E

ach year on Nov. 10, the country commemorates National Heroes Day. The date was chosen to mark the epic struggle of Indonesian revolutionary independence fighters who resisted the effort by the Dutch to reassert their authority over the country in 1945.

Who won the Battle of Surabaya is irrelevant. Some battles are not on the battlefield. It was this spirit of resistance against the odds that epitomized the soul of the Indonesian struggle '€” a spirit of '€œnever surrender'€ that was evident through the centuries of resistance that began with the Portuguese in the 16th century. In the last 15 years, Nov. 10 has also become an occasion to announce the latest members of an esteemed list of '€œnational heroes'€ declared by the state.

Those defined as heroes under the government criteria for consideration are those who did '€œactual deeds that can be forever remembered and serve as an example for other citizens'€ or those who have undertaken '€œextraordinary service that furthers the interests of the state and people'€.

No country will ever rise to greatness if it cannot learn from the lessons of the past, or respect its forefathers.

The children of today have no comprehension of the sacrifices made to reach the Indonesia of today. And we are grateful that our children do not have to endure the pain and suffering of past struggles.

Our children face their own challenges in making this country great, and it is unfair to say that their trials will be any less demanding than those of 1945.

Remembering those that have come before them is appropriate conduct. In fact, it may be even be worthwhile that at Nov. 10 public events a minute of silence is observed before the proceedings commence as a form of respect.

Unfortunately the naming of these heroes has been increasingly subject to political influence, leading us to question just what the definition of a hero is. This was especially so during the reign of the New Order. Those considered political opponents were unlikely to ever be nominated, and there seemed to be an emphasis on those who participated in armed struggle. The revolutionary struggle has also been seen in a particularly masculine framework, with only a dozen women having been declared heroines.

The debate becomes even a more tinted when the government has to reject controversial figures, as was the case most recently, with the public debate around former presidents Soeharto and Abdurrahman '€œGus Dur'€ Wahid. No one can deny that during their time both individuals contributed and played a role in shaping the fate of this country. But it may just not be politically their time yet.

It should not be a '€œyes'€ or '€œno'€ situation. The fact they may not be proclaimed national heroes today should not take away the worthy contributions they have made. To do that would be an affront to lesser known or forgotten names who never got their due.

True heroes do not act courageously because they want to be called heroes. For them it is an act in time, a commitment and determination to embrace suffering and sacrifice. And for us, we need heroes not because of the glamor, but because they are individuals who remind us of our missing qualities to better ourselves and others beyond material temptations.

True heroes make us believe in justice '€” that good prevails, despite the odds.

So who needs heroes? We do. They may not be the ones declared by the government, but rather the ones who when we think of them, inspire us to do more for others.