Facebook 
Twitter 
Soundcloud 
Youtube 
Rss 
Photo by Solo Imaji.
As anti-lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender rage sweeps across Indonesia, Muhamad Haripin outlines the dangers of linking LGBT rights and issues with war.
Former president Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono’s sparkling record of political stability (or stagnation, as some might argue), and economic development were tarnished by his failure to prevent discrimination and violence against Indonesia’s minority groups.
His religious affairs minister, Suryadarma Ali, recently sentenced to time in jail for corruption, repeatedly showed not only a lack of empathy but also directly threatened minorities.
With recent events, do Indonesia’s embattled minorities now have to also live under threats and persecution during Joko “Jokowi” Widodo’s administration?
A few weeks ago Defence Minister Ryamizard Ryacudu made some extraordinary and controversial statements – both to do with the kind of wars Indonesia now faces.
First, as part of the growing anti-lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender rage sweeping across the archipelago, he claimed that the country’s LGBT movement was part of a proxy war to conquer Indonesia.
Following that, the minister suggested that Indonesia should restrain from buying weapons. According to him, Indonesia has no real enemy, especially as the regional situation over the last 50 years has been conducive to economic development, and the related peace that brings. As such, the military instead needs more equipment designed to counter and mitigate contemporary threats — namely terrorism, natural disasters, and infectious diseases.
The LGBT issue also provoked a few retired officers to share their views. Kiki Syahnakri, former deputy army commander, argued that LGBT rights are a weapon of hegemonic countries, in the form of soft power, seeking to gain control and destroy other countries’ economic strength and culture. Indonesia is considered to be a vital target.
Both Ryamizard and Kiki are viewed as hard-liners among Indonesia’s military elites. Back in 2003, Ryamizard said that the murderer of Papuan activist Theys Eluay was a hero.
A day before Ryamizard’s statement, President Jokowi reiterated his administration’s commitment to revamping Indonesia’s military capabilities. The Defence budget would reach 1.5 per cent of GDP, approximately Rp 250 trillion (US $18.66 billion), if Indonesia could achieve 6 per cent economic growth. LGBT issues and the defence budget are rarely discussed in the same vein. While the president has yet to make any comment regarding the debate on same-sex marriage, his minister chose to side blatantly with those who are against it.
Ryamizard’s statement probably won’t cause a sudden change in policy at the defence ministry. The ministry has been busy with the “bela negara”, or state defence, program – its new initiative to instil and promote patriotism, nationalism and Pancasila values among the public.
Cooperating with various social groups, the defence ministry has arranged training for civilians throughout Indonesia, with students, blue-collar workers, and teachers persuaded to participate. Given the target of recruiting one million bela negara cadres in the next ten years, the anti-LGBT view could probably be added subtly to the existing bela negara curriculum.
It is therefore unsurprising that a call for LGBT rights, and its vehement rejection, was, by and large, framed as a proxy war. The military, particularly under the current leadership, has been a strong advocate of this type of thinking.
TNI Commander General Gatot Nurmantyo has held rallies outlining this contemporary form of warfare — where enemies are everywhere, yet cannot be easily detected. He argues that foreign powers no longer rely upon conventional measures of control and conquest based on territorial occupation nor colony building. Instead — as repeatedly echoed by Indonesian military elites — ideological and cultural infiltration and economic sabotage are how the fight is won.
This standing theory seems to confirm the danger the LGBT movement represents — since this unconventional concept of sexuality is regarded as being brought to Indonesia from abroad, or not genuinely borne out of the country’s own traditions. Therefore, it is perceived as perfectly natural for the nation ‘to fight’ the LGBT movement.
In this approach, the military establishment stands on firm ground. The TNI is ranked as the most trusted institution in the country, according to national surveys conducted by polling agencies. Based on this, it could be suggested that the military is now considered socially acceptable by a majority of the Indonesian public. People might disagree with them on some issues, but in general, people trust them.
As for Ryamizard, he is also riding high. He has the support and legitimacy his ministry needed to implement the bela negara project. He could also interpret the Nawacita, Jokowi’s 9-point priority program inspired by Soekarno’s teachings, as a nod toward inward looking and security-minded nationalism.
This is massive achievement for the military institution, particularly considering where it was during the heyday of Reformasi. At that time, a call to get back to the barracks was common. The military’s political role was gradually stripped away as well.
Playing the populist card is common practice among politicians; Ryamizard is no exception. However, the public should not let their political leaders’ statements get out of hand. Is Indonesia really under threat from a proxy war today? What proof does Ryamizard have of the country’s LGBT minority and a proxy war? In a democratic Indonesia, sensible arguments should be the currency bankrolling the exchange of ideas.
Moreover, the whole situation raises a serious question about the path of Indonesian nationalism the government currently advocates; will it become a mantra to justify particular views and norms – particularly, those that share similar principles with the military camp? Or a space that enables divergent views to coexist peacefully?
Let’s hope to hear much less controversial social commentary from Ryamizard in the future.
Muhamad Haripin is PhD student at Graduate School of International Relations, Ritsumeikan University, Japan, and author of Reformasi Sektor Keamanan Pasca Orde Baru. He tweets @mharipin
Tying anti-LGBT sentiments to the military has its limits. For all you know 25 % of soldiers are cross-dressers. This piece fails to mention primary opposition from Islamic Parties and from Islamic NGOs that have as much influence on negative views of LGBT individuals as the Indonesian military, which by the way, is also criticized by Islamic Parties and Islamic NGOs as being too secular. The interplay between the military (whether hardliners or something else) and the Islamic Parties/NGOs is not given sufficient attention in this commentary. One would be left with the impression, among other human rights abuses, the military is solely responsible for anti-LGBT behavior. That is not correct and is not logical, given the pervasive influence of radical Islamic forces in Indonesia that are in no way tied to the military.
0
0
You seem comfortable making sweeping statement about sexuality in Indonesia, which to my mind is more problematic than the author not dealing with a well-trodden path that his article clearly does not seek to address.
Do you have anything to back up your claim that “for all we know 25% of Indonesian soldiers are crossed dressers”?
How do you conceptualise “crossed dressers” in relation to LGBT? Is Richard Branson “LGBT” because he cross-dressed as a stewardess? Does cross-dressing makes soldiers more tolerant toward “LGBT”?
It’s very clear that the author’s aim is to explore the implications of linking anti-LGBT discourse with war. I doubt that anyone would come away with the impression that the author argues that TNI is behind the anti-LGBT hysteria.
0
0
General Gatot Nurmantyo began ranting against the proxy war to which Indonesia is currently subjected long before Jokowi appointed him as TNI Commander. This suggests that Jokowi endorses Gatot’s paranoid vision or at least is unfazed by it.
Enemies that are unseen are more terrifying than visible ones. This mental outlook could be a legacy of the animist beliefs that persisted for many centuries among various Indonesian ethnic groups. On Java, Clifford Geertz provided a useful catalogue of some of these unseen forces or spirits, tuyuls and others, when he wrote up his research among those he called abangans in Pare, East Java. Nothing happens by chance in this world-view.
Soeharto understood how fearsome unseen enemies were when he denounced latter-day communists for conspiring to set up an ‘organisasi tanpa bentuk’, which acquired its appropriate acronym, ‘OTB’. The PKI was bad enough, but at least one knew where it usually hung out.
Similarly, the soldiers in Gatot’s proxy war don’t wear uniforms or carry arms, but they are more dangerous than if they did.
The likely result of Gatot’s campaign against the proxy war is the reinforcement of regrettable tendencies towards insularity and xenophobia in Indonesian society. It is no surprise that Ryamizard Ryacudu, of 60,000 foreign spies fame, should echo Gatot, but why has Jokowi fallen dupe to such people?
It is disappointing to record that the authors of Australia’s 2016 Defence White Paper seem oblivious to the proxy war that Indonesia faces. Here is a sample paragraph:
“The modernisation of the Indonesian armed forces and Indonesia’s
growing influence are positive developments that will add to Indonesia’s
security, and that of the region. A secure Indonesia is in Australia’s
interests and its growing military capabilities will offer Australia and
Indonesia opportunities for more effective cooperation to respond to
regional challenges, including terrorism, transnational crime such as
people smuggling and humanitarian disasters as well as search and
rescue operations.”
Why not go further and try to obtain Ryamizard’s and Gatot’s undying friendship by condemning the proxy war, even if we still harbour some lingering doubts about how grave the LGBT threat is?
0
0
Ryamizard’s proxy wars are little different to the ‘latent’ communism and asymmetrical threat of foreign ideologies and interests infiltrating Indonesia with NGOs, that LEMHANAS has never stopped teaching. I miss my old LEMHANAS materials, a Canberra based thief borrowed and never returned them.
LEMHANAS isn’t entirely paranoid. Foreign ideologies and values have indeed infiltrated Indonesia, and NGOs are indeed used to fight proxy wars. The PRC and Taiwan both have their proxy NGOs, as do KSA and Iran. Remember Al Haramain? Ex Communists in the Netherlands use unresolved 1965 issues to delegitimise and weaken TNI, knowingly serving the interests of Papuan activist groups. Soros fronts allow activists to present themselves as ‘researchers.’ Environmental groups fund local NGOs to wage proxy battles against select businesses investing in RI. No proxy wars being fought over Freeport then? Move along, nothing to see there?
0
0
They are not wrong. The threat to the Western nations is from Indonesian Muslims and destroying their religious unity with LGBT propaganda against Indonesian society is a good way to wage proxy war against them. We should not be surprised at their counter-attacks.
0
0