Salim Said and Indonesian Military Politics

Salim Said is known and praised for his independence as a researcher and observer of politics, especially military politics.

Indonesia lost one of its important intellectual-activists: Salim Haji Said. He passed away in Jakarta on Saturday afternoon, May 18, 2024.

Salim Haji Said or Salim Said pays very serious attention to the role of the military in Indonesian politics. In the book Indonesian Military and Politics: Now and in the Future (2001), Salim Said sees the military's political role still and will continue to exist for some time in Indonesia . Looking at the latest Indonesian political phenomena, this observation is very difficult to refute.

The political role of the military

There are two main factors as to why the military has difficulty staying out of Indonesian politics. Firstly, there is the army's self-image. According to him, the military not only feels entitled but also obligated to be involved in politics.

The main factor that drives the Indonesian National Army (TNI) to always have a desire to enter politics is the belief among their own ranks that civilians are not capable enough to manage the country. Civilians are very vulnerable to division. Only they themselves (the military) are able to protect the integrity of the nation and the state.

According to Salim Said, perception can be minimized if the civil strength demonstrates good performance. When the reformation took place, where all criticisms were addressed to the New Order, there began to emerge an awareness that during the New Order, the military not only was not capable of managing the country well, they even became merely tools of an authoritarian regime. This awareness aided the democratization process and the transition to civil supremacy tended to run smoothly.

Also read: Salim Said Dies, Indonesia Loses Press Figure and Military Political Expert

The second factor is the balance of military and civilian political relations. Salim Said believes that this balance is the reason why military politics still continues to emerge in Indonesia, even though its form may change over time. The key term is the structure of political opportunities. Its involvement always exists, but its form varies.

In an interview with the daily Republika, June 14 1999, Salim Said stated:

"When we talk about civil-military relations in Indonesia, we talk at two levels. At the legal-constitutional level, it is clear that in Indonesia there is civil supremacy. This means that the person chosen by the people is the one who has power, including power over the TNI, in accordance with Article 10 of the 1945 Constitution.

Meanwhile, in the political realm, it is a fact that since the beginning of independence, the TNI has played a political role. Even without the Dwifungsi doctrine and the "Middle Way," they have had a political role.

Because of this, Salim Said believes that the threat of the return of military power to politics will never truly disappear.

The role of the military, according to Salim Said, does not depend solely on the will of the generals and high-ranking TNI officers, but on the dialectical relationship between the forces in society and the military itself. Entering the reform era, the military formally separated itself from politics by revoking ABRI's dual function since 20 April 2000 through a speech by TNI Commander Admiral Widodo Adisubroto.

This incident, according to Salim Said, is considered as one of the three most important events in modern Indonesian history after the proclamation of independence and the collapse of the Old Order.

The revocation of ABRI's dual function, for Salim Said, was not primarily due to the civilian reform movement, but rather occurred because of Soeharto's loss of financial ability to finance the stick and carrot politics that had been going on for so long. This applies to the military. Apart from that, Suharto's divisive politics in the military made the army less solid and lost its enthusiasm to maintain political supremacy.

Therefore, Salim Said believes that the threat of the military's return to politics has never truly disappeared. However, as long as the strength of civil politics remains solid, coupled with the international community's intolerance for formal military involvement in politics, civilian supremacy in Indonesian politics is likely to still be able to endure.

Kompas

Indonesia lost a prominent national press figure, who was also a military observer, Salim Said. He passed away on Saturday (18/5/2024) at 19.33 WIB, after being treated at Cipto Mangunkusumo Hospital, Jakarta. Salim was born in Parepare, South Sulawesi, on November 10, 1943. The professor at the Defense University began his career as a journalist. Salim started his career in journalism as an editor at several media outlets, such as Pelopor Baru, Angkatan Bersenjata, and as a journalist for Tempo magazine. Farewell Salim Said. Your service and dedication will always be remembered by the press community and Indonesian people.

Gestapu

The event of the transition of power from the Old Order to the New Order was the main focus of Salim Said's attention throughout his academic career. He was a young journalist when the night of the massacre of generals and high-ranking Army officers occurred on September 30, 1965. Working for the daily Armed Forcesbrought him very close to the main actors in the tensions before and after that event.

As a journalist, he recorded in detail every piece of events he experienced firsthand or heard from first-hand sources in the bodies of high-ranking military officers and activists, especially from the anti-communist circles. It was the notes and memories of those events that made Salim Said's conclusions feel different from the general conclusions of observers and researchers of the 1965 tragedy, both from the official conclusions of the New Order regime and the Cornell Paper written by Ben Anderson and Ruth McVey.

If the official explanation of the New Order deems the PKI as the sole actor in the September 30th movement (Gestapu), the Cornell Paper instead claims that the incident was purely an internal conflict within the Indonesian Armed Forces. Simplifications, such as the notion that the event was orchestrated solely by the Indonesian Communist Party (PKI), PKI as the only victim, Soeharto as the main perpetrator of the coup, the involvement of CIA agents, and so forth, do not appear in Salim Said's analysis.

Also read: Rejecting the return of ABRI's dual function

For example, he stated how the atmosphere of discomfort was created by the PKI and its supporting organizations, which carried out intimidation movements against political opponents. In the field of arts that he also engaged in, he witnessed how the Lekra cultural group did what Pramoedya Ananta-Toer called "eliminating" groups of artists whom they accused of being "counterrevolutionary and supporters of Nekolim."

In 1964, President Soekarno banned the Cultural Manifesto, an artistic gesture from non-communist groups. This prohibition was then followed up by Lekra activists and PKI sympathizers to close the movement of the signers of the Cultural Manifesto. The PKI people themselves created a mocking acronym for the manifesto: Manikebu or Manikebo.

In several writings, Salim Said stated that for those living in Indonesia in the two to three years leading up to 1965, it would be easy to declare that the kidnapping of army officers was carried out by the Indonesian Communist Party (PKI).

The notes and memories from those events are what make Salim Said's conclusions feel different from typical observers and researchers of the 1965 tragedy.

According to him, the incident occurred in a typical political setting where various factors were involved. These factors, among others, include military doctrine, PKI propaganda, international events, the ganyang Malaysia movement, and even Soekarno's efforts to co-opt the critically perceived political power of the Army in the Nasakom concept. In fact, in Salim Said's analysis, the possibility of Soekarno's involvement in the Gestapu incident is quite open.

At that time, according to him, the kidnapping of figures often occurred for what is referred to as "pendaulatan." Supporters of Soekarno, especially the PKI, considered the Army officers led by A Yani to not be too loyal to Soekarno. However, at the same time, it was not easy for Soekarno to dismiss Yani. Therefore, the possibility of replacement was carried out in another way, namely through "pendaulatan."

This argument is quite reasonable considering that the kidnapping was carried out by Cakrabirawa troops led by the president's own security guard, Lt. Col. Untung. However, the kidnapping event that ended in the massacre of the generals is very likely not in the scenario.

KOMPAS/RONY ARIYANTO NUGROHO

Military observer and researcher Salim Haji Said (third from the right) during the press conference of the Achmad Bakrie XVI Award at Djakarta Theatre XXI, Jakarta, on Tuesday (14/8/2018). Salim Haji Said received the Achmad Bakrie XVI Award for the social thought category.

Independent, objective

Salim Said is known and praised for his independence as a researcher and political observer. This independent attitude often puts him in a difficult position. In his semi-memoir book, From Gestapu to Infrastruktur, Salim Said tells how he almost became the target of a rampage from Islamic Student Association (HMI) activists led by Fahmi Idris because he was considered a PKI sympathizer. At the same time, he was also suspected by leftist student groups as a member of the HMI which in the years leading up to Gestapu the PKI had been aggressively trying to disband.

After the Reform era, Salim Said was also often accused of being an insider in the military because of his close relationship with them. However, according to Salim Said, his closeness with the military was due to his focus on studying military and its relation to Indonesian politics.

Said's independent and objective attitude also comes from his own strong personality and high commitment to maintaining objectivity.

Another accusation of partisanship emerged because during Gestapu's time, he was a journalist for the daily Armed Forces. According to Salim Said, before Gestapu, almost no media was free from the control of the PKI and its allies. The media and critical members of the press were muzzled and considered counter-revolutionary and accomplices of neo-colonialism and imperialism (nekolim). The Armed Forces daily at that time was probably the only media that was quite independent from the influence of PKI propaganda.

William Liddle, in his endorsement for the book Witnessing 30 Years of Soeharto's Authoritarian Government (2016), called Salim Said the best observer and analyst of the New Order. Salim Said, according to Liddle, is not only a living witness, but also "an impartial historian who always sees humans in all their complexity."

According to historian Anhar Gonggong, in the introduction to the book Interviews on Soldiers and Politics (2001), the sharpness of Salim Said's analysis was awakened by three things. First, the sharpness of his analysis is influenced by his formal educational background in the social and political fields. Salim Said completed his undergraduate studies in sociology at the University of Indonesia. Doctoral studies were completed at Ohio State University in political science.

However, Said's independent and objective attitude also comes from his own strong personality and high commitment to maintaining objectivity. And, what is more important is that in every political analysis, Salim Said always bases himself on strong historical data.

Also read: Political Scene, Service of Two Retired TNI Officers

The second factor is his childhood environment in Pare-pare, South Sulawesi. In the 1950s, Pare-pare, South Sulawesi, in general, was an area of unrest following the dissatisfaction of independence fighters with the central government's decision regarding the Indonesian military. According to Anhar Gonggong, this turmoil led Salim Said to have an interest in studying military and politics.

The next factor was his profession from the 1960s to 1970 as a journalist. He was a journalist for the daily Armed Forces, then became a journalist and co-founded the magazine Tempo. His experience as a journalist has made Salim Said sensitive about the accuracy of the facts in the reports and analyzes he makes. His position as a journalist also gave him the opportunity to meet many important sources of information both among the military, bureaucrats and civilians.

Goodbye, Professor!

Saidiman Ahmad, Program Manager Saiful Mujani Research and Consulting (SMRC); Student of the Political Science Doctoral Program at the University of Indonesia

NORBERTUS ARYA DWIANGGA MARTIAR

Saidiman Ahmad