Time for Indonesia To Face PKI Past
Adi Zulkadry and Anwar Congo, two of the subjects featured in Oscar-nominated documentary 'The Act of Killing', being made up for a recreation of one of the 1965 massacres in Medan. (Photo courtesy of Final Cut)
When the documentary film The Act of Killing, which portrays the 1965 massacres of people accused of having ties to communism, was internationally released, it was well received by critics and has gone on to receive a nomination at this year's prestigious Academy Awards.
Despite recognition from the international film industry, however, different reactions also emerged, especially in Indonesia, where several groups have strongly refused or 'denied' that the horrible massacre was a part of Indonesian history.
Last week, a book discussion titled "Tan Malaka, Gerakan Kiri, Dan Revolusi Indonesia, September 1948-Desember 1949" ("Tan Malaka, The Leftist Movement and Indonesian Revolution, Sept. 1948 – Dec. 1949") which was supposed to be delivered by its author, Dutch historian and philosopher Harry A. Poeze, as part of his book tour across Java, was banned by the police.
This followed a number of protests by several hard-line Islamist groups including the Islamic Defenders Front (FPI), pushing to stop the event by claiming it was "spreading a misleading ideology" in Indonesia.
Tan Malaka was a prominent nationalist and a pioneer of the Communist Party of Indonesia (PKI) and a proponent of a syncretism between Islam and communism.
In 1926, Tan was involved in an attempt to overthrow the Dutch colonial government.
However he later strongly refused to join the movement, saying that the local forces in Indonesia, then known as Dutch East-Indies, were not strong enough to fight Dutch colonial rule.
Similarly, Tan opposed the PKI leadership during a coup against President Sukarno in Madiun.
He was executed by the Indonesian military in 1949 but was later named a national hero by Sukarno.
Poeze told the Jakarta Globe that he had no intentions of spreading any sort of ideology through discussions about his book.
"The book we wanted to discuss was my previous book, published in 2007. It talks about the left-wing movement and Tan Malaka in 1948-1949. It also talks about the mystery of Tan's death and his grave."
"My book is all about the history of the Indonesian revolution and has thousands of footnotes. There was no intention of spreading the ideology of Communism whatsoever. It was meant to talk about Tan Malaka, it was purely about history," he emphasized.
Poeze regrets that the Surabaya Police, who were supposed to be protecting and implementing the law, had surrendered to the protesters' demands to call off the book discussion.
Police weren't trying to protect participants of the discussion, who are civilians, he said, emphasizing that from such a point of view, it could be seen as police having sided with protesters.
"If FPI wants to erase the Communist-Socialist issue from history, this can be seen as manipulation of history. Indonesia has to admit that in the past, such a left-wing ideology existed in the country."
"In addition, Tan Malaka was not a culprit at all. He was an Indonesian hero, Sukarno made a hero of him, so I think it's weird such a discussion could be targeted by protesters and the police should side with them," he said.
He explained that it was the duty of historians to write factual stories and uncover truths with a high degree of objectivity.
"We cannot deny that Tan Malaka is a part of Indonesian history. There should be a discussion or a book about him and that's what my books are trying to do," he said.
Political motives
A historian from the Indonesian Institute of Sciences (LIPI), Asvi Warman Adam said that while Communism had an element of support in the country there was little threat from it these days.
"Communism is so yesterday. Even though some countries profess it as their ideology, most of those countries have been implementing a liberal economy," he said, adding that people no longer had a reason to fear Communist views. "There's a newer idea people should be paying attention to — neoliberalism."
"The thing is, our government doesn't completely understand Tan Malaka. He was the one who opposed the idea of a coup in 1926. He wasn't involved in Madiun in 1948. In many respects, he was contrary to the PKI and its ideas," Asvi said.
He said it was not clear why certain groups had opposed the discussion, saying he assumed that such actions were used by some people to portray Communism in a bad light, the same bad light imposed through propaganda by the government of former President Suharto.
Asvi added that the banning of such discussions may indicate that certain parties wanted the truth about Indonesia's past to remain hidden.
"Until recently, discussions about Poeze's books were allowed, but why not now? We should be careful with the people who asked for the discussion to be called off," he said, adding that police shouldn't be banning the discussion but instead prioritize civilians' safety.
Tension between Islamic groups and the Indonesian Military (TNI) on one side and the communists dates way back, to when the war in Madiun resulted in the death of a religious leader and members of the PKI, Asvi said.
The 1955 general election, the country's first, saw the influence of the PKI rise, heightening tension between the party and the Islamic groups and the military.
At that time, the PKI was the fourth-largest party behind the nationalist PNI, Sukarno's vehicle, the modern Islamic party Masyumi and traditionalist Islam's Nahdlatul Ulama.
Using hatred against the PKI, Suharto, then a two-star general and commander of the Army's strategic command (Kostrad), rose to power and subsequently blamed a failed coup and the murder of a number of generals in September, 1965, on the communists.
At least 500,000 people were killed in the aftermath of that incident, allegedly perpetrated by Islamic and nationalist groups with the help of the Army.
During the New Order regime, communist teaching was banned, and being used by the regime as a common enemy to spread its propaganda.
"The root of the troubles was a political matter which was dressed up as a matter of religion," said Asvi.
J.J. Rizal, a historian from the Bambu Community, said that it was necessary for the public to be aware that although the New Order has long passed, political views implanted during the era remain fresh and strong in today's society.
"The main machine has died, but its followers still remain," he said.
Rizal also seconded opinions that see the government and the nation as not having the courage to face its past and admit that Communism was once a part of Indonesia's history.
"As long as certain groups still freely roam, there's no real freedom," he said. "If they can protest against a national hero such as Tan Malaka and the police fail to provide protection for people to discuss him, just revoke his heroic title, it's no use."
Rizal emphasized that with ongoing protests on the freedom of speech, Indonesia is yet to be completely free from the propaganda spread under the New Order regime.
"The government should clarify the truth and should call off the 1966 law which discriminates against Communism, which continues to spark protests against people who wish to discuss the topic," the historian said.
In 1966, the People's Consultative Assembly, then the highest institution in the country, ratified a law prohibiting Communism, allowing the capture and killing of people considered to have ties with Communism, be it men, women or children, civilians or intellectuals.
When Abdurrahman Wahid, better known as Gus Dur, rose to become president in 1999, a year after the fall of Suharto's regime, he tried to revoke the law but the move triggered rejection from various parties, and heralded his fall from power.
Hiding crimes?
Human Rights Watch researcher Andreas Harsono said that Poeze is a renowned academic who is competent to talk about Tan Malaka. "Before the law, [the book discussion] is legitimate and must have been protected by law," he said.
"The question is why did police cooperate with the FPI to ban the book discussion? The police should have taken action against the party who protested but ironically did the opposite. Those parties both violated human rights and at the same time violated the law," Andreas added.
Andreas also said that such an act coming from law enforcement means that Indonesia cannot protect its own laws.
"An ideology cannot be a threat for one country. In some European countries, there are several Communist parties. We should mirror that," he said.
Andreas quoted author George Orwell who once said that he who controls the past controls the future. And he who controls the present controls the past. "So, if you want to have a good future for your country, you have to learn about your own history," said Andreas.
"That is why the mass killings in 1965-1966 in Bali and Madura, also the Madurese in Pontianak, ethnic Chinese killings in Kalimantan, or in Papua, and in Timor Leste or in Aceh have to be understood deeply to prevent a similar event from occurring in the future," he said.
Haris Azhar, the executive director of human rights organization Kontras, said that it was a mistake to ban a book discussion, and part of a systematic effort to prevent any discussion about the country's past.
"The issue of Communism is being used to shield certain groups from their mistakes. It is being used to shut down their guilt for their own interest. Many ignorant people are being used to attack alleged communists," he said.
Haris said that any discussion on Communism, including about Tan Malaka, was fine, and efforts to ban it were counter-productive.
"With respect to people who came from a background associated with Communism, they have now been accepted. In their day-to-day life, the people are OK with them," he said.
"However, there are many who still get discriminated because of their Communist background. Discrimination is still prevalent," he said.
Haris said the public should not overreact on the issue of Communism.
"Today the party is no more. It no longer has any cadres — but freedom of expression and opinion is granted in the constitution," he said.
He said the 1966 ruling should be revoked immediately. "If a law is discriminative, then that law is no longer appropriate. If we claim to be a democracy, there should be no such law. Nobody should discriminate against anyone. We should be ashamed of ourselves," he said.
'Fostered idiocy'
Indonesian literary figure Putu Oka Sukanta said the protests from a number of small Islamist hard-line groups were the result of the lack of insightful knowledge about what they are against.
"Many people are afraid and then forbid something even though they don't know exactly what it is," he said, adding that such a view was "a form of idiocy and dullness."
"The most important point for such groups is to prohibit this or that. They use muscle, without being thoughtful," he said.
Putu, who was jailed without a trial during the New Order era for alleged involvement in Communism, said that discussion is part of civilization, and should be protected by the country's laws.
"Any groups have to be invited into dialogue with intellectuals to discuss anything. But they must be willing to refrain from the use of violence."
"If someone writes a book, people who don't agree with its findings are free to come up with their own book that supports their view," he said.
Such open discussion must be done to educate the nation, he said. "We should not be afraid to discuss things and we must read in order not to be left behind by other countries in the constellation of nations in the world," Putu said.
Commenting on the ban of Poeze's talk, Putu stressed that there was no law against having different opinions, but he stressed that the government's stance in maintaining the 1966 law was incomprehensible.
He said that if there were any small groups creating commotion when someone holds a book discussion, this reflects badly on those group themselves.
"These groups do not understand government policy or the freedom of speech," he said. "We should ask them, why did they do such a thing? Why can't they let intellectuals meet in peace and talk about our own history?"
Unfortunately, without a clear explanation, police have always allowed these groups to get away with their protests.
"The police should have been protecting the intellectuals, rather than fighting against them. The government never prohibits such events, so why did police bother to give in to the FPI's demands? The police is part of the government apparatus, not this small group's tool," Oka said.
Blast from the past
Putu said that Indonesians needed to really understand that the capturing of people accused of being communists after Oct. 1, 1965 was illegal because no warrants had been issued or any legal procedures followed.
"They were arrested and were jailed without a trial. They couldn't have an attorney. The regime treated them as 'outside of the law,' " he recalled.
"Not having any legal protection, these people lost their status as citizens. They were treated arbitrarily; were tortured, were exiled. They had no basic rights," he said.
"Even after getting out of prison, the humiliation continued by having their identity card marked by letters "E.T.," meaning ex-political prisoner.
He said that even after the New Order fell, these people couldn't claim any compensation from the government for their illegal arrest or captivity.
"As for intellectuals, they were not permitted to write or read. Not having a pen or even a paper was the most severe torment for intellectuals. It was worse than not eating or not drinking," he said.
"The New Order made a systematic effort to destroy one's intellect," he added.
"Many went insane but I fought by stringing words together in my memory and imagination," he said.
He said that while the communist suspects had been victimized by the state, the killers of 1965-66 still roamed free.
"They don't feel guilty, even though some of them have become crazy, but the murderers who still survive expect some reward, Putu said, referring to Anwar Congo in The Act of Killing.
He demanded the government revoke the 1966 ruling, adding that this would otherwise be a lasting reference for some groups to protest any discussion related to Communism in the country, because there were statutes that could allow them to hide behind the law.
Putu said that the government must have a national campaign to provide understanding to the groups opposing any discussion about Communism while launching an inquiry to clarify what exactly happened in 1965-66 and why it happened, because much of what happened in those dark days has been successfully covered up.
"The government must explain to the nation the incident in 1965; Was there really a coup from the PKI? Was the torture of the generals even real? That is the task of current government: to clarify the truth," he said.
"This is not the duty of small groups [such as the FPI], this is the government's responsibility," he said.
The truth must be revealed in order to understand what happened and why, he said. "How can we get better in the future without knowing our past mistakes?"
