---
After Six Decades of Independence, Broken Bridges and Broken Promises
Yohanes Sulaiman & Phillip Turnbull | December 01, 2011
Last weekend’s collapse of a bridge in East Kalimantan raised a lot of eyebrows. People immediately compared the quality of the 10-year-old bridge with Dutch-built infrastructure here that remains standing after decades. There are discussions of how much effort it took to demolish a single Dutch dam, in contrast to many Indonesian-made dams that only lasted for a few years before rupturing in floods.
All these discussions show how much different is the development mind-set of the Dutch compared with Indonesians.
While it is true that Dutch interests in Indonesia were mainly exploitative, to cart off Indonesia’s riches back to the Netherlands, the Dutch also realized that they could not exploit Indonesia effectively without building a strong infrastructure. Without strong dams, bridges, railroads and roads, highly efficient and profitable plantations would not have been possible. As a result, by the time the Dutch recognized Indonesian independence in 1949, they had left Indonesia with a legacy of infrastructure that would provide a strong foundation for Indonesian economic growth.
The professionalism of the Dutch administration in running Indonesia was emulated by Indonesia’s founding fathers. Understanding that the Dutch had viewed Indonesians as lazy, unprofessional and clueless in managing the country, the founding fathers set out to prove otherwise.
In the Volksraad , an advisory body established by the colonial government in the 1910s, people like Haji Agus Salim and Jahja Datoek Kajo showed their wits in advocating Indonesian interests. Both also contributed heavily in making Bahasa Indonesia the official language of the Volksraad. Even though the Volksraad was seen as a rubber-stamp body, the fact that both elders managed to persuade the Dutch-dominated body showed how professional and skillful they were.
During the economic hardship of the war for independence, our founding fathers also won respect from the Americans and even their Dutch adversaries thanks to their skill in managing the ragtag republic. The late George Kahin, a leading American expert on Indonesia, once recalled that when he met Mohammad Natsir in 1948, the latter was shabbily dressed. Even then, however, Kahin was highly impressed with Natsir’s skills and ability as a communication minister.
The post-independence era provided the opportunities for great minds like Mohammad Hatta and Sjafruddin Prawiranegara to shine and to create a better society. But unfortunately, independence also brought out the worst in society: people whose goals were simply power and money. It brought to power many who were and are just as venal as the Dutch in exploiting the country, with the difference being that they are not very efficient at it.
The statistics on civil servants provide a useful snapshot for the crassness of their rapacity. By early 1952 the number of civil servants in Indonesia was 571,243, compared with 144,974 in the Dutch East Indies in 1930, leading to Sjafruddin’s lamentation that government service had become a charitable institution.
The struggle between people who wished to build Indonesia into a modern society and people who demanded political power and economic wealth has continued to the present day. Even today the government seems incapable of providing an infrastructure to support the population, too distracted as it is with maintaining an outmoded feudalism whose intention is to protect dynastic wealth and privilege at the expense of social progress.
This attitude has no place in the 21st century, just as the former colonialism no longer has a place in Indonesia or in any accountable, transparent, liberal society run by professionals who recognize that the foundation of any society lies in the equality of all men and women and their right to share in the common wealth of a prosperous and just economy.
Yet today, if we pause and reflect, we can acknowledge, for all the time-conditioned faults and the unacceptable mentality of a bygone era, under the Dutch we did get roads that did what roads were meant to do. We also got thousands of well-managed plantations, the Bosscha Observatory, dams, impressive and tasteful public buildings and palaces, an efficient and clean railroad system, canals that worked, a disciplined army, an education system worthy of the name and a legal system administered in courts free of corruption. Under the Dutch we also had a fair proportion of politicians who knew what they were talking about, even if they were talking about the wrong things by today’s standards. Still, not bad.
While clearly the centuries of Dutch occupation and colonial administration, with all the concomitant injustices, were not a form of therapy for the Indonesian people, it is fair to ask: What exactly did we learn from that experience?
Building bridges that stay up is obviously not one of them. And that is indicative of other things we failed to make better than the Dutch. Perhaps deep down some Indonesians are no better than our past colonial masters. Perhaps they haven’t really learned anything. If that is the case, our overlords are now our own brothers and sisters. And that is a far worse, more humiliating occupation.
Perhaps it’s time to ask the Dutch back. At least then we knew where we were, even if we were in the wrong place. Most of us are still at the bottom of the pile. Some of us are even at the bottom of the river. But the government tells us we never had it so good and would have us believe how lucky we are to have them. Is that so?
----
DrDez
6:03am Dec 2, 2011
A nice tongue in check poke at the administration.
First comment - sadly the nationalists take commentaries like this and chest beatings will occur - possibly the best distraction tool they have after a sex scandal
Second - 66 years and we are in a deep hole I feel with no obvious way out of the corruption, sectarian violence, rising wealth gap, rising unemployment, rising labour violence, rising military violence, growing separatism, disintegrating infrastructure blah blah blah that those with half a brain can see
Even the progress that has without been made is increasingly being challenged - I think of education as the most obvious. The standard of education of the 18 - 21 year old's we interviewed for our apprenticeship scheme this year meant that fpr the first time in 25 years we have not taken 10 on. Similarly the post grad studies we fund - usually we do 5 this year 1.
Meanwhile the elite get richer and more and more are exposed almost daily for what they are
Comello
7:25am Dec 2, 2011
Good luck with the trolls and/or knee-jerk nationalists on this forum...
trueblue
2:43pm Dec 2, 2011
Yohanes-Sulaiman
2:59pm Dec 2, 2011
DrDez
3:13pm Dec 2, 2011
Yes. But here today, right now. After 43 years in this land I think it is the worst time I have ever known for wanton corruption. It exists at every level of our society, it is ingrained and seems almost genetic in nature. It saddens me to say I see no short term solution and with that curse everything else darkens. add to this a boat load of religious issues and growing separatist calls countered by increased nationalism - yikes.. Not a pretty time ahead
Yohanes-Sulaiman
3:25pm Dec 2, 2011
Here's some data that I did not include in this piece: In February 1950, Sukarno gave the approximate figure of 180,000 federal civil servants and 240,000 Republican civil servants. The budget for 1950 envisaged a deficit of f. 1.5 billion, approximately 17% of the total budget. In 1952 the number of civil servants was 571,243: why would a nation need an increase of 150,000 civil servants in just two years?
Considering the relatively low education of Indonesians back then, let me spell you the reason: NEPOTISM.
If you don't believe me quoting Sjafruddin complaining about the massive increase in the numbers of civil servants, you can also read Bung Hatta's own memoir to find out that he was not that all happy with the ballooning of the numbers of civil servants (and military personnel) that eat up the government's budget.
Yohanes-Sulaiman
3:35pm Dec 2, 2011
@DrDez: thus our tongue-in-cheek ending, asking whether it is the time to bring the Dutch back, though it seems that someone didn't get the joke.
Duck
4:33pm Dec 2, 2011
"What exactly did we learn from that experience?"
I would actually be quite interested to read about an answer to this question.
DrDez
5:19pm Dec 2, 2011
trueblue
5:57pm Dec 2, 2011
Comello
12:08pm Dec 3, 2011
I hope you understand the relevance of your last post regarding the issue at hand - I did not.
DrDez
2:11pm Dec 3, 2011
MikeOfAston
3:26pm Dec 3, 2011
MikeOfAston
4:05pm Dec 3, 2011
padt
4:40pm Dec 3, 2011
Re 'trueblue's' last comment, Dr Dez and Comello, - I admit to being a bit mistified also. Lost in the erudition. I am reminded of the words of of an apprentice who said of his boss: "He stopped by this morning for a couple of words. I did not understand either of them."
But I am sure what trueblue has to say is correct, up to a point, so to speak, kind of. Like others I await further enlightenment and clarification from both Yohanes Sulaiman and trueblue.
Valkyrie
6:06pm Dec 3, 2011
It's the Legal system they inherited from the English.
I would also like to add that tertiary education was made available especially for Singapore and many went to universities like Oxford, and Cambridge.
Among others that they inherited, I believe the above were prime movers for their success.
The parting of ways with Malaysia was a stroke of genius by LKY. I know he showed despair and disappointment when Abdul Rahman decided to "kick" Singapore out. It was good politics at that time. I remember it very well.
Yohanes-Sulaiman
6:20pm Dec 3, 2011
@trueblue: dunno which book you read, but I am pretty sure Bung Hatta was a champion in his own rights. True that Sukarno was a champion, but in my humble opinion, Sukarno was more of talk while Bung Hatta was the doer: pushing for the creation of cooperatives, etc - in essence, he talked very little but did a lot. You also have to look at the 1950s "as a whole," where Bung Hatta's authority was very constrained and actually he broke apart with Sukarno because he saw Sukarno as wasting to abuse his position as prez by playing politics at the expense of technocrats for his cliques in PNI's gains - which Hatta abhorred.
Hatta was trying to empower the society by trying to give them tools to succeed, not babyfeed them through bloated social security called civil service.
Yohanes-Sulaiman
6:24pm Dec 3, 2011
Fear of death was a great motivator to behave responsibly.
Valkyrie
9:12pm Dec 3, 2011
You should not forget that LKY was associated in some form with the "commies" and he allied himself with labor kingpin Devan Nair. His nemesis at that time was Lim Chin Siong who fled, ironically to the UK.
Once again, I must say with some reservations, that LKY was a political genius and played his cards well, albeit in a dangerous manner.
The presence of ANZUK forces after gaining independence for both Malaysia and Singapore ensured a win-win solution. It was commonly called the five power arrangement.
If I am not wrong, LKY was actually in fear of MAPHILINDO, an integrated Malay-race formation in this region. Although it was non political, it was 'something' he recognized as threatening.
Yohanes-Sulaiman
10:46pm Dec 3, 2011
trueblue
5:44am Dec 4, 2011
DrDez
9:08am Dec 4, 2011
Good luck with your new found profession - we are short of good extractions here as testified by the excessively high numbers of young unemployed.
hvschaik
6:44am Dec 5, 2011
In the 1950's nobody could build the greatest Mosque (in that time), because nobody knows how to make such a great building in a country where earthquake which was sensitive for buildings. And such a great building was never build anywhere.
There was only one man who could calculate the construction of the Mosque and that was my father: Ir. Johannes Henri van Schaik, a Dutch engineer. But the president Soekarno had forbidden that his name was mention anywhere. So the president gave an Indonesian engineer the honour...
My father Ir. J.H. van Schaik worked by the Dutch construction contractor company named: "De Kondor" with their office at Jl. Nusantara no 39, Jakarta, in the neighbourhood of the presidential palace.
This famous Istiqlal Mesjid still exist! Thanks to my dad.
When my father was ready with his calculations (given to the President), Soekarno, he threw my father and his family out of the country in 1958.
DrDez
10:00am Dec 5, 2011
Nice story - thank you for sharing. One day when Indonesia stops blaming everyone and revisits its history perhaps your father will get his place in history. I hope so
hvschaik
3:23am Dec 6, 2011
I hope there is a historian, who may checked all I wrote. But I am affraid that it will be impossible, because it was top-secret.
I do not know (my father is passed away in May 2000) if the documents of the calculations still exist or maybe already destroyed. I hope that the documents are still somewhere. It could be on several places: by the presidential archives or by the archives of the several builders of the Mosque.
hvschaik
6:51am Dec 6, 2011
In the 1950's it was named Jalan Nusantara. The parallel road was named Jl Veteran. Why and when the street name was changed, I do not know.
We lived in the neighbourhood: Jl. Tanah Abang tiga, so I know the surround neighbourhood very good...
DrDez or others, please use these information.
(I found the new name by google maps).
No comments:
Post a Comment