Peluncuran BUKU Cerita-Cerita 'WONG JOWO-SURINAME' -

IBRAHIM ISA – Berbagi Cerita
Selasa, 18 Januari 2011
---------------------------------------------------------------

Peluncuran BUKU Cerita-Cerita 'WONG JOWO-SURINAME' – “MIGRASI DAN WARISAN BUDAYA”


Kemarin kutulis di ruanganku “Berbagi-Cerita”, sekitar orang Belanda keturunan 'Jowo-Suriname', RANOMI KROMOWIDJOJO. Yang dewasa ini namanya sedang ngetop mencuat di dunia sport renang kejuaraan dunia. Datang tanggapan dari sahabatku, drs Harriëtte Mingoen. Siapa wanita ini? Hariette Mingoen, adalah Ketua Stichting Rukun Budi Utama, Nederland. Bertahun-tahun lamanya H. Mingoen bekerja keras, tak kenal susah payah demi memajukan kehidupan budaya bersama masyarakat 'Jowo-Suriname' di Belanda, khususnya di Den Haag. Juga untuk kepentingan kaum alonchtoon lainnya di Belanda.

Buku cerita-cerita sekitar orang-orang JAWA SURINAME yang berdomisili di Belanda, Suriname dan Indonesia, berjudul “Migratie en Culturele Erfgoed”, bahasa Indonesianya, “Migrasi dan Warisan Budaya”, yang diterbitkan oleh KITLV, Leiden, 2010, adalah hasil tim editor yang terdiri dari Lisa Jasmadi, Rosemarijn Höfte dan HARIËTTE MINGOEN.

Nah, buku ini pada tanggal 20 Januari 2011 lusa, akan diluncurkan di Erasmus Huis, Jakarta. Inilah yang hendak kuceriterakan. Dalam e-mailnya kepadaku tadi malam, Hariette Mingoen mengabarkan tentang akan diluncurkannya buku 'Migrasi dan Warisan Budaya' di Jakarta, Indonesia. Ia bersama Henk Schulte Norholt, salah seorang pimpinan KITLV, dan Rosemarijn Höfte akan hadir dalam peristiwa peluncuran buku tsb.

Tentu saja, peluncuran buku tsb punya arti penting. Ia merupakan sumbangan berarti pada khazanah literatur sejarah berkenaan dengan hubungan sejarah Indonesia-Suriname-Belanda. Khususnya yang menyangkut orang-orang JOWO-Suriname. Episode ini merupakan bagian dari sejarah Indonesia. Kini ia tercatat dan terdokumentasi dengan baik.


* * *

Mingoen khsusus memberitakan kepadaku untuk menyampaikan sekitar peluncuran buku “Migrasi Dan Warisan Budaya” di Jakarta, pada tanggal 20 Januari yad, kepada sahabat-sahabat peduli sejarah di Jakarta. Tulisan ini bermaksud untuk memberitakan kepada sahabat-sahabatku peduli sejarah di Jakarta, seperti mantan Dubes Indonesia di Den Haag Abdul Irsan, mantan Dubes Mohammad Joesoef, sejarawan muda Bonnie Triyana, Aswi Adam, Goenawan Mohammad, Laksmi Pamuncak, Wilson, Koesalah Tur, Hoesein dan banyak lainnya. Dengan pengetahuan ini jika tak ada aral melintang kurasa mereka akan hadir pada peluncuran buku 'MIGRASI DAN WARISAN BUDAYA”. Yang penting ialah agar mereka itu memberitahukan Erasmus Huis, Tel 021-524 1069, mengenai kesediaan mereka hadir.

* * *

Dalam surat undangan yang dikelurkan oleh Erasmus Huis, tertera sbb:

UNDANGAN – KAMIS, 20 JANUARI 2011 – 18.00

Jadwal Acara:

Registrasi dan makan malam -- jam 18.00

Simposium -- jam 19.00
Pembicara: Henk Schulte Nordholt, Tema Latar Belakang; -- Hariëtte Mingoen, Tema Migrasi Orang Jawa; -- Rosemarijn Höfte, Tema: Presentasi buku dan website; -- Aswatini, Tema: LIPI dan penelitian migrasi orang Jawa.

Pembukaan pameran foto – 20.30. Oleh Matte Soemopawiro, fotografer; Annemieke Ruigrok, Kuaswa Usaha Kedutaan Besar Belanda; Toekman Saimbang, Kuasa Usaha Kedutaan Republik Suriname.

Ceramah akan dibawakan dalam bahasa Inggris atau bahasa Indonesia.

Pameran foto berlangsung hingga 18 Februqari 2011.

* * *

Nah, inilah yang kuhendak BAGI-CERITERAKAN kepada sahabat-sahabatku di Jakarta dan para pembaca sekalian, agar tidak luput peristiwa penting di Erasmus Huis, Jakarta, pada tanggal 20 Januari 2011, lusa, berkernaan dengan PELUNCURAN BUKU 'MIGRASI DAN WARISAN BUDAYA'.

RANOMI KROMOWIDJOJO – KAMPIUN RENANG – ASAL “JOWO-SURINAME”

IBRAHIM ISA – Berbagi Cerita
Senin, 17 Januari 2011
-------------------------------------------

RANOMI KROMOWIDJOJO – KAMPIUN RENANG – ASAL “JOWO-SURINAME”

Pers asing, ketika memberitakan sekitar kampiun dunia kejuaraan renang yang diraih RANOMI KROMOWIDJOJO, menyatakan bahwa Ranomi, – sering disapa NAOMI – , adalah tokoh perenang dunia muda dan cantik asal Belanda. Ia meraih kejuaraan dunia renang itu (Dubai) mewakili “Oranje”, mewakili Kerajaan Belanda. Dalam tahun 2010 Naomi memenangkan 4 titel kejuaraan Eropah dan tiga kejuaraan dunia, pada jalur pendek. Memang Naomi adalah 'orang Belanda'. Tapi asalnya b u k a n dari B e l a n d a . Dari namanya saja sudah kelihatan. KROMOWIDJOJO.
Ayah Naomi bernama KROMOWIDJOJO. “WONG JOWO-SURINAME. Jadi, Naomi itu adalah w.n. Belanda asal Jowo-Suriname. Ibunya asal Groningin, Nederland. Nah, begitulah duduk perkaranya.
Dalam suatu cakap-cakap santai di suatu pertemuan, aku cerita tentang orang-orang Jawa Suriname di Nederland. Mereka itu puya organisasi rapi. Pada penghujung tahun lalu, orang-orang Jawa-Suriname yang sudah w.n Belanda memperingati (di Den Haag) hari ultah ke-120 mereka-mereka itu diangkut oleh pemerintah Hindia Belanda dari Jawa ke Suriname. Organisasi mereka punya website. Dalam kesempatan memperingati ultah ke-120 itu, telah diterbitkan dua buah buku penting. Satu antranya ialah: “Migratie en Culturele Erfgoed”. Buku tsb memuat cerita-cerita suka-duka orang Jawa di Suriname, Indonesia dan di negeri Belanda. Tentang buku ini telah kutulis akhir tahun lalu.
Di Suriname orang-orang yang diangkut dari Jawa itu dipekerjakan sebagai pekerja-kontrak untuk perkebunan tebu Belanda di Suriname.
* * *
Tentang orang-orang Belanda asal Indonesia yang berhasil dalam karierenya. Yang mencapai sukses gemilang memang ada beberapa. seperti a.l WIBI SOERYADI. Wibi (40) adalah pianis dan komponis muda yang kenamaan di Belanda dan didunia musik klasik. Pada tanggal 27 Januari 2011 yad ini, ia akan tampil di Canergie Hall, New York, untuk kedua kalinya. Canergie Hall adalah salah satu gedung budaya dimana dipertunjukkan musik klasik maupun populer, yang paling kenamaan dan prestegius. Oleh masyarakat Belanda, Wibi dinilai pemain piano terbaik Belanda.
Kemudian disebut-sebut nama pemain bola Belanda, Giovanni van Bronchorst. Namanya mencuat populer sejak menjadi kapten kesebelasan Oranje di pertandingan kejuaraan dunia di Afrika Selatan tahun yang lalu. Sebelumnya Giovani adalah pemain utama klab bola Feyenoord-Rotterdam. Ada seorang pembaca kolomku yang bertanya: Pak Isa, apa benar kapten kesebelasan nasional Belanda yang bernama Giovanni vn Bronchorst itu asal Indonesia-Ambon. Betul, jawabku. Bapaknya Belanda bernama Victor van Bronchorst dan ibunya asal Maluku, bernama Fransien Sapulette.
* * *
Seorang kawan nyeletuk: Jangan lupa nama RANOMI KROMOWIDJOJO, juara renang dunia termuda baru-baru ini, adalah seorang putri berumur 20th, cantik pula, yang sekarang ada di top kejuaraan renang dunia. Ia Belanda tetapi ditubuhnya mengalir darah Jawa, Jawa-Suriname.
Benar, kata hadirin. Janngan lupa itu. Tidak dijelaskan apa sebabnya, tetapi semua orang-orang Indonesia itu, merasa bangga bahwa muncul lagi seorang 'celebrity' di Belanda yang asal Indonesia . Dan tanpa memerlukan penjelasan lebih lanjut akupun turut bangga. Pokoknya ikut bangga!
Di kejuaraan renang untuk pemuda di Budapest (2005), Naomi yang ketika itu baru berumur 15 th sudah berhasil meraih medali emas. Dalam tahun 2006 bersama dengan Chantal Groot dan Inge Dekker memenangkan medali perak (4X100M) di Kejuaraan Renang Eropah. Dan pada 2007 meraih medali perunggu di Melbourne. Di Olympiade Beijing, Naomi memenangkan medali emas dalam kejuaraan estafet (4x100m) bersama Femke Heemskerk dan Maarleen Veldhuis.
Pembaca hendak melihat lebih banyak foto-foto perenang luar asal JAWA SURINAME itu? Silakan akses WIKIPEDIA, ZIMBIO'S HOME PAGE, dll di media internet. Pasti lebih banyak informasi dan cerita mengenai RANOMI KROMODIDJOJO.
* * *
Mengapa tulisan tentang NAOMI KORMOWIDJODO ini ditulis? Tak laian, ingin sekadar melempangkan fikiran sementara orang, yang memandang remeh kaum migran, khususnya yang berwarna. Seperti antara lain yang asal Indonesia, atau Indonesia Jowo-Suriname. Padahal mereka-mereka itu turut mengharumkan nama negeri Belanda di bidang olahraga internasional.
Apalagi kalau dilihat daftar pemain bola Belanda lainnya, seperti Ruud Gullit, Frank Rijkaard, Patrick Kluivert, Clerence Zeedof, Reizeger, Edgar David, dll. Pengikut dan pendukung Geert Wilders yang setengah mati anti-migran, anti MOSLEM dan anti-Islam itu, tidak punya kemampuan normal lagi untuk bisa melihat kenyataan. Bahwa sesungguhnya bangsa Belanda, tidak banyak beda dengan bangsa Amerika. Yaitu hasil dari suatu proses 'melting pot'. Sebagaimana halnya banyak nasion di dunia kita ini. Termasuk nasion INDONESIA.
* * *

Untuk SBY: “Bilang Saja, Saya tidak Mampu”

Kolom IBRAHIM ISA
Kemis, 13 Januari 2011
----------------------------------------------

”SARAN”(!!!) -- Untuk SBY:
“Bilang Saja, Saya tidak Mampu”

“Bilang saja saya tidak mampu”, adalah kata-kata keras dan tajam berasal dari Ahmad Syafii Maarif, mantan ketua Muhammadiyah. Memang dia orang Sumatera, orang Minang. Bukan orang Jawa. Omongannya, keluarnya 'ces pleng' begitu saja. Tidak kasar. Juga bukan 'kurang sopan'. Jelas! Tegas! Di satu fihak, saran itu supaya SBY mundur saja sebagai Presiden RI, meskipun belum penuh masa jabatannya sebagai presiden yang dua kali berturut-turut terpilih langsung. Di lain fihak, diberikan alasan yang jelas, Yaitu 'tidak mampu'. Maka, tidak bisa ada salah tafsir. Bukan karena melakukan pelanggran hukum berat, seperti korupsi atau melakukan pelanggaran HAM berat.

* * *

Kalangan cendekiawan, cukup mengenal siapa Ahmad Syafii Maarif ( lahir: 1935). Dalam tahun 1985 terbit bukunya: Islam dan masalah kenegaraan : studi tentang pecaturan dalam Konstituante. Buku tsb adalah sebuah revisi dari tesis PH.D-nya, berjudul “Islam as the basis of state” yang diraihnya di University of Chicago (1982).

Kritikan tajam Ahmad Syafii Maarif kepada SBY tsb adalah sebagian dari kritik yang diajukan oleh sembilan orang tokoh agama. Selain Maarif, terdapat
Andreas A Yewangoe, Din Syamsuddin, Uskup D Situmorang, Biksu Pannyavaro, Salahuddin Wahid, I Nyoman Udayana Sangging, Franz Magnis Suseno, dan Romo Benny Susetyo. Mereka beranggap bahwa pemerintahan Presiden Yudhoyono, sesudah lebih setahun menjabat, --- dan sebelumnya SBY sudah lima tahun menjabat presiden pilihan langsung, -- telah gagal mengemban amanah rakyat. Pemerintah terlalu banyak berbohong atas nama rakyat.

Maarif tidak membatasi kritiknya hanya pada SBY. Tetapi juga sampai ke kepala desa. Maarif mengingatkan pemerintah, mulai presiden hingga kepala desa, untuk membuka telinga lebar-lebar. "Telinganya harus dibuka untuk mendengar aspirasi rakyat. Jangan ditutupi telinganya." . . . Ditegaskannya bahwa selama pemerintahan SBY tidak ada perubahan yang fundamental, khususnya bersangkutan dengan beleid yang mantap mengenai masalah kemiskinan, kesulitan ekonomi dan hukum, yang tidak bisa ditegakkannya.

Selanjutnya para pemuka agama itu berrencana mengajak umat mereka melawan kebohongan pemerintahan Presiden Yudhoyono.

Salah seorang dari sembilan tokoh agama itu, Romo Benny Susetyo, ketika membacakan pernyataan bersama mereka, menandaskan sbb: "Kami menghimbau elemen bangsa, khususnya pemerintah, untuk menghentikan segala bentuk kebohongan publik" Para tokoh lintas agama sepakat, bahwa sistem ekonomi neo-liberalisme yang dijalankan pemerintah telah gagal meskipun pertumbuhan ekonomi Indonesia tercatat 5,8 persen.

Benny: "Rakyat kecil tidak pernah merasakan keadilan dari pertumbuhan ekonomi semu itu. Ini berlawanan dengan tuntutan Pasal 33, UUD 1945," Ekonomi Indonesia sudah keluar dari jalur Undang-Undang Dasar (UUD-RI). Kecenderungan pasar bebas dalam sistem ekonomi Indonesia adalah penghianatan terhadap apa yang tercantum di pembukaan UUD 1945. Kondisi tersebut, diperburuk oleh sikap pemerintah yang masih mengedepankan pencitraan. Demikian Romo Benny Susetyo.

* * *

Demikianlah, --- Sampai sembilan pemuka agama dan kepercayaan menyatakan kritik terbuka demikian kerasnya kepada pemerintah, khususnya kepada Presiden SBY. Ini bukanlah hal yang biasa. Mereka-mereka itu bukan petinggi parpol, bukan politikus, juga bukan aktivis media. Mereka adalah orang-orang yang sehari-harinya bergumul dengan masalah ilmu, pendidikan, kepengajaran, kepercayaan dan religi. Bahwa mereka sampai memerlukan tampil menyuarakan rasahati dan penderitaan masyarakat luas, --- itu menunjukkan kepedulian mereka atas nasib bangsa ini. Juga menunjukkn sudah betapa seriusnya keadaan negeri dan bangsa.

* * *

Juga tokoh parpol oposisi Ketum PDI-P, Megawati Sukarnaputra, dengan tajam mengecam kebijakan SBY selama ini. Mega menilai bahwa SBY telah gagal meletakkan fondasi dasar untuk tercapainya kesejahteraan rakyat dan keadilan sosial.

Mega menilai pemimpin yang hanya mementingkan pembangunan citra. sebagai sumber kegagalan.

Jusuf Wanandi, Ketua Umum Asosiasi Pengusaha Indonesia (Apindo),
tidak kurang keras dan tajam sekali dalam penilaiannya terhadap janji dan politik SBY. Wanandi: "Apa yang dijanjikan Presiden SBY untuk memacu perekonomian tidak ada yang berjalan". Berbagai klaim keberhasilan pertumbuhan ekonomi nasional setelah 15 bulan periode kedua pemerintahan Presiden Presiden Susilo Bambang Yudhyoono (SBY) dianggapnya hanya isapan jempol belaka.

Fokus pencitraan dan pergulatan kepentingan politik menghabiskan energi
pemerintah untuk mendorong roda ekonomi nasional bergulir dengan cepat
di tengah persaingan menjadi pemain dominan dalam percaturan ekonomi
global.

Wanandi menegaskan "Semua klaim itu adalah semu. Pertumbuhan ekonomi yang telah dicapai bukanlah timbul dari hasil kinerja pemerintah. Ekonomi (nasional) mengalami pertumbuhan karena dunia usaha dan masyarakat (Indonesia sendiri) yang berjuang sendiri untuk sekedar bertahan atau mencari peluang untuk berkembang".

* * *

Bambang Soesatyo, Anggota Badan Anggaran DPR dan Wakil Ketua Umum Kadin, dengan argumentasi menguraikan, bahwa, berselang puluhan jam setelah pemerintah mengumumkan sukses pengelolaan ekonomi negara per 2010, klaim keberhasilan (pemerintah) itu langsung dicampakkan rakyat.

Ke-tidakpercayaan pada diri sendiri, menyebabkan pemerintah lebih memuja statistik dan mendengar apa kata orang asing, namun takut mengakui kegagalannya menyejahterakan rakyat.

Saat Menteri Koordinator Perekonomian, Hatta Rajasa, memaparkan penilaian keberhasilan kebijakan pemerintah itu, Awal Januari 2011, --- Jutaan ibu rumah tangga, bahkan juga para bapak rumah tangga, sedang menggerutu karena nilai tukar uang belanja harian keluarga-keluarga anjlok akibat kenaikan tajam harga kebutuhan pokok.

Ada beberapa keluarga diantaranya tewas akibat mengkonsumsi tiwul karena tak sanggupmembeli beras. Demikian ditandaskan Bambang Soesatyo.

* * *

Begitu antusias pemerintah mengklaim keberhasilannya selama ini, demikian pula maraknya komentar kritis dan tajam media dan masyarakat, termasuk tokoh-tokoh pemuka agama seperti yang diuraikan di atas. Semua mengungkap dan membongkar kepalsuan serta kebohongan klaim keberhasilan pemerintah itu.

Penderitaan disebabkan tekanan ekonomi yang mencekik rakyat kecil, termasuk golongan tengah yang luas, tidak bisa diselubungi dengan klaim 'keberhasilan pertumbuhan ekonomi', seperti dikatakan Menteri Hatta Rajasa.

Apakah jalan buntu yang dihadapi pemerintah SBY ini bisa dicari solusinya pada suatu politik tambal sulam? Dengan mengadakan suatu 'perubahan kabinet', misalnya. Mengganti menteri yang satu dengan menteri lainnya. Apalagi bila tindakan itu semata-mata untuk memperoleh tambahan dukungan parpol di DPR. Supaya bisa berkuasa terus. Juga untuk lebih lanjut menumpulkan daya kritis sementara politisi dan parpol.

Ataukah jalan keluar itu, seperti yang disarankan oleh Ahmad Syafii Maarif kepada Presiden SBY, yaitu:

“BILANG SAJA SAYA TIDAK MAMPU”.

* * *

Yang tidak boleh berhenti, adalah kegiatan pengontrolan, teristiwewsa oleh media yang bertanggungjawab yang peduli nasib negeri dan bangsa ini, terhadap tindak-tanduk politik pemerintah -- adalah pengugkapan, kritik, pembongkaran masyarakat, khususnya kritik terhadap kebijakan ekonomi pemerintah yang berorientasi pada modal asing, pada Bank Dunia dan IMF,


* * *

FOCUS - ON INDONESIAN ECONOMY

IBRAHIM ISA FOCUS - ON INDONESIAN ECONOMY
Wednesday, January 12, 2011
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-- Indonesia and the global rise of economic, political power
-- RI economic fundamentals strong, investors shouldn't worry
-- UBS: RI economy to expand by 6 percent in two years
-- RI to remain attractive destination of global funds
-- RI vows to remove barriers on creation of common market
-- State bodies keep doors closed on budget documents
-- CSIS paints grim political, economic outlook for 2011
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Indonesia and the global rise of economic, political power
Magda Safrina, Jakarta | Sat, 03/20/2010
Despite the complication caused by some delays and coordination matters related to the official visit of the US President Barack Obama to Indonesia, which was later postponed to June this year, the essence of the visit itself signals an important message to Indonesia and to the rest of the world.
To Barack Obama, Indonesia is not only a childhood home where he spent four happy years with family and friends, but a source of political and economic power that he needs to keep his political and economic agenda moving forward.
How could Indonesia, a country that was overlooked for almost a decade as a global forum and global influence suddenly become so important to Obama and to the US, both from political and economic standpoints?
The importance of Indonesia as having the world’s largest Muslim population nation has often been discussed in media, particularly Indonesia’s strategic position in its relation to the Middle East conflict.
The fact that Indonesia has been praised by the US as the role model where democracy and Islam prosper harmoniously adds to the list of Indonesia’s political capital in the global forum.    
Indonesia is the largest nation in ASEAN (Southeast Asian Nations), which comprises 10 Southeast Asian countries. Indonesia is also ASEAN’s largest economy with 2009 GDP at US$514 billion.
Indonesia is one of the founding nations of ASEAN together with Thailand, Malaysia, Singapore and the Philippines.
Since ASEAN was founded in 1967, Indonesia has always been playing important role in ASEAN. Indonesia’s former president, Soeharto, was one of the most respectful ASEAN figures.
The East Asian integration, often called ASEAN + 3, which refers to China, Japan and South Korea, now has moved further in policy implementation.
One major achievement that had integrated the region more closely is noted by the signing agreement of ACFTA in January 2010, an agreement that unites China and ASEAN economies with 0 tariff on goods and services crossing each borders.
The East Asian integration itself would bring about an integration of $12.2 trillion of world economy, with a total population of 2.1 billion people.
The integration of East Asian economies both as the Asian production platform and as the world’s growing domestic market has become much more important particularly since East Asia has proven that it can weather global recession relatively smoothly.
Asia is believed to be the source of world economic growth in the future. Led by China, the East Asian economy is projected to contribute to three quarters of 2.5 percent of world economic growth in 2010.
What unique about East Asian integration, in some extent has become a source of concern among other economies in the rest of the world, is the fact on how countries in East Asia are trading and investing between each other at a much faster pace and much larger volume than ever before.  
Although there are increasing concerns within each ASEAN nation about the decline of country’s competitiveness compared to China, the world’s largest production base is believed to also offer a huge export opportunity that could offset the decreasing competitiveness of certain industries in ASEAN countries.  
As the policy implementation is in progress, where adjustments in ASEAN economies are also taking place, we would need some more time to further evaluate how this integration would improve Asia’s economic status.
In such context, Indonesia is becoming more and more important both for the US and China.
Both countries would need to maintain their close relationships with Indonesia to secure their
economic stakes in East Asian
economy, particularly because US-China economic relations are often tenuous.
The US is China’s largest export market. In 2008 and 2009, China’s exports to the US accounted to $252.3 billion and $296.4 billion respectively.
However, China’s domestic market is well developed enough to absorb its massive production capacity if US market declines due to the economic recession.
Therefore, China needs the US to continue to import from it to assure there won’t be massive lay off workers at companies and factories in China.
The continuation of Chinese government investing in US Treasury Bonds providing the US government loans shows the complexity of US-China relations.
Today, China holds $755 billion in US government treasury bonds. The complication is increased by the US’s accusation that China is manipulating its currency to prevent the yuan from increasing while most experts believe the Chinese currency should have appreciated due to the increasing value of yuan’s real exchange rate.
The Chinese government’s effort to keep yuan stable against the US dollar is believed to have effectively maintained Chinese competitiveness in the global playing field.
With the rise of its importance among the two world economic powers, Indonesia is now entering its most important economic and political milestone in the global forum.
How Indonesia makes the most of this, given its rising role, would determine Indonesia’s position in the future, politically and economically.
As the nation at the crossroads, Indonesia should make the best of this opportunity to progress its economic and political relations with both the US and China. This progress should be real, well designed and well implemented.
The writer is a graduate student at International Business
School, Brandeis University,
Massachusetts, US.
RI economic fundamentals strong, investors shouldn't worry
The Jakarta Post, Businesss | Mon, 05/10/2010
(JP/P.J. Leo)First quarter growth of 5.7 percent is an indicator that Indonesia economic fundamentals remain strong, and investors should not worry about economic prospects, says Danareksa Research Institute economist Purbaya Yudhi Sadewa.
"The GDP growth in the first quarter showed that economic fundamentals remain strong. Investors in the stock market should not panic despite the minister is replaced," he said Monday.
Finance Minister Sri Mulyani Indrawati will move to the World Bank on June 1 as a managing director, the second-highest position in the bank, just under President Robert Zoellick.
JP Morgan analyst Sin Beng Ong said Indonesia's economic fundamentals were "very strong" despite Mulyani's departure. "Too early to say the reform is stopped. Indonesia is still in very good hands," he said.
But "the market is taking a wait-and-see approach", he added.
 UBS: RI economy to expand by 6 percent in two years
Aditya Suharmoko, The Jakarta Post, Jakarta | Tue, 03/09/2010
Swiss-based bank UBS estimates that Indonesia's economy will expand by 6 percent in the coming two years, leading to a stronger rupiah against the US dollar, UBS economist Edward Teather said Tuesday.

"We forecast Indonesian real GDP growth to perform well in a global and ASEAN context, growing at 6 percent in 2010 and 2011," he said.

"On a trend basis we suspect the economy should achieve at least 5 to 6 percent real GDP growth in the context of a de-leveraging global economy, higher than our model suggests because of still-rising savings and investment to GDP. Because of this, we expect an ongoing real appreciation of the rupiah."

UBS says its greatest concern with Indonesia's economy is overconfidence as the stock market index historically loses a point every time a data release is below consensus expectations.
RI to remain attractive destination of global funds
The Jakarta Post, Jakarta | Thu, 12/09/2010
Indonesia will remain one of the world’s most attractive destinations for global portfolio investment thanks to the country’s healthy economic growth, securities analysts have said.

Matthew Brown, head of Citi’s Asia Pacific Fund Services, said at a seminar on market outlook in Jakarta on Wednesday that Indonesia’s overall economy showed a significant growth opportunity, which made it an attractive destination for foreign funds.

“The recovery will continue ... There will be a lot more capital flow to Asia. The Europe and United States are looking for new opportunities and that’s important,” he told reporters following the event.

The Indonesian Stock Exchange (IDX) is among the best performing stock markets in Asia this year. The benchmark Jakarta Composite Index (JCI) has grown about 45 percent so far this year as foreign investors continued to pump funds into the Southeast Asia’s biggest economy. On Wednesday, the index rose 1.28 percent to close at its new record high of 3,769.99.

Brown explained that approximately US$60 trillion was seeking to be invested at present, $48 trillion of which is owned by European and US’ investors. “The funds are in the process of re-evaluation and asset restructuring that’s going to result in increased capital flow, which will continue in the next two or three years,” he added.

Investors, according to Brown, always want exposure in emerging markets to some degree, and Indonesia is among them.

With near-zero rates in developed nations like the US and Japan, Indonesia’s 6.5 percent benchmark interest rate has attracted foreign investors to invest in both debt and capital markets. About Rp 115.3 trillion of foreign funds have entered the nation’s stock and debt markets so far this year, a condition that has worried regulators due to fears over a sudden reversal that could hamper economic activities.

Tigor M. Siahaan, Citi’s country business manager, estimated Wednesday Moody’s would soon upgrade Indonesia’s sovereign rating to a level below the investment grade in line with the improvement of the country’s economic performance. “Moody’s was here last week talking to the government. So in several weeks we expect them to come up with an upgrade,” he told attendees at the same seminar.

Meanwhile BNP Paribas said Indonesia’s benchmark index may increase 20 percent within a year on an expected upgrade on the country’s sovereign debt rating. “Despite outperforming its peers in the region this year, we do not believe that the benefits of the re-rating have been fully priced in,” analyst Elvira Tjandrawinata told Bloomberg. “Other catalysts could include a continued pick up in investment, which would feed consumption, making it stronger and sustainable,” Elvira said. (est)

RI vows to remove barriers on creation of common market
Rangga D. Fadillah, The Jakarta Post, Jakarta | Wed, 01/12/2011
We have a dream: Indonesian Chamber of Commerce and Industry (Kadin) chairman Suryo Bambang Sulisto (from left), Trade Minister Mari Elka Pangestu and Foreign Minister Marty Natalegawa chat after they attended ASEAN Economic Community (AEC) meeting in Jakarta on Tuesday. Indonesia aspires to become a dominant economic player in the region. JP/Nurhayati
As the new chair of ASEAN, Indonesia said it would remove all legal barriers toward the establishment of the ASEAN Economic Community (AEC) and would ensure all member countries were ready for broader integration in 2015.
Trade Minister Mari Elka Pangestu said Tuesday that currently the realization of the blueprint to establish the AEC faced stumbling blocks due to the late ratification of agreed regulations by ASEAN member states, including Indonesia.
“All ASEAN members should ratify agreements after they are made, but the processes are impeded by different domestic procedures and adjustments to prevailing national laws,” she said at a press conference at the Indonesian Chamber of Commerce and Industry (Kadin) in Jakarta.
Utilizing its strategic position as the new chair of ASEAN, Mari said Indonesia would encourage ASEAN member to increase efforts to combat constitutional, legislative and regulatory limitations that could hinder the realization of the AEC, which would be similar in structure to the European Economic Community or the European common market.
“We also recommend that each country strengthens the institutions coordinating and supervising the implementation of the blueprint,” she said.
In her speech, Mari highlighted several possible economic breakthroughs ASEAN may achieve in 2011, such as the completion of an information exchange system on recalled unsafe products, the establishment of the ASEAN Small- and Medium-Scale Enterprises Service Center as well as strengthening economic ties with China, Japan, Korea, India, the US and other economic partners.
The AEC blueprint states four major targets: Establishing a single market and production base, creating a competitive economic region, promoting equitable economic development and encouraging full integration into the global economy.
Kadin chairman Suryo Bambang Sulisto vowed his organization would work harder to combat all constraints hindering the development of business and industry in the country.
“We’ll improve cooperation with the government because improving competitiveness is our shared responsibility. We can’t succeed without the government’s assistance,” he said after meeting with Mari and Foreign Minister Marty Natalegawa.
The vision to establish an integrated economic system among ASEAN members dates back in 1992 when the first ASEAN free trade agreement was signed. In 2010, ASEAN-6 members (Brunei, Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines, Singapore and Thailand) lifted 99 percent of import and export tariffs on trade between each other.
State bodies keep doors closed on budget documents
Bagus BT Saragih, The Jakarta Post, Jakarta | Tue, 01/11/2011
An NGO lodged a complaint to the Central Information Commission (KIP) on Thursday regarding the rejection of 37 state bodies to disclose documents on budget allocations.
The Indonesian Forum for Budget Transparency (FITRA) filed information requests to 65 state institutions, but only 28 had provided proper documents on the 2010 Approved Budget Allocation List (DIPA).
“Because they rejected our requests to provide the DIPA documents, which are public domain according to the 2008 Law on Freedom of Information, we reported the institutions to the commission,” FITRA investigation and advocacy coordinator Uchok Sky Khadafi said.
Among the 37 state bodies were the Trade Ministry, the Forestry Ministry, the National Education Ministry, the Religious Affairs Ministry and the State-Owned Enterprise Ministry, as well as non-ministerial bodies such as the Constitutional Court, the Attorney General’s Office, the National Police, the State Intelligence Agency, and the Supreme Audit Agency.
“Ironically, the House of Representatives, which endorsed the Freedom of Information Law, also rejected our request,” Uchok said.
FITRA found that only five ministries provided budget information, including the State Secretariat,
the Industry Ministry, the Agriculture Ministry, the Transportation Ministry and the Culture and Tourism Ministry.
The Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK), meanwhile, was the only law enforcement institution answering the queries.
“We have sent request letters since last year. However, most of the recipients completely ignored the requests, while others gave various excuses on why they wouldn’t want to provide budget information,” Uchok said.
Some ministries — the Defense Ministry, Women’s Empowerment and Child Protection Ministry and the Research and Technology Ministry — even declared that DIPA lists were not for public consumption, he added.
“The Public Works and Finance Ministries indeed responded to our requests, but they did not give us the DIPA lists as requested,” he said.
KIP chairman Ahmad Alamsyah Saragih said the commission would study the case and summon representatives from the reported institutions for clarification.
“We will decide within 14 days whether the cases should go to mediation for settlement,” he said, adding that should mediation fail, the cases would go to an adjudication hearing, similar to a criminal court hearing.
The ruling of an adjudication hearing is final with no appeal. The 2008 Freedom of Information law says any party refusing to execute such a ruling can be punished with up to three years in jail and a Rp 20 million (US$2,240) fine.
Alamsyah confirmed that any state budget-related information was supposed to be open for public.
“State bodies run their institutions using public funds, so the public deserves to know the allocation. But let us process the reports as stipulated by the law. Maybe some misunderstanding has taken place,”
he said.
Established in August 2009, the KIP, with three offices all in Java, has so far received 31 information disclosure requests from the public. Besides FITRA, the Indonesia Corruption Watch (ICW) has also filed a number of information dispute cases with the KIP. The ICW has requested the commission settle disputes with the National Education Ministry, the National Police and five state schools in Jakarta.Transparency International Indonesia (TII) secretary-general Teten Masduki said having freedom of information after 30 years of an “opaque” regime was not easy, but it was important to maintain as a means of preventing corruption among state officials.
CSIS paints grim political, economic outlook for 2011
Ridwan Max Sijabat, The Jakarta Post,
The political and economic outlook is rather gloomy for Indonesia in 2011, a think tank says.
Announcing the results of its political and economic analysis and research in 2010 on Tuesday, the Centre for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) said 2011 would again see an orgy of transactional politics stemming from a possible Cabinet reshuffle, the debate over revisions to the 2008 legislative election, local elections and premature nominations of presidential hopefuls.
“Following the evaluation of the performance of Cabinet ministers, the President is expected to reshuffle his Cabinet and this will incite bickering among political parties seeking to keep their representatives in the Cabinet,” CSIS political analyst Nico Harjanto said.
He added that the House of Representatives’ failure to control party supporters and members’ donations in the newly endorsed political party law and the planned hike in the parliamentary threshold would only serve big parties’ thinly veiled attempt to squeeze out smaller parties and consolidate their dominance in the next elections.
“The [reformed law] leaves no room for political mavericks to be held in check or for small parties to grow. This will certainly result in the rise of political oligarchies.”
CSIS senior researcher and political analyst J. Kristiady concurred, saying the gloomy political prediction for 2011 had to do with the failure of the post-2009 election political elites to create an effective government.
“2010 was marked by increasing transactional politics among parties in the ruling coalition. After the election, almost all parties that won seats in the House were busy with political transactions, negotiations, squabbles and broke their promise to address national problems and improve public social welfare.”
Following the 2009 elections, the public was optimistic that re-elected President Susilo Bambang Yudho-yono, who won more than 60 percent of the votes in the presidential race, would be able to use his big political capital to form an effective government that would be supported by the simple multi-party system.“This expectation did not come to fruition,” Kristiady said.
CSIS economist Deni Friawan said the economy would grow, but not as strongly as expected.Apart from investments, economic growth in 2010 was supported by consumption to balance decreased government spending, he said.
“Economic growth is expected to reach 6 percent this year with hope that inflation can be held in check,” he said.

Focus On INDONESIA'S FOREIGN RELATION

IBRAHIM ISA – Focus On
INDONESIA'S FOREIGN RELATION
Monday, 10 January 2011
-----------------------------------------------------
– A critical reading of ‘Natalegawa doctrine’
– Challenges for Indonesia as ASEAN chair
– Building ASEAN anew
– True, key facts in RI tourism
---------------------------------------
A critical reading of ‘Natalegawa doctrine’
Ahmad Rizky Mardhatillah Umar, Yogyakarta | Fri, 01/07/2011
Indonesian foreign policy in the era of Foreign Minister Marty Natalegawa has embraced a new perspective – the so-called Natalegawa doctrine. This perspective sees Indonesia in a position of “dynamic equilibrium” in world politics.
There is currently a fragmented distribution of political power, and there are many challenges for inter-governmental cooperation that lie ahead. The foreign minister’s new doctrine is therefore interesting to examine in light of these issues.
The Jakarta Post spoke with Marty on Dec. 29, 2010, and many important points in Indonesian foreign policy nowadays were discussed. First, international politics is understood in the new doctrine as a state of “dynamic equilibrium” and “cold peace”. The polarities in post-Cold War international politics have shifted, opening up opportunities for strategic cooperation. Therefore, there are many economic and political changes within international politics that can no longer be understood as unipolar.
The dynamic equilibrium concept indicates that there are more possibilities for nations to become new powers in international relations. For Indonesia, this idea allows us to improve our economic and political strength and begin an era of cooperation among the Global South.
Second, dynamic equilibrium is a position of equality among countries in the Global South to cooperate peacefully without having to depend on any forms of hegemony in international politics. As a consequence, Indonesian foreign policy must harness the potential power of developing countries without denying the existence of powers in the “north”. This was reflected in the directions Indonesia’s foreign policy have taken, as formulated by Marty at the beginning of his term.
Third, this doctrine also views the world through the experience of the Cold War and current “cold peace”. Residual forces from the Cold War still exist, but we cannot deny that new forces have arisen in its aftermath. For example, China and India dominate Asian markets and have become emerging forces in regional — and even international — economies. Relations between these forces are not hostile like in the Cold War era, but more competitive, dynamic and non-political.
Fourth, the paradigm of international security nowadays has also shifted in line with the pluralism of the actors. Thus, opportunities for cooperation are wide open. Marty has responded to this situation by increasing economic cooperation within ASEAN member countries and in Asia and the Pacific.
But, the “Natalegawa Doctrine” is not free of criticism. Indonesian foreign policy perspectives lead to a critical question: How can Indonesia compete among the new powers in this post-Cold War era?
The inclusion of Indonesia in the G20, an exclusive group of developed countries, is an achievement of its own. But, this exclusive position must take into account public interests. It is not only about our national interests and acceptance in the international arena, but also in the domestic sphere. The government must also balance its foreign policy with the interests of the wider community.
The government’s vow of all-out diplomacy by involving all stakeholders has come under criticism. But, the realization of this promise is important to make sure that the public pays attention to diplomatic practices and propaganda.
In addition, criticism has also been directed at the government’s style of dealing with international problems. President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono insists on adhering to the tenet “zero enemies, a million friends” when responding, for example, to the border conflict with Malaysia. Some have considered this pragmatic approach unclear.
The “Yudhoyono doctrine” is quite ambiguous. Dynamic equilibrium is established through the strengthening of regional cooperation. It means that foreign policy decision-making emphasizes regionalism — especially in ASEAN. It implies that we should make friends in strategic positions, not with all countries. The criticism of this policy is that it is too fixated on the imagery and spirit of “zero enemies, a million friends”. It is also unclear what Indonesia’s strategic position is at the regional level.
It would be extremely premature to critique the foreign minister’s new foreign policy doctrine. However, constructive criticism should be allowed and public oversight needs to be strengthened in order to match the government’s “all-out diplomacy”. It would be better if the public could observe and control the execution of diplomacy and foreign policy practice, and criticize together if there are any mistakes.
Hopefully, the Natalegawa doctrine can help to offer a new way for Indonesia to achieve power in international politics.
The writer works at the Institute of International Studies at Gadjah Mada University, Yogyakarta.
Challenges for Indonesia as ASEAN chair
Bambang Hartadi Nugroho, Jakarta | Thu, 01/06/2011
A portentous opportunity for the nation to bolster its diplomatic achievements and standing in Southeast Asia has emerged as Indonesia readies itself to take over ASEAN’s rotating chair in 2011.
In 1976, when Indonesia chaired ASEAN, member states produced the Bali Concord I, which was based on the Treaty of Amity and Cooperation (TAC). It laid out the rules of the game for ASEAN and also for other powers that wanted to engage in any form of cooperation with ASEAN.
The recent signing and ratification of this treaty by Japan, China, and the United States further emphasized its importance to ASEAN as well as to the three nations.
Similarly, in 2003, ASEAN produced the Bali Concord II, which initiated the ASEAN Economic Community. Therefore, it is understandable if we expect another breakthrough from Indonesia this time around, probably in the form of a third Bali Concord.
The government of Indonesia under President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono seems enthusiastic and prepared to play a huge role, at least from what we can see on the surface.
If we examine the slogan that Indonesia chose for its chairmanship, ASEAN Community in a Global Community of Nations”, it can be inferred that Indonesia’s leadership over the next 12 months will be more outward-looking.
In the words of government officials, Indonesia will focus on carving a bigger role for ASEAN in international society, using the nation’s advantages as the world’s largest Muslim-majority nation and the only Southeast Asian nation in the G20.
Nevertheless, when we talk about regional cooperation, especially in the form of an organization, we will always face the question of “deepening” versus “widening”.
Deepening means the organization will focus more on internal improvements, such as strengthening its dispute settlement mechanism. Widening usually refers to enlarging membership, organizational roles
or issues covered. These options are not necessarily contradictory, yet priorities have to be set.
For ASEAN, executing both deepening and widening strategies will be very hard, considering the short period of the chairmanship. This means that Indonesia must choose which option to focus on. For those who believe that ASEAN still needs many organizational improvements, then, it will be considerably naïve for ASEAN to widen its role and seek influence externally while not devoting attention and energy to internal development.
If Indonesia focuses on deepening, it will find many unresolved challenges that need to be taken care of very seriously.
To begin with, Indonesia will be faced with the jargon of “people-centered association”, which needs to be translated into real action. Arranging events in which the ASEAN public will be involved is insufficient. Instead, within the aforementioned expression lies a mandate for any form of cooperation made within the framework of ASEAN to done for the benefit of the people.
ASEAN is often criticized for being too elitist. Such criticism is not entirely wrong, because people might feel that the cooperation or negotiations that have been happened inside ASEAN have not necessarily brought advantages to them.
For Indonesia, one immediate regional and national interest should be the protection of migrant workers.
As one of the largest sources of migrant workers, protection and promotion of their rights is Indonesia’s vital interest and needs to be one of the focuses of Indonesian foreign policy in ASEAN. This is also in line with voices from domestic constituents, who have urged the Indonesian government to step up efforts to protect its citizens abroad, including migrant workers.
The Declaration on the Protection and the Promotion of the Rights of Migrant Workers made in Cebu in 2007 is a good start, yet it needs to be closely monitored in execution.
If we look at the implementation of an ASEAN single market, which also includes the free flow of workers, then this issue will not only be the interest of Indonesia, but also of most of ASEAN’s member states. Therefore, as the incoming chair of ASEAN, Indonesia should promote this as one of the most important items on the agenda during its tenure.
Another goal that Indonesia needs to achieve is promotion of democracy and human rights. It is understood that some ASEAN states are, as some say, “in the process of transitioning towards democracy”. Those countries, which are relatively young in terms of ASEAN membership, are looking at other members for examples as to how democracy and human rights can be practiced.
Indonesia is a reference for those young members. Indonesia as one of the founding fathers and the incoming chair of ASEAN must be able to set a good example as to how to practice democracy and how to enforce human rights.
By the end of its tenure as ASEAN chair, Indonesia must be able to report not only to its citizens, but also to all citizens of ASEAN that it has done its best to convert ASEAN’s slogan of a “people-centered association” into people-centered policies.
The time for rhetoric in ASEAN is over. It is time for real action to benefit of the people. Hopefully Indonesia will be able to maximize its role as the chair of ASEAN in 2011.


The writer is an assistant lecturer in International Relations at the University of Indonesia in Depok, West Java.
Building ASEAN anew
C.P.F. Luhulima, Jakarta | Fri, 01/07/2011
Indonesia’s three foremost priorities for its tenure as ASEAN’s chair have been lucidly articulated by Foreign Minister Marty Natalegawa.
The nation must assure that during 2011 substantial progress is made towards realizing the ASEAN Community in 2015; assure ASEAN’s leadership in regional architecture building, specifically to give crucial significance to the East Asia Summit, which has been expanded to include Russia and the US and develop a vision for an ASEAN Community and Global Community of Nations after 2015.
This article will limit itself to Indonesia’s leadership in regional architecture building with ASEAN as a center for such a structural design. “Our capability of including Russia and the United States in the process of thrashing out that regional architecture means creating a dynamic equilibrium,” Marty said.
What will be the major challenges of producing a regional architecture? All sovereign countries will at all times defend their independence and their uniqueness. The pursuit of national interests in a globalized world and particularly within ASEAN should no longer be founded on the concepts of Machiavelli nor of Lord Palmerston, who said nations have no permanent friends, only permanent interests. ASEAN has been built on compromises.
To continue to pursue member states’ national interests is no longer in line with the method of consensus building in ASEAN. What has changed in ASEAN is how people define their interests, and, in particular, the configurations by which they pursue them.
We are not eliminating national interests in ASEAN. But we have agreed that the best way to safeguard our interests is by cooperating with one another. Cooperation has contributed immensely to identifying and realizing ASEAN’s interests.
To avoid misunderstandings, interests have to be put on an equal footing with values and norms. Any foreign policy that is not based on common values and norms as enunciated in the ASEAN Communities Blueprints and the ASEAN Charter should be set aside. The values and norms that we have sanctioned in the charter and its constitutive documents should form the fundamentals of foreign policy.
The foreign policy of every member country should be based on those norms. These values and norms should become the core of our diplomacy and external actions and express our common identity. They should shape Indonesia’s and ASEAN’s stance in its relations with the world, in finding common solutions and in making commitments to create effective multilateral institutions to face new challenges in a globalized world.
To build an ASEAN-centered regional architecture defies simple approaches. An ASEAN architecture that can accommodate larger powers such as India, China, Russia and the US requires a strong Indonesia in a strong ASEAN.
Indonesia can offer only a relatively small counterbalance to India, China, Russia and the US in the game of maintaining a “dynamic equilibrium” in the new architecture.
However, those powers have already committed themselves to ASEAN values and norms by becoming party to the Treaty of Amity and Cooperation in Southeast Asia as a requirement to join the East Asia Summit.
Recognition of ASEAN, and of Indonesia as primus inter pares, should be capitalized upon in initiating and constructing that visualized ASEAN-led regional architecture. As in the case of building ASEAN, such a regional architecture should also acknowledge cooperation among equals as a fundamental safeguard for their members’ interests.
Indonesia will initiate and shape that architecture during its chairmanship, as Marty specified, but the nation must realize that its leadership will only last one year.
Other smaller member countries will have to take over the venture in the years following Indonesia’s chairmanship. They will also have to manage ASEAN’s internal affairs and timelines to accomplish ASEAN’s community building by 2015 to sustain and further develop that architecture.
This means ASEAN must at the same time be supported by a strong regional institution to tackle regional issues and necessitate national adaptations to regional requirements, regional norms.
Managing and fulfilling ASEAN’s objectives with clearly set timelines requires a dedicated and autonomous regional institution. Thus ASEAN member states energies will be free to embark upon the bigger task of structuring a huge regional architecture. An ASEAN Secretariat will no longer be able to handle those tasks because of its inherent institutional character.
It is, thus, to set free the energy of ASEAN member countries to build that regional architecture that the ASEAN Secretariat must be developed into a more autonomous institution.
The secretariat must enable ASEAN to focus its energies more on the strategic importance of constructing that new Asia Pacific architecture and delegating non-strategic issues and decisions in ASEAN’s agenda of community building to the ASEAN Commission.
ASEAN’s current secretary-general, because of his prominence, can be designated as the commission’s chairman or president.
A redesign of the ASEAN Secretariat into an ASEAN Commission will reflect ASEAN’s shift from a regional forum for ministerial diplomacy into one of summit diplomacy and summit decisions.
This shift has, since 1992, with the initiation of AFTA and later agreements, taken authority away from the ASEAN Ministerial Meetings.
It is this transformation into a redesigned organizational structure that will enable ASEAN to sustain the efforts of structuring a regional architecture for the greatest benefit to the region, Southeast Asia and East Asia.
 The writer is a senior researcher at the Indonesian Institute of Sciences’ Center for Political Studies.
True, key facts in RI tourism
Turman Siagian, Jakarta | Tue, 02/16/2010
Taking notice of an opinion by Anak Agung Gde Agung entitled: Indonesia’s tourism — a national tragedy, published in Jan. 21, 2010, we would like to clarify some points.

First, we would like to provide a summary of key statistics on total tourist arrivals in Indonesia. It was shown that between 1995 and 2007 tourist arrivals in Indonesia fluctuated from between 4.4 to 5.3 million. The figure was seriously impacted by a series of tragedies, such as terrorism, earthquakes, tsunamis and epidemic diseases.
In 1997 we recorded the arrival of 5.18 million tourists. A year later, the economic crisis that was followed by a multidimensional crisis that contributed to the decline of visitor arrivals to 4.6 million.
The figure, however, gradually increased in the next three years, booking significant growth in 1999 (4.72 million), in 2000 (5.06 million) and in 2001 (5.15 million).

However, the number of foreign tourists decreased after the World Trade Center attacks in September 2001, which recorded a significant decline in visitor arrivals in Indonesia as well as in other countries. In 2002, 5.03 million tourists visited the country.
In the years following, the tourism industry in Indonesia has faced several major threats. Since 2002, travel warnings have been issued by a number of countries over terrorist threats and incidents in some areas in Indonesia that significantly reduced the number of foreign visitors. The bombing in Bali in 2002 was a major blow to the tourism sector, reducing visitor arrivals to 4.46 million in 2003.

Government and stakeholders have since then worked hand in hand, along with the support of other countries and NGOs to recover Indonesia’s tourism sector. A year later, in 2004, tourist arrivals increased to 5.32 million, marking the highest number of tourist arrivals in Indonesia.
But bombing incidents have occurred almost every year since then, again worsening the Indonesian tourism sector. The 2004 Australian Embassy bombing and the second Bali bombing in October 2005,
along with the December 2004 tsunami the Yogyakarta earthquake and the bird flu outbreak in 2005, caused tourist arrivals to decrease to 5.02 million in 2005 and 4.87 million in 2006.

Through various campaigns, the number of foreign tourist arrivals bounced back in 2007, booking an influx of 5.5 million tourists. The Visit Indonesian Year (VIY) 2008 campaign contributed to the increase of tourist arrivals to 6.42 million in 2008 — the highest ever in the country — contributing US$7.3 billion in tourism revenue. The VIY campaign also stimulated the growth of domestic tourists, at 225 million, who spent around Rp 123.17 trillion. The 2008 performance shows the significant growth of 16.4 percent from the previous year, the best result within ASEAN and the Asia-Pacific, which recorded growth of 10.26 percent and 3.48 percent, respectively.  
In 2009, despite the global economic crisis, with the general elections at home and the July 2009 JW Marriott-Ritz Carlton bombing, Indonesia’s tourism managed to show resistance, recording 6.4 million tourist arrivals.

Second, there was the government’s policy to develop Bali as a tourism icon. The government issued in 1972 a master plan for the Development of Tourism in Bali, making Bali the model for future tourism development for the rest of the country. This policy was also meant to attract international visitors to other destinations in regions from Sabang to Merauke. Programs, such as “Bali and Beyond” in 1990 and “Bali + 10”, were drawn up to support the development of other tourist destinations.
The government issued a ministerial regulation in 2007, determining 10 leading destinations, namely North Sulawesi, South Sulawesi, West Sumatra, East Nusa Tenggara, West Nusa Tenggara, North Sumatra, South Sumatra, Riau Islands, East Kalimantan and West Papua. The 10 destinations, with diverse characteristics and resources, were stimulated to develop their tourism potential.

Third, in the development of destinations outside Bali and Java, there are important matters to be considered: infrastructure, budget limitations and human resources.
Indonesia with a vast region and diverse ethnic group and culture — in other words, with the abundance of tourism potential — needs more effort and budget to promote and manage its tourism potential.

Fourth, it needs a brand image. We have to admit that neighboring Malaysia, Thailand and Singapore have succeeded in promoting their tourism by means of their international brandings, with the support of an adequate budget.
We have the “Indonesia Ultimate in Diversity”, and the strategy to promote our potential, but our promotional budget has been limited. In 2007 for example, Malaysia’s tourism promotional budget was $100 million, Singapore allocated $90 million, while we only had $15 million.

The government has introduced the 2010–2014 Tourism Development Plan, which no longer focuses on the number of foreign tourist arrivals, but more on the priorities below:
The development of tourism-human resources, quantitatively and qualitatively.
Tourism contribution on national revenue.
New investment quantities in the tourism industry.
Domestic tourism expenditure.
Revenue/foreign exchange earnings.
Based on the above facts and figures, we would like to inform that Indonesia’s tourism should not be compared with other countries for we face different situations that need special responses, policies and strategies.
The writer is a chief spokesman at the Culture and Tourism Ministry.

AUNG SAN SUU KYI – PEJUANG KONSISTEN BIRMA “TANPA KEKERASAN”

Kolom IBRAHIM ISA
Rabu, 05 Januari 2011
-----------------------------

AUNG SAN SUU KYI – PEJUANG KONSISTEN
BIRMA “TANPA KEKERASAN”

Aung San Suu Kyi (lahir: 19 Agustus 1945) -- adalah pejuang konsisten demi demokrasi dan hak-hak azasi manusia Birma. Ia teguh mempertahankan prinsip 'tanpa kekerasan' dalam perjuangan untuk demokrasi dan hak-hak manusia. Tokoh Aung San Suu Kyi adalah lambang dan ispirator perjuangan demi kebebasan, baik untuk Birma, maupun bagi mancanegara. Ia demikian populernya di dunia internasional, sehingga media mancanegara pernah menyatakan bahwa popularitas Aung San Suu Kyi sebagai pejuang demokrasi dan hak-hak manusia mendekati popularitas pejuang dan negarawan Afrika Selatan, Nelson Mandela.

Berbeda dengn Nelson Mandela yang memilih cara perjuangan seperti yang dilakukan oleh tokoh pemimpin perjuangan kemerdekaan India, Jawaharlal Nehru, -- ketimbang cara perjuangan Gandhi dengan prinsip 'non-violence'-nya. Mandela menganggap bahwa cara perjuangan 'tanpa kekerasan', adalah taktik perjuangan semata, ---- Aung San Suu Kyi memilih cara perjuangan 'tanpa-kekerasan', 'non-violence', sebagai prinsip perjuangan. Aung San Suu Kyi agak panjang lebar menjelaskan mengapa ia memilih cara perjuangan 'tanpa-kekerasan'. Hal itu disiarkannya di internet dalam sebuah siaran 'Youtube'.

* * *

Sejak berkuasanya junta militer Ne Win, gerakan politik di bawah pimpinan Aung San Suu Kyi, terus menerus ditindas dengan kekerasan. Pemilihan Umum Birma (27 Mei 1990) yang mutlak dimenangkan oleh 'National League For Democracy' yang didirikan dan dipimpinnya sendiri (didirikan pada 19 September 1988), samasekali tidak digubris oleh penguasa. Aung San Suu Kyi malah tetap dipenjarakan.

November, 2010 y.l Aung San Suu Kyi bebas dari tahanan rumah bertahun-tahun lamnya oleh rezim militer Birma. Sejak itu seakan-akan tidak terdengar apa-apa lagi mengenai kegiatan pejuang konsisten Aung San Suu Kyi. Ada suara yang mengkhawatirkan Aung San Suu Kyi akan 'berkompromi' dengan penguasa militer. Yang akibatnya akan merugikan gerakan dan perjuangan untuk demokrasi di Birma.

Tetapi nyatanya 'seruan' Aung San Suu Kyi menawarkan 'dialog' dengan penguasa junta militer dengan 'rekonsiliasi nasional' sebagai agendanya, berkali-kali ditolak oleh rezim junta militer Birma. Selanjutnya tidak terdengar lagi berita yang mengkhawatirkan bahwa dibebaskannya Aung San Suu Kyi dari tahanan rumah sejak November 2010, akan digunakan oleh penguasa militer untuk melakukan penindasan yang lebih kejam lagi. Sikap junta militer tetap seperti selama ini: 'menganggap sepi' Srikandi Birma itu, seolah-olah ia tidak eksis.

Meskipun dipersekusi, dipenjarakan, diperlakukan demikian 'bias' oleh penguasa, Suu Kyi tetap menantang: “Saya berharap bisa sama-sama minum téh dengan mereka, (maksudnya para jendral junta, I.I.) pada setiap hari Sabtu. Sama-sama minum teh dengan santai dan bersahabat”. -- Bila mereka menolak terus, maka, “bisa diajak bicara pada suatu minum kopi bersama”. Kata Suu Kyi dalam sebuah wawancara.

Sikap Suu Kyi, seperti yang dikatakannya, adalah sbb:
“PRIORITAS UTAMA SAYA, ialah, agar rakyat menyadari bahwa mereka sendiri punya kekuatan untuk mengadakan perubahan itu. Kemudian sama-sama kita bisa berbuat ”.

Selama duapuluh tahun belakangan ini di kalangan kaum demokrat Birma telah tumbuh generasi muda yang siap melakukan perjuangan demi demokrasi dan hak-hak manusia. Namun, mereka tidak selalu seia-sekata dengan Suu Kyi dan NLD. Sikap kaum muda ini, antara lain akibat sikap pimpinan NLD yang fikirannya dianggap sudah tidak nyambung lagi dengan situasi kongrit Birma. Malah mereka itu sering terlibat dalam pertikaian intern mereka sendiri. Tampaknya tugas Suu Kyi sehubungan dengan NDL, yang terdekat, ialah mengadakan 'perubahan dan perombakan' dalam partainya sebagai alat perjuangan. Agar sesuai dengan situasi dan tugas-tugas baru perjuangan.

Anjuran NDL dan Suu Kyi agar kaum demokrat baru itu memboikot 'pemilu' yang diadakan di bawah syarat kekuasaan ketat junta, itu ditolak oleh kaum muda. Kaum demokrat tsb tokh ikut ambil bagian dalam 'pemilu' November 2010 y.l. Dengan 'pemilu' tsb junta militer sesumbar bahwa dengan terbentruknya 'parlemen hasil pemilu', kemudian akan berdiri suatu
'' pemerintah sipil” di Birma. Tentunya tanpa Suu Kyi dan NDL. Betapapun Suu Kyi harus mempertimbangkan situasi ini.

Suu Kuyi menaruh perhatian besar pada generasi muda dalam perjuangan demokrasi. Beliau mengisahkan betapa kaum muda dewasa ini sangat aktif memanfaatkan komunikasi eletronik. Mereka menggunakan misalnya, media Facebook, untuk berkomunikasi dan melakukan perdebatan politik serta mengadakan hubungn internasional.

“Tahukah Anda, (dewasa ini) segala sesuatu muncul di media internet”, tanya
Suu Kyi pada wartawan yang mewawancarainya.

* * *

Aung San Suu Kyi menyadari bahwa begitu junta militer merasa Suu Kyi yang bebas itu merupakan bahaya serius bagi kekuasaan mereka, maka para jendral itu dengan kekuasaan dan kekerasan di tangan mereka akan bertindak terhadap Aung San Suu Kyi dan NDL yang dipimpinnya. Sehubungan dengan kemungkinan itu Suu Kyi menyatakan (dalam suatu percakapan dengan wartawan majalah “Time”), sbb:

“Saya akan berbuat sebanyak mungkin sebisa saya, selama saya masih bebas. Saya tidak mau melelahkan diri, tetapi kita tak akan tau berapa banyak waktu yang kita miliki”.

Aung San Suu Kyi tidak menutup mata terhadap kemungkinan bahwa penguasa tidak akan berhenti dengan pelbagai cara dan usaha untuk menggunakan tangan besi. Dan akan lagi-lagi memenjarakannya.

Bahkan tidak mustahil penguasa akan menggunakan berbagai cara untuk membunuhnya. Bahaya ini riil. Sudah tiga kali muncul 'preman-preman' melakukan serangan pada Suu Kyi dan pendukung-pendukungnya.

Salah seorang pimpinan NDL, Win Htein, bercerita bahwa pernah diajukan kepada Suu Kyi untuk menggunakan fest anti-peluru bila keluar rumah. Suu Kyi menjawab: “Saya tidak pernah bermimpi menggunakannya (pakai fest anti-peluru). Kalau saya berbuat demikian akan terkesan bahwa saya hendak melindungi diri terhadap rakyat yang mendukung saya”.

Demikianlah. Profil pejuang tangguh Birma, Aung San Suu Kyi. Konsisten dan berani. Berpegag teguh pada prisnip perjuangan yang dianutnya selama ini. Aung San Suu Kyi adalah seorang Srikandi, -- suri teladan dalam perjuangan demi keadilan dan kebebasan bangsa dan negerinya.


* * *

NOAM CHOMSKY Mengenai TIONGKOK

IBRAHIM ISA – Berbagi Cerita
Sabtu, 01 Januari 2011
------------------------------------------

NOAM CHOMSKY Mengenai TIONGKOK


Ketika kubuka computer pada pagi hari tangal 1 Januari 2011 ini, kujumpai kiriman sahabatku, penulis Singapura, MAY SWAN. Kiriman itu adalah (partial transcript – translation courtesy of Global Voices Online), wawancara cendekiawan AS Noam Chomsky. Wawancara Noam Chomsky itu adalah dengan media Guangdong (Canton), “Southern Metropolitan Daily”, mengenai TIONGKOK. Dalam bahasa Inggris.

Pada tanggal 12 Agustus 2010 Noam Chomsky memberikan ceramah di Universitas Beijing. Judul ceramahnya : “Lika-liku Orde Dunia: Kontinuitas dan Perubahan. Isinya terutama mengenai dua macam ancaman terhadap dunia. Yaitu peperangan nuklir dan perusakan lingkungan”.

Yang kupublikasikan di bawah ini ialah bagian dari pandangan Noam Chomsky mengenai Tiongkok. Seperti yang dikemukakannya dalam wawancaranya dengan “Southern Metropolitan Daily”.

* * *

Trankrip singkat wawancara Chomsky itu cukup menarik. Pembaca tidak akan menemukan tanggapan Chomsky mengenai pertanyaan apakah Tiongkok masih merupakan negara sosialis ataukah sudah terjadi 'restorasi kepitalisme', dan 'soal-soal teoretis dan ideologis' lainnya, dst, dst, dst.

Namun, pandangan realis, praktis serta kritis Noam Chomsky mengenai Tiongkok bisa menggugah pembaca – agar berusaha melihat Tiongkok dengan mempertimbangkan pandangan lain.

Kuterjemahkan sebisaku wawancara Noam Chomsky mengenai Tiongkok ke dalam bahasa Indonesia. Mudah-mudahan membantu untuk melihat Tiongkok dengan mempertimbangkan pandangan kritis seorang sarjana piawai Amerika. Membandingkannya dengan banyak kesimpulan di mancanegara mengenai Tiongkok. Baik yang pro maupun yang kontra.

Chomsky dikenal di mancanegara dan dunia pengetahuan, sebagai orang yang berpandangan Kiri. Progresif. Yang pro-kemerdekaan bangsa-bangsa. Dan yang keras dan tajam anti-imperialisme. Aku tertarik dengan kenyataan bahwa sarjana kritis ini berkunjung ke Tiongkok. Sebelum berkunjung ke negeri itu, Chomsky dengan teliti dan kritis mengikuti perkembangan Tiongkok. Ini bisa kita saksikan dari wawancaranya itu.

* * *

Beberapa fokus dari pandangan Noam Chomsky mengenai Tiongkok:

“Tiongkok seyogianya bertanya pada diri sendiri peranan macam apa yang ingin dimainkannya di dunia. Syukur, Tiongkok tidak memainkan peranan sebagai agresor dengan anggaran belanja militer yang besar, dsb.

Menjawab pertanyaan apakah Tiongkok akan mengubah Orde Dunia. Apakah Tiongkok akan memainkan peranan seperti Amerika Serikat sekarang?

Chomsky:
“Saya kira tidak! Saya juga tidak berharap demikian. Apakah Anda benar menginginkan Tiongkok memiliki 800 pangkalan militer di seberang lautan, menginvasi dan menggulingkan pemerintah negeri lain, atau melakukan tindakan teroris? Ini apa yang dilakukan Amerika sekarang. Saya kira ini tidak mungkin dan tidak bisa dilakukan oleh Tiongkok. Saya juga tidak berharap hal itu terjadi. Tiongkok sudah mengubah dunia.

“Tiongkok sedang berkembang, tetapi tak ada bukti-bukti bahwa perkembangan internnya akan mengancam Barat. Apa yang merupakan ancaman terhadap AS bukanlah perkembangan yang berlaku di Tiongkoik, tetapi adalah kebebasannya. Itulah yang merupakan tantangan.

* * *

Di bawah ini adalah catatan sebagian dari wawancara Noam Chomsky dengan media Guangdong, “Southern Metropolitan Daily”, ttg 22 Agustus 2010, sbb:

Southern Metropolitan Daily (SMD):
Sebagian terbesar orang Tiongkok telah menerima globalisasi. Selama tigapuluh tahun belakangan ini, terutama setelah Tiongkok masuk WTO, banyak orangTiongkok telah banyak memanfaatkannya. Tetapi tampaknya Anda melihat globalisasi dalam sorotan suram.

Chomsky: Hasil-hasil ekonomi yang telah dicapai Tiongkok sedikit sangkut pautnya dengan globalisasi. Kaitannya adalah dengan perdagangan dan ekspor. Tiongkok berangsur-angsur menjadi negeri yang berorientasi ekspor. Tak seorangpun, termasuk saya, menentang ekspor. Tetapi ini bukan globalisasi. Kenyataannya Tiongkok telah menjadi pabrik di dalam sistim produksi Asia Timur Laut. Bila dilihat seluruh regio tsb, kita akan menemukan sistim tsb sangat dinamis. Volume ekspor Tiongkok luar biasa. Tetapi ada sesuatu yang luput dari pandangan kita. Ekspor Tiongkok berat bersandar pada ekspor Jepang, Korea dan AS. Negeri-negeri ini memberikan Tiongkok komponen-komponen teknik-tinggi (hightech) dan teknologi. Tiongkok hanya melakukan perakitan, kemudian memberikan cap 'Made in China'.

“Tiongkok berkembang pesat sekali dengan mengikuti politik-politik yang bijaksana. Di satu fihak jutaan diangkat dari kemiskinan, tetapi, di lain fihak, ongkos-ongkos seperti perusakan lingkungan adalah sangat tinggi. Dan itu hanya ditransfer pada generasi berikutnya. Para ekonom tak mempedulikannya, tetapi itu adalah ongkos-ongkos yang akhirnya harus ada yang melunasinya. Mungkin itu adalah anak-anak kalian atau cucu-cucu kalian. Itu semua tak ada sangkut-pautnya dengan globalisasi dan WTO.

SMD: Apakah Anda berpendapat bahwa bangkitnya Tiongkok akan mengubah orde dunia. Apakah Tiongkok akan memainkan peranan seperti yang dimainkan Amerika sekarang?

Chomsky: “Saya kira tidak; saya juga tidak berharap demikian. Apakah Anda benar-benar berharap melihat Tiongkok dengan 800 pangkalan militer di seberang lautan, menginvasi dan menggulingkan pemerintah-pemerintah lain, atau melakukan tindakan teror? Ini apa yang dilakukan oleh Amerika sekarang. Saya kira hal ini tidak akan dan tidak mungkin dilakukan Tiongkok. Saya juga tidak menginginkan hal ini terjadi. Tiongkok sudah mengubah dunia. Tiongkok dan bersama India meliputi jumlah lebih separuh penduduk dunia. Mereka sedang tumbuh dan berkembang. Tapi secara relatif, kemakmuran mereka hanyalah merupakan sebagian kecil saja dari kekayaan dunia. Kedua negeri tsb masih akan menempuh jalan panjang dan akan menghadapi banyak masalah serius dalam negeri, yang saya harap akan dipecahkan berangsur-angsur. Tak ada gunanya untuk membanding-bandingkan pengaruh global mereka, dengan pengaruh negeri-negeri kaya. Harapan saya ialah, bahwa mereka akan memberikan pengaruh positif terhadap dunia, tetapi itu harus dicermati dengan hati-hati.

“Tiongkok harus bertanya pada diri sendiri, peranan apa yang (hendak) dimainkannya di dunia ini. Untung, Tiongkok tidak memainkan peranan sebagai agresor dengan anggaran militer yang besar, dsb.

Tetapi Tiongkok punya peranan yang harus dimainkannya. Ia merupakan sumber kosumer besar, dan terdapat yang pro dan yang menentangnya. Misalnya, Brazilia akan menarik keuntungan ekonomi bila ia mengekspor ke Tiongkok. Di segi lain, ekonominya juga akan mengalami kerusakan. Untuk negeri-negeri dengan sumber luar biasa seperti Brazilia dan Peru, ada satu masalah, ialah, bahwa mereka bersandar pada ekspor sumber-sumber utama. Hal mana bukan merupakan model perkembangan yang baik. Untuk mengubah cara perkembangan mereka, pertama-tama mereka harus memecahkan masalah domestik mereka. Mengubah diri mereka menjadi produsen-produsen, tidak hanya mengekspor bahan-bahan ekspor utama kepada negeri-negeri lain.

SMD: Apakah sukses yang dicapai Tiongkok itu meruapakan ancaman bagi demokrasi Barat?

Chomsky: Baikllah kita bikin perbandingan historis. Apakah bangkitnya Amerika Serikat merupakan ancaman terhadap Inggris yang demokratik? AS didirikan dengan membantai penduduk bumiputera dan dengan sistim perbudakan. Apakah model ini cocok untuk negeri-negeri lain? Apakah Anda inginTiongkok belajar dari model ini? Benar, bahwa AS berkembang menjadi negeri demokrasi yang kuat di banyak segi, tetapi demokrasi AS itu tidak dikembangkan dari model ini, yang setiap manusia rasionil tidak ingin menirunya.

“Tiongkok berkembang, tetapi tak ada bukti yang menunjukkan bahwa perkembangan internnya menyebabkan suatu ancaman bagi Barat. Apa yang menantang AS bukanlah perkembangan Tiongkok, tetapi kebebasannya. Itulah yang merupakan ancaman riil.

“Anda bisa melihat dari setiap berita utama bahwa fokus politik luarnegeri AS sekarang ini adalah Iran. Tahun 2010 dikatakan 'Tahun Iran'. Iran digambarkan sebagai ancaman terhadap politik luarnegeri AS dan orde dunia. AS telah memaksakan sanski unilateral yang keras, tetapi Tiongkok tidak mengikuti AS. Tiongkok tidak pernah mengekor AS. Sebaliknya, Tiongkok mendukung sanksi PBB, yang sangat lemah, dan tak ada arti samasekali. Beberapa hari sebelum saya berangkat ke Tiongkok, Kementerian LN Amerika memperingatkan Tiongkok dengan cara yang menarik. Dikatakan oleh AS bahwa Tiongkok harus memikul tanggungjawab internasional, yaitu, mematuhi perintah AS. Ini adalah tanggungjawab internasional Tiongkok.

Ini adalah imperialisme tulen. Bahwa negeri lain harus bertindak menurut keinginan kita. Bila tidak, maka mereka tidak bertanggungjawab. Saya kira pejabat-pejabat Kementerian Luangeri Tiongkok akan tertawa bila mereka dengar hal itu. Tetapi itu adalah logika standar imperialisme. Kenyataannya, Iran menjadi ancaman karena ia tidak mau mematuhi perintah AS.

Tiongkok merupakan ancaman yang lebih besar, karena, adalah problim besar bila sebuah negara besar menolak melakukan perintah-perintah.

Inilah tantangan yang benar-benar dihadapi oleh AS. * * *