sprawling as Indonesia.
"After
all, if you strip away the corruption, nepotism, and human rights
issues from Soeharto's reign, what do you have? The thankless
task of running an often dysfunctional archipelago that revels -
and is mired - in diversity," the commentator says.
"The
United States of America, after all, faced serious hurdles during
its first decades, though it was able to resolve these without
its leaders being scrutinized on CNN and You Tube." The
paper also says that many regional leaders such as Singaporean
Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew and Malaysian leader Mahathir
Mohamad have praised Suharto's achievements.
Suharto
governed Indonesia from 1966 to 1998. He is accused of
corruption, repression and causing between 500,000 and a million
deaths. Hundreds of thousands of suspected communists were killed
as Suharto rose to power in the 1960s. A further 200,000 people
are thought to have died during Indonesia's occupation of East
Timor.
Though Britain's Economist magazine notes his
"exceptional brutality", it is still keen to point out
the positive side of Suharto's regime. "Economic growth
accelerated, roads and factories were built, foreign investment
flowed. A hugely disparate archipelago of tens of thousands of
islands, which had seemed at risk of shattering, was united."
The Inter Press Service (IPS), a civil society news agency says
that "The truth is, Suharto still reigns in the heart of
people in the villages, despite the fanfare of democracy brought
by the new governments."
The service quotes Warid, a
farmer from West Java, as saying "To me, Suharto is the
best. When he was in power, fertiliser was abundant and
affordable, irrigation worked well. So farming, which is my
inherited and only skill, was a reliable business for living."
Mohammad Ainun Najib, a popular columnist in Indonesia, explains
this respect in the following way, according to the IPS: "The
incapability of the new government makes the people yearn for the
Suharto era, when prices of basic necessities were affordable,
streets were safe from rallies and anarchism, and jobs were easy
to find."
Economic gains don't make everyone so
forgiving though. "What about the millions of people,
alleged members of the Indonesian Communist Party (PKI), who were
murdered without trial? How about those who were kidnapped and
are still missing? We respect Suharto, definitely. But we also
respect those victims of his oppressive rule. All men are equal
before the law," said Fajrun, an activist in Jakarta,
speaking to the IPS.
This perspective is reinforced by
The East Timor and Indonesia Action Network, a U.S.-based
lobbying organisation for East Timor rights, which says that
Suharto is "one of the worst mass murderers of the 20th
century". The site says that Suharto's allies must be
brought to justice for the shocking deaths and corruption which
took place.
"To overcome Suharto's legacy and to
uphold basic international human rights and legal principles,
those who executed, aided and abetted, and benefited from his
criminal orders must be held accountable."
|
|
