Hasil Pencarian  ::  Simpan CSV :: Kembali

"The intention of this article is to discuss the relationship between the processes of fiscal and political decentralization, the outbreak of communal violence, and what I call 'the new politics of tradition' in Indonesia. In 1999 under the President Jusuf Habibie, the Indonesian parliament (DPR) voted in favour of two laws, No. 22 and 25 of 1999, which promised to leave a significant share of state revenues in the hands of the regional governments. Strongly supported by the liberal ideologues of the IMF and the World Bank, the two laws were envisaged within Indonesia as a necessary step towards devolving the centralized power of New Order patrimonialism and as a way of curbing separatism and demands for autonomy by giving the regional governments the constitutional and financial wherewithal to maintain a considerable degree of self-determination. Decentralization was in other words touted as the anti-dote to communal violence and separatist tendencies-an anti-dote administered or at least prescribed by multi-national development agencies in most conflict-prone areas of the world. This paper wishes to probe this idea by looking at the conflict and post-conflict situation in North Maluku. The conflict illustrates how local elites began jockeying for political control in anticipation of decentralization. The process of decentralization is in other words not merely an anti-dote but in some cases an implicated part in the production of violence. One reason for this is simply that the decentralization of financial and political control after three decades of centralization entails a significant shift in the parameters of hegemony-a shift towards which local political entrepreneurs in the regions are bound to react. The new 'politics of tradition' currently emerging in Indonesia is the combined result of changes in global forms of governance, a strong political focus on ethnic and religious identity in the 'era reformasi' and a local willingness to employ these identities to garner support in the new political landscape of decentralization."

"Konflik-konflik berdarah yang menyertai Indonesia setelah jatuhnya Orde Baru cenderung terjadi di Indonesia bagian Timur, dengan pengecualian daerah Aceh. Saat ini banyak analisis akademis, baik dalam bahasa Indonesia maupun Inggris yang telah mulai menguraikan aspek-aspek politis, sosial dan diskursif dari konflik-konflik di Timor Timur, Maluku, Maluku Utara, Poso, Kalimantan dan Papua. Penelitian-penelitian ini telah mulai meninggalkan penelaahan-penelaahan yang terlalu sederhana dan kerap sarat bias yang muncul segera setelah terjadinya konflik. Penelitian-penelitian tersebut mulai memberikan gambaran tentang konteks etnografis yang lengkap dan lebih rumit dari 'perang di Indonesia bagian Timur'. Gambaran ini memperlihatkan tercampur baurnya provokasi politik, ketegangan ekonomi, provokasi diskursif, dan adaptasi buletin lokal terhadap bentuk-bentuk identifikasi berdasarkan agama suku bangsa yang memberikan dorongan dan motif berbeda untuk ikut serta dalam setiap kerusuhan individual yang bergejolak di berbagai wilayah Indonesia Timur setelah tahun 1999. Walaupun setiap bentrokan/pertikaian (bahkan dalam satu wilayah konflik seperti Maluku atau Poso) seringkali bersifat unik secara politis dan pengalaman, mereka saling mempengaruhi satu sama lain. Setiap kerusuhan memupuk berkembangnya perasaan paranoia nasional yang disebarluaskan oleh media. Dalam prosesnya,setiap pertikaian/bentrokan menaburkan bibit-bibit kekerasan di tempat lainnya."