TNI internal reform needs new paradigm

The Jakarta Post , Jakarta | Mon, 10/08/2007 8:30 AM | Opinion

Al Araf and Anton Aliabbas, Jakarta

A clash between Indonesian Military (TNI) soldiers and National Police personnel broke out in Ternate, North Maluku, last week, killing at least two people and wounding several others.

It was the latest conflict involving the two forces since their separation in 2000 as part of military reform. Questions emerge as to whether the reform has brought about a new brand of security actors and how far the process has gone.

Some experts say the reform has significantly restricted the TNI's role in politics, improved its professionalism as a defense force, ingrained respect for human rights and put the corps under civilian control. Others, however, maintain that there have been no fundamental changes in the TNI as the reform remains just rhetoric.

It is difficult to judge which opinion is valid, mainly because, as a reaction to and correction of bad experiences from the past, the reform process appears more as a euphoria, and moves without a blueprint or good planning. We can see, until now, the government has not implemented any definite measurements to evaluate the reform process.

This has complicated efforts to rearrange TNI as a professional military institution. This is evident in the government's decision to propose to the House of Representatives the reserve forces bill, as the controversy surrounding the military court bill and national security bill have remained unsettled. Of course, there is nothing wrong with the move as between 10 and 15 security-related bills must be prepared as part of the TNI reform.

The question rests with the capability of the House and government. Are they able to discuss three security-related bill simultaneously? Is it the best time to submit the reserve forces bill ahead of more crucial bills such as the intelligence bill?

As a part of security sector reform (SSR) framework, managing and rearranging the TNI requires good and systematic plans. Those plans need clear measures in order to transform the TNI into a professional and modern force.

There are at least seven measures to evaluate the process of military reform: 1) arrangement of laws based on the rule of law; 2) establishment of developing policy capability and doctrine, form defense planning; 3) implementation of policy and regulations; 4) improvement of professionalism; 5) effective and capable oversight; 6) logical and proportional budget; 7) settlement of human rights violation cases.

Military reform must follow the concept and agenda of SSR. Political expert Prof. Robin Luckham describes SSR as a governmental discussion not only in the framework of the possibility of mistakes in allocating resources, but also the potential of instability that could have a negative impact on the government.

The main objective of the SSR is to establish good governance in the security sector and also to create the secure environment and public order that can support state goals of creating a prosperous people.

As a result, SSR can be understood as an effort to assure the authorized institutions that have the obligation to protect the state and people conduct their duties and functions based on good governance principles.

Pursuant to that aim, efforts to make military reform successful should be placed on a new wider and more comprehensive approach.

First, TNI reform should be seen as a part of an agenda completing the SSR. Because of that, conducting the military reform agenda requires a multidimensional, inter-disciplinary and inter-relation approach. In this context, the existence of a blueprint to guide the SSR process and national security framework as a foundation for military reform is a must.

Second, TNI reform should run parallel with political reform. Consequently, TNI reform should adopt democracy as a starting point. In other words, democratic values such as transparency, accountability and respect for human rights should be accepted as the values that guide the efforts to change and rearrange the military institution.

Third, military reform is the responsibility of not only the government and the TNI, because security is a public good. In this context, criticism of the TNI should be valued as public participation to help build a professional military, instead of a threat.

Fourth, the stagnating TNI reform cannot not be blamed only on the TNI. In a democratic state, the responsibility should be borne by the legitimately elected political authorities.

Fifth, TNI reform should assure the TNI is no longer a political instrument but a state apparatus that is loyal to the political authorities and the law. Hence, the TNI should refrain from taking actions that could disturb the reform process and follow the SSR agenda, as determined by the political authorities.

Sixth, TNI reform should not be seen only as a move to prohibit the military from business or from getting involved in politics, but also should be perceived as an effort to build modern, integrated and good defense capability.

The government needs to create a blueprint to guide the SSR and national security framework as a basis to make TNI reform a success. The new paradigm on military reform is important to initiate the process. Without clear goals and guidelines, the TNI reform will only partial, reactive and will go nowhere. Happy 62nd anniversary, TNI.

Al Araf is research coordinator at Imparsial human rights group and a graduate student in Defense and Security Studies at the Bandung Institute of Technology (ITB). Anton Aliabbas is a graduate student in Defense and Security Studies, ITB, and a member of the Bandung Security and Development Studies Forum.

Comments (0) | Post comment

A | A | A |