Government soft power, reharnessing its power Owen Podger  ;   Professional associate at the Institute for Governance and Policy Analysis, University of Canberra

JAKARTA POST, 28 Agustus 2014

                                                                                                                       

I refer to the excellent article by Enda Nasution entitled “Soft power, the bazaar and voting for Indonesia’s future” in The Jakarta Post on Aug. 18. Enda states that life has changed, thanks to social media and digital technology, and people are often taking charge and solving their problems locally through their hand-held gadgets. He says “The dynamics of this new global age are too complex to be solved by the old way of command and conquer. A country as big and as diverse as Indonesia needs hundreds of leaders, thousands of thinkers and millions of doers and we need to be well coordinated so we all know that we are all going to the same direction. Indonesia needs to become a movement.” Modern media is indeed the new boy on the block, so dominant that it appears that the self-government in Indonesia is new, rather than undergoing a revival with the help of modern Information Technology. Soft power has a long history in Indonesia. First, there are the old civil society organizations. Some of the oldest formed as social resilience in colonial times, others grew during the Sukarno era, some of our best were established as resistance to the Soeharto regime, and then there has been a flourishing since the beginning of reformasi. Second, there are local community schools. Madrasah (Islamic school) came first as a self-government way of competing with the Dutch school system. Then came the other religions and secular organizations providing schools where the government could not. At the end of the Soeharto era, more than half the junior and senior high schools in the country were run by non-government organizations. Third, there are villages. Village self-government existed long before there were kings and sultans or colonialist or feudalist presidents or a ministry of home affairs. The government has laws and institutions to regulate these self-governing institutions, and tries to put them into a bureaucratic mould. The new Village Law aims to do much good, but it also strives to turn village governments into a different type of government than it has been in the past, modeled on regional government, not on more effective civil society. We have a ministry of religion that supports educational reform by providing incentives for private madrasah to turn to state madrasah, and for their teachers to become civil servants. We have school building programs that have massively increased the number of state high schools while private schools have struggled to survive. They all would want to replace efficient community driven school systems with inefficient government systems, by taking over rather than helping them provide the best value for society. So why do village governments and private schools accept and even clamor to go the opposite direction to the new trend that Enda describes? Money. The government promises money if these civil society organization adopts its inefficient models of government. Enda see that it is now time for a change in approach. Social media is essential, but alone cannot break down the disincentive systems in villages and schools and other civil society organizations. Surely the government realizes that so much of its reform program is actually working against this new trend. Take schools out of the Religious Affairs Ministry and put them in the Education and Culture Ministry, and change its policies so as to reward private schools for providing better value for money than the government can. Put villages and civil society organizations under an umbrella that will empower and nurture civil society, and provide funding as long as there is best value for money in provision of services. Don’t encourage inefficiency with promises of funding without head to performance. Enda is right. We do need principles deeply grounded, and let go of being in charge all the time, being flexible while taking on real problems through real action. Leaders who listen rather than command and inspire rather than instruct have a lot of undoing to do, removing wicked incentive systems, reducing reglomania, and demanding that their bureaucracy helps civil society to just do it. Some principles have been considered in the past. In 2009, a committee of Regional Representative Council (DPD) proposed an article for their version of a law on regional government that redefined government affairs. The article stated that government will not regulate (mengatur) or carry out (mengurus) anything that can be regulated and/or carried out by society itself. This article was not just a reflection of the new trend. It was also DPD’s interpretation of the preamble of the Constitution which gives the first reason for forming a government as to protect the people, meaning also to protect what they do themselves. The same committee proposed an article for their version of the village law that said that government should not intervene in village affairs, but rather support them. The principle should apply to all civil society organizations as long as they work for the common good. The Constitutional Court has now cleared the way for president-elect Joko “Jokowi” Widodo and vice president-elect Jusuf Kalla to get on with their new style of leadership. I am certain civil society as a whole will observe what they do with delight and anticipation, and help wherever they can. To use an old Kalla motto: the faster the better. ●

Testing times foor us all Erlan Idrissov  ;   The Minister of Foreign Affairs of Kazakhstan

JAKARTA POST, 28 Agustus 2014

                                                                                                                       

Indonesia is famous for its diversity. The country is made up of thousands of islands, and hundreds of languages, and people from many regions and ethnic groups. While the majority of the country’s citizens are Muslim, the spirit of religious tolerance that is enshrined in Indonesia’s Constitution remains one of its defining and inspiring characteristics. So Indonesia is an ideal place to host a UN forum that celebrates such diversity. The 2014 Global Forum of the United Nations Alliance of Civilizations (UNAOC) brings together the nations of the world at a time of worrying and growing divisions along cultural and sectarian lines. Kazakhstan is proud to be playing its part in the summit. Like Indonesia, Kazakhstan is also a place of religious tolerance and freedom. On the Great Silk Road between Asia and Europe, we have always been a meeting point of cultures, religions and civilizations. As the home of many ethnic and religious groups who live together in peace we are also as proud of our Islamic heritage as our reputation for religious freedom, tolerance and diversity.   We have sought to share and spread these values through initiatives such as the Congress of World and Traditional Religions, which was established in 2003 in Kazakhstan. The Congress, which brings together leaders of all religions, provides a unique platform to discuss the important issues and challenges facing inter-religious and inter-civilization relations in the world today. And I am proud to say that in a little over a decade, the Congress has become a valuable international forum, working to foster a culture of peace and harmony between world religions. As the Congress has developed and grown in stature, it has established relations with other international organizations and fora, including the UN and the UNAOC. We greatly value their involvement and support for the Congress and our broader efforts to promote a culture of peace and harmony, including the initiative to proclaim 2013-2022 the “International Decade for the Rapprochement of Cultures”. Over the coming days, we will rightly celebrate the diversity and richness of human civilization. But all of us gathered here also know there can be no room for complacency.  Innocent civilians in Kazakhstan, in Indonesia and across the world are targeted by militants who detest freedom and harmony. Violent extremism poses a threat to peace and extremism in many countries. We must confront such evil directly. Indonesia has made great progress in rooting out extremists and combating such violence. But it is not a task any nation can achieve alone. We need to work together not just to tackle the threat posed by those of violence but also to counter messages of division and prejudice on which hatred feeds.    We hear them all around us. In too many places, anti-Muslim sentiment has become commonplace. Anti-Semitism is on the rise across Europe. Religious minorities face oppression and worse in many countries. When such attitudes are left unchallenged, violence can follow. From the world stage to local communities, leaders need to speak the language of tolerance and respect, not division and defamation. As beacons of tolerance and religious freedoms, Indonesia and Kazakhstan can and must help give a lead.  Wherever tensions divide communities, the opportunity exists for the UNAOC to build bridges and to help people move from conflict to collaboration. It is particularly important for the Alliance to work where risk is greatest. Right now, there are two situations that are especially urgent — the conflicts in Iraq and the ongoing impasse between Israelis and Palestinians. Both should be addressed in Indonesia. First, Kazakhstan stands in unity with the international community to deplore the bloodshed in Iraq. The country is an extraordinary mosaic of tribes, ethnicities, languages and religions. We witness in horror the sectarian violence and mass reprisals as the situation continues to worsen. When the conflict ends, Iraqis from all backgrounds will need help to rebuild damaged relationships so all can work together to restore their nation. The Alliance encourages efforts by partners — notably religious leaders from all denominations — to foster healing. But what will work for one country might not succeed in another. Progress in the Middle East Peace Process is long overdue. The loss of life in the recent violence was deeply harrowing. Each day of bloodshed takes us further from the agreed goal of a two-state solution. A durable peace requires the resumption of meaningful negotiations backed by international engagement. But Israelis and Palestinians remain polarized. We should be particularly worried about the region’s youth. A generation of young people on both sides is at risk of growing up with a dehumanized and utterly false concept of their neighbors. We must help them to see them not as enemies but as fellow human beings. There is a huge amount to do. It is why Kazakhstan, along with Indonesia and other partners, is so committed to the success of the UNAOC. It remains an initiative of tremendous importance. At this time of test for the human family, let us all do our part to see it thrive. ●