Indonesia's stake in the Beijing Olympics

A.M. Hendropriyono ,  Jakarta   |  Wed, 04/23/2008 1:07 AM  |  Opinion

Months ago, Chinese embassies around the world quietly began to assess the potential security risks along the path to be taken by the Olympic torch. This was almost laughable at the time, seemingly nothing more than over-sensitivity on the part of the Beijing authorities.

Now, after watching ugly protests erupt along the torch's route from San Francisco to Paris, their concern was prophetic.

The root cause of these rallies has been the plight of the Tibetan people. To be sure, the Tibetan issue has been smoldering for more than half a century, though in more recent years it has been glamorized by a handful of apparently sincere adherents in Hollywood.

Too, the Tibetan cause has been going from strength to strength on account of the Fourteenth Dalai Lama -- a skilled, impassionate orator who today cuts one of the most sympathetic and beloved religious figures in the world.

But with the Beijing Olympics looming in August, Tibet's considerable international support community went into overdrive. They realized, correctly, that Beijing would be most vulnerable while under the scrutiny of the world's media in the run-up to those Games. They also realized that, with the Dalai Lama already 72 years of age, this was literally a once-in-a-lifetime chance to press their cause.

I would submit, however, that many in the developing world -- and especially in Indonesia -- need to view what has been happening to the Olympics with a different set of concerns.

For one thing, the Olympics were supposed to be a sporting event where religion, ethnicity and politics were checked at the door. Of course, this is not the first time in recent decades that politics has made an intrusion. There was the tit-for-tat boycotting of the Moscow and Los Angeles Games in the '80s, for example.

But the disruptions ahead of the Beijing Olympics open a Pandora's box like no other. Here we see non-state actors -- to include corporations -- looking to put their cause on a soapbox at the expense of the pending Games. This mix of politics, religion and sport sets an uncomfortable precedent, to say the least.

But a far greater concern is the issue of separatism. Rare is the country whose borders make perfect ethnic sense, whose populations are fully homogeneous. Many developed countries have been able to overcome tense pasts, where one indigenous population resisted encroachment, or subservience, to another.

The United States, for example, contended with its Native Americans (not to mention fighting a civil war against secessionists). The Australians had the Aboriginals and Japan the Ainu, just to name a couple. Few today would debate the placement of the borders in the United States, Australia or Japan, however, because their national sovereignty is recognized as non-negotiable.

Not so within the developing world. One need only to look at home to see multiple examples of ethnic groups still agitating to spin out of Jakarta's orbit -- whether it be in Papua, Aceh (currently in remission) or the Malukus. In many cases, overseas non-state actors support those causes. There are even a few cases of overseas politicians lending their support.

Elsewhere in Southeast Asia, recent history is rife with similar examples. In Thailand, the Patani Muslims are currently warring to cede. In Mindanao, a Muslim minority has been sporadically fighting for its own homeland for decades.

In the '70s, the Hmong highlanders of Laos flirted with the idea of carving out their own state. In the '80s, it was the Khmer Krom of Cambodia who talked up the idea of re-forming their historical kingdom that extended into southern Vietnam. And in Myanmar, several minorities have been looking to Balkanize that nation.

The Indonesian government, no surprisingly, takes a dim view on separatists. Instead, Jakarta has in more years sought to win over wayward minorities through concessions such as special autonomy. The jury is still out as to whether this has succeeded, though I think most would admit that places like Aceh and Papua are far more tranquil today than during any time in recent memory.

China has taken similar measures in Tibet. For example, it has exempted Tibetans from its one-child family policy. And the practice of Tibetan Buddhism has been allowed to strongly rebound since, say, the repression its followers felt during the Cultural Revolution.

Given the recent unrest in Lhasa, however, clearly more needs to be done. As religion is such a central part of Tibetan life, Beijing might want to concede to the Dalai Lama and the Tibetan diaspora more control over selecting incarnates. This would be similar to Jakarta's concession to apply Islamic law in Aceh. In fact, Indonesia may well be able to offer suggestions -- or even lend its good offices -- to help Beijing come to a better accommodation with its Tibetan populous based on its experiences in Aceh.

By contrast, for Indonesia to join the non-state actors who are pressuring China in the run-up to the Beijing Olympics would simply be wrong. Rather, when the Olympic torch passes through this country next month, Indonesians of all ethnicities should embrace the event and showcase our love for sport regardless of politics.

Jakarta should even go further. Indonesia should underscore its support for China's sovereignty and recognition of Tibetan as a domestic Chinese issue. And on a symbolic level, President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono should make clear his intent to attend the opening ceremony in Beijing.

As the saying goes, people in glass houses should not throw stones. Those overseas communities supporting separatism in Tibet should take a long, hard look within their own borders before seeking to hijack the Olympic Games.

The writer is former head of the National Intelligence Agency (BIN).

Copyright © 2008 The Jakarta Post - PT Bina Media Tenggara. All Rights Reserved.