This comment was meant to be satirical. Satire can sometimes be more incisive than straight narrative or analysis. The danger lies in the possibility that readers don’t see that it is not serious.
As a reader with the up most respect for your previous work, I observe your comments across New Mandala as the measurement of whether the article follows your deep expertise and authority on the topic.
In this case I guess its doesn’t meet your standard (I hope to write something in the future that does). In regards to the earlier comment on the “closer security apparatus”. I am arguing that the issue provides ample opportunity to be exploited by those within the security apparatus that wish to challenge the Jokowi administration. However, thus far Jokowi has appeared to consolidate (make stronger and closer) his relationship with the main coercive elements of the internal security apparatus (TNI and POLRI) over the issue.
In relation to the comment on BIN under Budi Gunawan, I am not privy to the intricacies of Indonesia’s State intelligence service. However, regardless of the controversy surrounding the appointment of Budi, the institution would at a minimal be contributing something. Whether or not jokowi is using their products or capabilities, and or their is a BIN conspiracy by Budi against jokowi (if thats what your getting at?) I cannot make a such a judgement.
Finally, your comments always show an additional level of nuance that assist aspiring Indonesian observers like myself. I can only speak for myself but it would be great if you put these ideas, comments and analysis in an article as it is sometimes hard to connect the dots across multiple comment threads to get that full extent of what your arguing. It would be great to add to the debate across topics on New Mandala rather than limiting your insights and analysis to comments which not everyone reads or replies.
I appreciate the time you took to read and critique my argument and I look forward to reading your future comments and hopefully a contribution or another external publication.
Firstly, my sincere apologies for the spelling mistake, this was my error and not an editorial one, I take full responsibility. I have notified the editors and it should be corrected shortly.
In regards to your question about appeasement, strengthening this relationship I see involves appeasement – on both sides.
You are also right in your remarks that political appeasement is not always considered a strategic victory per se.
I also agree that Jokowi’s move has made it more difficult for both the state apparatus and civil groups that are trying to mitigate the appeal of Islamist by exploiting religious piety acts – but if Jokowi takes a hard approach against these groups now, this would arguably add more fuel to the fire making it even more difficult as they are likely to push back harder deepening appeal and divide.
It is possible that Jokowi has paved the way for “Kriwikan dadi grojogan”. If this proves to be the case then it would be hard to argue that it was a strategic victory (I will be the first to admit that my argument along this line was incorrect).
I have also been observing those developments you mentioned in Bandung and now Jogja– they are indeed worrying – but putting the Ahok issues aside, these events still do not represent a deviation from the usual tension that exist between some Islamic groups and Christians at this time of the year.
I also came to the same initial conclusion as you as the timing of these events link with the ahok case – but its still premature (the same could be said with some of my arguments) to draw a final conclusion that the brooklet has become a stream or a river. This might indeed change if the Ahok case does not achieve justice in the eyes of these radical groups (I will be submitting an entirely different argument in this case than the one above if this eventuates).
The gerakan shalat subuh 1212 is something that observers will need to keep an eye on. It could be a trend towards widening the “brooklet”, but it could also be just a capitalization on the “brand” of 411/212 and could fade away just as quick as it appeared if the Ahok case go forward and achieves the results that these groups assert they want – blasphemy precedents would suggest this is likely to happen to some degree.
However, it could be argued that not-appeasing hardliners at this point would only strengthen the radical groups grievances, increasing grievance among themselves and those not so radical participants – what I see is more Muslim solidarity over the ahok issue rather than a rise in radical numbers. It appears the ahok issue appeals to a wide Islamic audience than what has been portrayed.
It’s through this lens that I argue that this political appeasement could be a strategic victory, by not drawing a line in the sand, Jokowi has been able to bring these groups closer, negotiating and alleviating grievances now at a time where tensions are high, violent acts are low, and the issue centres around the recent ahok case (a temporary and solvable issue through the legal system) not a long-term, unsolvable issue that will continue to be a source of fuel for recruitment and further uprising against the government.
By strategic, I mean that it is a longer term calculated decision that goes beyond the political gains with these groups and the ahok case. Indonesia not only faces the challenge of rising participation of radical Islamic political groups likely to become a ongoing challenge in the future, but developments in Syria and Iraq are also likely to see a return of extreme battle hardened operators returning to Indonesia and the Philippines (the nearest training safe haven) after Indonesia’s rather successful counter-terrorist efforts.
Its here where I see Jokowi’s soft calculated approach paying strategic dividends in the long run. By appeasing these radical groups now, and those supporters that are inclined to use limited violence to achieve these aims, Jokowi is attempting to not only to make pragmatic moves at the political level by bringing these groups into the political fold early, but also longer term security gains that reduce grievances among those (including returning operators separate to these radical groups) that may be prone to pushing the envelope much further in terms of violence to achieve desired political aims, (most likely different aims between these different political actors but they will likely target the state) if they feel that they are up against a post-reformasi government that continues to suppress, side line, or eliminate the participation of these Islamic hard line groups in post-reformasi political order.
I hope this sheds light on my point and helps to answer your question. Once again apologies for the mistake.
Shit at least 4 people dislike my comments. Wonder if they are from the ADB or similar. It is a bit rich disliking comments where one stands on principle but I suppose there are “small-minded” and “faceless” people that read NM.
Ashin Wirathu occasionally confuses Islamic religion with Islamic politics. In Buddhism it is not correct to criticise other religions, not least because it weakens one’s own faith. As a Buddhist monk this kind of speech is not appropriate.
Apart from this, he has my full support.
Just to clarify, I agree that Rakhine has been ignored and should have access to a fair share of gas revenue to develop itself. That has nothing to do with ‘human rights’. It’s just common sense.
Things we can agree on about Rohingya conditions: extreme poverty, statelessness, and inability to move to richer regions of Myanmar. For me, these conditions are sufficient to explain attempted migrations to other places. You might want to note that 40-60% of Rakhine youths have already left their homelands, largely ignored by the rest of the world. However, since the Rohingya situation is worse than the Rakhine youths, we can expect a lot of attempted migrations.
There is no reason (nor evidence) that a reforming government and military would want to engage in atrocities. The West has always assumed that the Burmese military is an irrational actor, something which would act against its own self-interest. For the West, rationality is so rare a trait that only the West is capable of. That has proven to be wrong every time since 1988.
It was good that you chose a ‘soft security approach’ to the author’s mistake with your name. After all, he used all the right letters in ‘Hikam’, and merely put them in the wrong order. Compared with the content of his post, this was not too bad.
Perhaps like you, I can’t see why Jokowi has to ‘strengthen his relations with Jakarta’s rising hard-line groups’.
Why do you continue to dodge around answering any of the questions that I have brought up, and insist on spouting your pitiful rhetoric? Let me try again: if there are none of these abuses happening against the Rohingya, why are tens of thousands of them risking their lives in horribly dangerous conditions to flee from Rakhine state?
The day the West bombs Myanmar is the day the real genocide begins. And despite causing it, the West would say ‘they did the right thing too late.’ But the author must be living in a self-righteous bubble to even think of that.
Pitiful. Is a sperm sample for a rape allegation too much to ask? Is a video or a photo featuring Burmese soldiers, or gunshot wounds from those who escaped “wholesale massacres” too much to ask? Yes, author. I give up. White men and women are the most moral creatures on this planet (despite the fact that only them enslaved a large portion of the world population, only them committed wholesale genocides in Americas and elsewhere, only them fought world wars and killed people for ideological nonsense et. etc.). You guys know better than the rest of the world. Only you stand for the weak and fight against the oppressors. But I have to say that blood is in your hands. People like you are responsible for prolonging the conflict, by dividing the communities with your self-righteousness and patent nonsense.
If 8888 happened today, the West would definitely unleash its no-fly zones and bombing campaigns. But what was actually happened? Since I was young, I met and talked with hundreds of Burmese soldiers and real people who participated in the protests. I have yet to find a genocidal monster who would enjoy mowing down the crowds. But let me tell you the truth in Mawlamyine as told by real people. In front of No.1 Market, students and protesters beheaded several accused of being ‘spies’. Rebel groups took advantage of the chaos and shot several rounds with one bullet narrowly missing my father’s head, but shootings in which several of our neighbors killed. But Western stories featured ‘nonviolent’ protesters gunned down by monstrous soldiers.
So, if your wishful, and pathetically attention-seeking, call for ‘military actions’ took place, millions of Burmese, including myself, would flock to the Burmese military. The chances are between zero and nil. Now, time to reach out for your SSRI prescription so that you don’t need to seek serotonin elsewhere.
You’re absolutely correct. What I meant is that it has not been officially announced that she is now his wife, even though we can infer this from the honorific “na Ayutthaya” appended to her name.
I chanced upon your blog and it resonates! I am in the process of publishing my “Migrants’ Thoughts and Tales” about my journey through life from Malaysia to the UK & now Australia – longing for my roots yet dismayed at what the incumbent government has turned Malaysia into!
Vajiralongkorn has just pardoned 100,000 prisoners – including Lese Majeste prisoners – but NOT repeat offenders, murderers, rapists, or large quantity drug traffickers. It seems this new king is following very much in the good heart ( jai dee) tradition of his father. No doubt aided by General Prem’s wise, extremely experienced, advice.
This statement is quite interesting to me: “Jokowi has used the event to further strengthen his relationship with Jakarta’s rising Islamic hard-line groups. This is a strategic move as these groups are viewed as both a potential asset and threat to national security, and their voices are increasingly amplified through social media.”
I was wondering if the notion of strengthening the relationship here means that Jokowi has been appeasing to the hardliners? If that is the case, then you’re spot on, because those Islamists have been more emboldened in their actions in the post-212. Cases in point are the recent forced dispersal of a Christmas celebration in Bandung and the taking down a billboard ad belonged to a Christian University in Yogyakarta, simply because it featured a Moslem girl wearing a hijab. Not to mention the most recent so called Subuh (predawn) prayer movement (Gerakan shalat Subuh) on December 12, claimed as the continuation of the 1410, 411, and 212 mass actions. Hence its label “gerakan shalat subuh 1212”.
A political appeasement is, however, not a strategic victory in my humble opinion. Not when you are dealing with the hardliner Islamists in Indonesia. In fact, Jokowi’s move has made it more difficult for both the state apparatus and those civil society groups that are trying to mitigate the appeal of the Islamists by exploiting religious piety acts. I dare say that, following a Javanese proverb, Jokowi could have been paving the way for “a brooklet to become a big stream” (Kriwikan dadi grojogan) by his spur of the moment decision during 212.
PS:
By the way, my name is Muhammad Hikam, not Hakim
Facebook 
Twitter 
Soundcloud 
Youtube 
Rss
Jokowi’s calculated soft approach to Jakarta’s radicals
This comment was meant to be satirical. Satire can sometimes be more incisive than straight narrative or analysis. The danger lies in the possibility that readers don’t see that it is not serious.
Jokowi’s calculated soft approach to Jakarta’s radicals
Dear Ken,
As a reader with the up most respect for your previous work, I observe your comments across New Mandala as the measurement of whether the article follows your deep expertise and authority on the topic.
In this case I guess its doesn’t meet your standard (I hope to write something in the future that does). In regards to the earlier comment on the “closer security apparatus”. I am arguing that the issue provides ample opportunity to be exploited by those within the security apparatus that wish to challenge the Jokowi administration. However, thus far Jokowi has appeared to consolidate (make stronger and closer) his relationship with the main coercive elements of the internal security apparatus (TNI and POLRI) over the issue.
In relation to the comment on BIN under Budi Gunawan, I am not privy to the intricacies of Indonesia’s State intelligence service. However, regardless of the controversy surrounding the appointment of Budi, the institution would at a minimal be contributing something. Whether or not jokowi is using their products or capabilities, and or their is a BIN conspiracy by Budi against jokowi (if thats what your getting at?) I cannot make a such a judgement.
Finally, your comments always show an additional level of nuance that assist aspiring Indonesian observers like myself. I can only speak for myself but it would be great if you put these ideas, comments and analysis in an article as it is sometimes hard to connect the dots across multiple comment threads to get that full extent of what your arguing. It would be great to add to the debate across topics on New Mandala rather than limiting your insights and analysis to comments which not everyone reads or replies.
I appreciate the time you took to read and critique my argument and I look forward to reading your future comments and hopefully a contribution or another external publication.
Jokowi’s calculated soft approach to Jakarta’s radicals
Dear Pak Hikam,
Firstly, my sincere apologies for the spelling mistake, this was my error and not an editorial one, I take full responsibility. I have notified the editors and it should be corrected shortly.
In regards to your question about appeasement, strengthening this relationship I see involves appeasement – on both sides.
You are also right in your remarks that political appeasement is not always considered a strategic victory per se.
I also agree that Jokowi’s move has made it more difficult for both the state apparatus and civil groups that are trying to mitigate the appeal of Islamist by exploiting religious piety acts – but if Jokowi takes a hard approach against these groups now, this would arguably add more fuel to the fire making it even more difficult as they are likely to push back harder deepening appeal and divide.
It is possible that Jokowi has paved the way for “Kriwikan dadi grojogan”. If this proves to be the case then it would be hard to argue that it was a strategic victory (I will be the first to admit that my argument along this line was incorrect).
I have also been observing those developments you mentioned in Bandung and now Jogja– they are indeed worrying – but putting the Ahok issues aside, these events still do not represent a deviation from the usual tension that exist between some Islamic groups and Christians at this time of the year.
I also came to the same initial conclusion as you as the timing of these events link with the ahok case – but its still premature (the same could be said with some of my arguments) to draw a final conclusion that the brooklet has become a stream or a river. This might indeed change if the Ahok case does not achieve justice in the eyes of these radical groups (I will be submitting an entirely different argument in this case than the one above if this eventuates).
The gerakan shalat subuh 1212 is something that observers will need to keep an eye on. It could be a trend towards widening the “brooklet”, but it could also be just a capitalization on the “brand” of 411/212 and could fade away just as quick as it appeared if the Ahok case go forward and achieves the results that these groups assert they want – blasphemy precedents would suggest this is likely to happen to some degree.
However, it could be argued that not-appeasing hardliners at this point would only strengthen the radical groups grievances, increasing grievance among themselves and those not so radical participants – what I see is more Muslim solidarity over the ahok issue rather than a rise in radical numbers. It appears the ahok issue appeals to a wide Islamic audience than what has been portrayed.
It’s through this lens that I argue that this political appeasement could be a strategic victory, by not drawing a line in the sand, Jokowi has been able to bring these groups closer, negotiating and alleviating grievances now at a time where tensions are high, violent acts are low, and the issue centres around the recent ahok case (a temporary and solvable issue through the legal system) not a long-term, unsolvable issue that will continue to be a source of fuel for recruitment and further uprising against the government.
By strategic, I mean that it is a longer term calculated decision that goes beyond the political gains with these groups and the ahok case. Indonesia not only faces the challenge of rising participation of radical Islamic political groups likely to become a ongoing challenge in the future, but developments in Syria and Iraq are also likely to see a return of extreme battle hardened operators returning to Indonesia and the Philippines (the nearest training safe haven) after Indonesia’s rather successful counter-terrorist efforts.
Its here where I see Jokowi’s soft calculated approach paying strategic dividends in the long run. By appeasing these radical groups now, and those supporters that are inclined to use limited violence to achieve these aims, Jokowi is attempting to not only to make pragmatic moves at the political level by bringing these groups into the political fold early, but also longer term security gains that reduce grievances among those (including returning operators separate to these radical groups) that may be prone to pushing the envelope much further in terms of violence to achieve desired political aims, (most likely different aims between these different political actors but they will likely target the state) if they feel that they are up against a post-reformasi government that continues to suppress, side line, or eliminate the participation of these Islamic hard line groups in post-reformasi political order.
I hope this sheds light on my point and helps to answer your question. Once again apologies for the mistake.
Decades of denial as Rohingya genocide continues
Shit at least 4 people dislike my comments. Wonder if they are from the ADB or similar. It is a bit rich disliking comments where one stands on principle but I suppose there are “small-minded” and “faceless” people that read NM.
Managing a declining threat
Ashin Wirathu occasionally confuses Islamic religion with Islamic politics. In Buddhism it is not correct to criticise other religions, not least because it weakens one’s own faith. As a Buddhist monk this kind of speech is not appropriate.
Apart from this, he has my full support.
Decades of denial as Rohingya genocide continues
You have already answered your own question.
Why Rakhine people should embrace human rights
Just to clarify, I agree that Rakhine has been ignored and should have access to a fair share of gas revenue to develop itself. That has nothing to do with ‘human rights’. It’s just common sense.
Decades of denial as Rohingya genocide continues
Things we can agree on about Rohingya conditions: extreme poverty, statelessness, and inability to move to richer regions of Myanmar. For me, these conditions are sufficient to explain attempted migrations to other places. You might want to note that 40-60% of Rakhine youths have already left their homelands, largely ignored by the rest of the world. However, since the Rohingya situation is worse than the Rakhine youths, we can expect a lot of attempted migrations.
There is no reason (nor evidence) that a reforming government and military would want to engage in atrocities. The West has always assumed that the Burmese military is an irrational actor, something which would act against its own self-interest. For the West, rationality is so rare a trait that only the West is capable of. That has proven to be wrong every time since 1988.
Jokowi’s calculated soft approach to Jakarta’s radicals
Pak Hikam,
It was good that you chose a ‘soft security approach’ to the author’s mistake with your name. After all, he used all the right letters in ‘Hikam’, and merely put them in the wrong order. Compared with the content of his post, this was not too bad.
Perhaps like you, I can’t see why Jokowi has to ‘strengthen his relations with Jakarta’s rising hard-line groups’.
Managing a declining threat
Buddhist Extremist = Oxymoron. Always will be.
As oppose to Muslim Extremist which is a continual reality to any who practice ‘Sharia Islam’.
Worst is only Sharia Muslim are regarded as true Muslim!
There is however a category of Buddhist who are staunchly Nationalist as well.
IMHO Ms Wignesrawan must distinguish these elements well to make her case more legit.
Over generalization will make a Buddhophobic as a lexicon here at new NM soon.
Decades of denial as Rohingya genocide continues
Why do you continue to dodge around answering any of the questions that I have brought up, and insist on spouting your pitiful rhetoric? Let me try again: if there are none of these abuses happening against the Rohingya, why are tens of thousands of them risking their lives in horribly dangerous conditions to flee from Rakhine state?
Decades of denial as Rohingya genocide continues
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/1812847.stm
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3ehf4n5UIdo
This is ‘fake news’? Why? I am baffled at the amount of blind genocide denial by the commentators on this site.
Henry VIII of Thailand
http://www.bangkokpost.com/news/general/1148461/crown-prince-education-key-to-progress
“Over the past 35 years, at least 2,100,000 degrees are estimated to have been handed out directly by the Crown Prince to Rajabhat university graduates.”
My math might be off but I believe that 2,100,000 / 35 = 60,000 per year. That’s a lot of diplomas……
Decades of denial as Rohingya genocide continues
The day the West bombs Myanmar is the day the real genocide begins. And despite causing it, the West would say ‘they did the right thing too late.’ But the author must be living in a self-righteous bubble to even think of that.
Decades of denial as Rohingya genocide continues
Pitiful. Is a sperm sample for a rape allegation too much to ask? Is a video or a photo featuring Burmese soldiers, or gunshot wounds from those who escaped “wholesale massacres” too much to ask? Yes, author. I give up. White men and women are the most moral creatures on this planet (despite the fact that only them enslaved a large portion of the world population, only them committed wholesale genocides in Americas and elsewhere, only them fought world wars and killed people for ideological nonsense et. etc.). You guys know better than the rest of the world. Only you stand for the weak and fight against the oppressors. But I have to say that blood is in your hands. People like you are responsible for prolonging the conflict, by dividing the communities with your self-righteousness and patent nonsense.
If 8888 happened today, the West would definitely unleash its no-fly zones and bombing campaigns. But what was actually happened? Since I was young, I met and talked with hundreds of Burmese soldiers and real people who participated in the protests. I have yet to find a genocidal monster who would enjoy mowing down the crowds. But let me tell you the truth in Mawlamyine as told by real people. In front of No.1 Market, students and protesters beheaded several accused of being ‘spies’. Rebel groups took advantage of the chaos and shot several rounds with one bullet narrowly missing my father’s head, but shootings in which several of our neighbors killed. But Western stories featured ‘nonviolent’ protesters gunned down by monstrous soldiers.
So, if your wishful, and pathetically attention-seeking, call for ‘military actions’ took place, millions of Burmese, including myself, would flock to the Burmese military. The chances are between zero and nil. Now, time to reach out for your SSRI prescription so that you don’t need to seek serotonin elsewhere.
The futility of Prayuth’s war on truth
You’re absolutely correct. What I meant is that it has not been officially announced that she is now his wife, even though we can infer this from the honorific “na Ayutthaya” appended to her name.
Behind Malaysia’s brain drain, surprise! Real people
Hi,
I chanced upon your blog and it resonates! I am in the process of publishing my “Migrants’ Thoughts and Tales” about my journey through life from Malaysia to the UK & now Australia – longing for my roots yet dismayed at what the incumbent government has turned Malaysia into!
Decades of denial as Rohingya genocide continues
probably best if the comments on this article are read first then we won’t be subject to a lot of rehashing .
http://www.newmandala.org/confronting-genocide-myanmar/#li-comment-1931840
Henry VIII of Thailand
Vajiralongkorn has just pardoned 100,000 prisoners – including Lese Majeste prisoners – but NOT repeat offenders, murderers, rapists, or large quantity drug traffickers. It seems this new king is following very much in the good heart ( jai dee) tradition of his father. No doubt aided by General Prem’s wise, extremely experienced, advice.
Jokowi’s calculated soft approach to Jakarta’s radicals
This statement is quite interesting to me: “Jokowi has used the event to further strengthen his relationship with Jakarta’s rising Islamic hard-line groups. This is a strategic move as these groups are viewed as both a potential asset and threat to national security, and their voices are increasingly amplified through social media.”
I was wondering if the notion of strengthening the relationship here means that Jokowi has been appeasing to the hardliners? If that is the case, then you’re spot on, because those Islamists have been more emboldened in their actions in the post-212. Cases in point are the recent forced dispersal of a Christmas celebration in Bandung and the taking down a billboard ad belonged to a Christian University in Yogyakarta, simply because it featured a Moslem girl wearing a hijab. Not to mention the most recent so called Subuh (predawn) prayer movement (Gerakan shalat Subuh) on December 12, claimed as the continuation of the 1410, 411, and 212 mass actions. Hence its label “gerakan shalat subuh 1212”.
A political appeasement is, however, not a strategic victory in my humble opinion. Not when you are dealing with the hardliner Islamists in Indonesia. In fact, Jokowi’s move has made it more difficult for both the state apparatus and those civil society groups that are trying to mitigate the appeal of the Islamists by exploiting religious piety acts. I dare say that, following a Javanese proverb, Jokowi could have been paving the way for “a brooklet to become a big stream” (Kriwikan dadi grojogan) by his spur of the moment decision during 212.
PS:
By the way, my name is Muhammad Hikam, not Hakim