Rondinelli, D. A. 1990, Decentralization, territorial power and the state: a critical response, Development and Change, vol. 21, pp. 491-500.
Yogyakarta Collective Movements and Identity in Post-Suharto Indonesia:
A Case Study in Javanese Ethnic Nationalism
David Efendi ASAN 627-Ethnic Nationalism
Professor C. Clayton
ABSTRACT
When the New Order regime was in power in Indonesia from 1965 to 1998, the Javanese ethnic group held a dominant and hegemonic position of power. This position changed dramatically when Suharto’s
regime fell in 1998. Non-Javanese ethnicities have demanded, and often gained, their own opportunities and voices in politics nationwide. At the same time, protest movements and violence tragically became a
widespread means for expressing grievances. Most riots occurred outside of Java.
This article analyzes existing literature and provides supplementary data from fieldwork interviews of participants in protest movements in Yogyakarta,Indonesia. This case shows that: 1 Javanese ethnic
superiority are changing during and after Suharto; 2 local-ethnic identity and cultural resources have become effective and legitimate means for mobilizing people to participate in protest movements supporting
the privileged status of Yogyakarta Special Region; and 3 cultural resources are themselves constructed,
invented, contested, and politicized by certain communities to defend the “public interest” as defined by those communities.
A. INTRODUCTION
Political reforms in 1998 opened Indonesia up to a number of changes. The media, for instance, gained the freedom to disseminate news to the public without overt state
censorship. This freedom has enabled many Indonesians to understand what is happening in their country, but there are still too few media channels to enlighten the
society and to facilitate peaceful conflict resolution. Most news stories only stop at the fact that violent uprisings occur nationwide. These incomplete stories actually tend to
make people unsettled by the current conditions. Thus, Indonesia’s current political landscape not only involves problems of political sovereignty and economic development,
but also cultural sovereignty, local identity and national unity.
When the New Order of Suharto was in power in Indonesia from 19965 to 1998, the Javanese ethnicity held both direct and indirect power
. Since the collapse of Suharto’s government in 1998, non-Javanese ethnicities have demanded their own opportunities
and voices through reforms that focus on self-governance and greater involvement in politics nationwide. At the same time, protests and violence have become widespread
phenomena for expressing grievances, with riots occuring generally outside Java during this period. Social scientists both from Indonesia and overseas have concluded that
Indonesia is an unfinished nation state Lane 2008; see also Hadiz 2010, with fragile nationalism that is Javanese-centric Aspinal; Tsing; Geertz 1964. During the New Order
regime, the Javanese were the dominant ethnic group socially and politically, though there are hundreds of ethnic groups nationwide. Both in the Old Order and New Order
regimes, Javanese tradition and culture held hegemonic sway over the everyday politics of the state in an uncontested position. Moreover, during the 32 years of the Suharto era,
there was a mutually reinforcing relationship of power relation between the State and the
cultural practice of Javanese tradition, as can be seen in Suharto’s choice of the Sultan of Yogyakajrta as vice president of Indonesia. Such Javanese domination can likewise
be seen in the offices of the president, ministers, state bureaucrats, governors, and regional heads during the same period. Governors, mayors, and regional heads were
Javanese and appointed by the president, even in areas outside Java. This project of Javanization workd hand-in-hand with modernization, nationalism, and the state ideology
of Pancasila to consolidate the influence of the outer island of Java as a center of power.
However, this policy also led to serious problems once the Javanese became a “common enemy” of marginalized ethnic groups during the reform era.
In response to dramatic political changes after the fall of Suharto, the Yogyanese have smartly used their collective and historical superiority to demand and maintain their
special status of Yogyakarta by mobilizing people and cultural resources in opposition to the democratization project led by the Central government. Moreover, the fact of
Javanese superiority during the course of Indonesia’s history has been constructed and invented as a new tool for negotiations with the national government. I argue that regime
change, whether to or from an authoritarian or democratic status quo, will involve social and political change, and traditional and indigenous groups are among those that are
most strongly impacted. Some groups accept such changes, and others refuse them. Yogyakarta has experienced this kind of problem concerning the contestable meanings
of democracy and identity.
The situation in Yogyakarta is similar to that of the Hawaiians, Maori, Sinegal, and the Mayans in Mexico, each of which is trying to maintain their local identity and traditional
beliefs despite state domination and institutionalized policies of assimilation. Marginalized
groups in Indonesia, such as those of the outer islands, called suku terasing “alien tribes”
including the Tengger, Naga, Samin, and Bawean, as well as traditional spiritual groups, are often victimized by projects of state nationalism that attempt to integrate such
communities into the state administration. In the case of the Outer Java islands, to mention a few, Mauritus has been convincingly described by the ethnographer Anna
Lowenhaupt Tsing in her book In the Realm of the Diamond Queen 1993, and Dayak has been described under the title Friction: An Ethnography of Global Connection 2004.
These case studies are examples of how state authority caused communities to lose their sovereignty and cultural dignity. Yogyakarta was the only exception, as it had never been
marginalized by such state projects until after Suharto’s regime ended. To sum up, this paper aims to examine Javanese ethnic nationalism in Yogyakarta
Special Region in the Post-Suharto era. Some issues that are addressed in this connection include 1 how the Javanese keep and negotiate their superiority and
domination after the collapse of Suharto, who used a Javanese concept of power in maintaining his power for 32 years; 2 how the Javanese ethnicity has created collective
identity and collective action based upon traditions, myths, rituals, and ancestral legacies in opposition to the central government; and 3 how people transform collective identity
into collective movements. In so doing, we will employ theories of ethnicity, nationalism, and ethnic nationalism, as well as theories of social movements.
B. METHODOLOGY
