A couple of days before the Chinese New Year, a colleague brought me a gift from a number of Chinese-Indonesian House of Representatives legislators from various political parties.
It did not come as a surprise. There are many Chinese-Indonesians in the House. What surprised me was the fact that regardless of their political differences, they gave me a lunar cake, or Nian Gao (kue keranjang), as a group.
This marks progress in our democratic society. However, we should bear in mind Spanish-American philosopher George Santayana, who stated, “Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it.”
What can we learn from the history of ethnic Chinese in Indonesia?
First, the Chinese have been a divided society ever since they first arrived in Indonesia in the 15th century under the leadership of Admiral Zheng He, who also introduced Islam to the archipelago. For centuries, Chinese-Indonesians were divided into three main groupings: Qiao Shengs, who were more inclined toward cooperation with the Dutch, Cina totoks, who looked toward mainland China, and Cina babas, who most successfully assimilated with the indigenous people of the Indies. Therefore, to generalize all Chinese as an identical group is inappropriate.
Second, the concept of “sharing the same historical background” as the main idea of the so-called Indonesia hundreds of years later is also very much related to Chinese-Indonesians. Under the Dutch colonial, Chinese-Indonesians were also the target of Dutch cruelty, as we recall the 1740 massacre that killed thousands of ethnic Chinese in Batavia.
The majority of Chinese-Indonesians were more closely associated with Cina babas, as they fought the Dutch and the Japanese along with indigenous Indonesians. Unfortunately, history shows that Chinese-Indonesians were structurally victimized both under the Old Order and New Order eras, as evidenced by the government’s decision to force them to scrap their family names. More recently, Chinese descents fell victim to violence during the May 1998 tragedy.
The situation drastically changed after the reform era thanks to the father of Indonesian pluralism, Gus Dur. Far fewer incidents of structural violence and discrimination against Chinese-Indonesians occurred. However, there are still many obstacles that prevent Chinese-Indonesians and indigenous Indonesians (pribumi) from sharing a mutual understanding. It is the social mindset within the country.
Many Chinese-Indonesians still experience the trauma of the past. They tend to generalize all indigenous Indonesians as the same. On the other hand, the pribumi tends to view Chinese-Indonesians as an economically self-interested community which is not willing to mingle with other Indonesians.
The dichotomy is still in place. Some days ago, Serang villagers protested a plan by a Buddhist foundation, Yayasan Timur Raya, to build a Chinese cemetery (The Jakarta Post Jan. 27, 2011).
Notwithstanding the fact that the demonstration was fueled by alleged procedural violations, demonstrations against a certain ethnicity is very rare here.
Why is it so hard to blend with each other?
It goes without saying that after decades of structural violence, it would be very difficult to change the mindsets of both pribumi and Chinese-Indonesians. The dark history of relations that led to bloodshed, as occurred in May 1998, should not be repeated.
The fact that Chinese-Indonesians, Cina babas, dedicated themselves to Indonesia during the independence struggle should be taken into account. They are not less nationalistic than indigenous Indonesians. They actually have no choice but to assimilate and blend in, understanding that unity is better than diversity.
On the other hand, Chinese-Indonesians should realize that time has passed by, regimes have changed and discrimination is irrelevant. The anti-pribumi mindset should no longer be maintained.
There are few reasons to live as an exclusive group, as it will only hinder integration efforts.
But most importantly, the government should play its role in promoting pluralism and values of multiculturalism within the diverse society, which the legislators had shown through their “lunar cake diplomacy”.
We should seize the momentum of Chinese New Year to promote these values. The fight against discrimination is not yet over and we cannot let history repeat itself.
The small present from the House members hopefully marks a start to efforts to instill pluralism as a fundamental Indonesian value. As US President Barack Obama stated last year during his visit to Indonesia: “E pluribus unum — out of many, one” in the United States, and “Bhinneka Tunggal Ika — unity in diversity” in Indonesia.
The circle shape of the lunar cake symbolizes unity, peace and determination. This can be the most important diplomatic means to ending discriminatory mindsets.
Gong Xi Fa Cai 2562.
The writer is research officer at the National Institute for Democratic Governance (NIDG), Jakarta.
