“Unity in Diversity”. The Indonesian decentralisation process after the fall of the New Order

Abstract

According to recent research results, decentralised government is nowadays the most effective political structure in Indonesia to cater for the heterogeneity, the geography and the size of the country. The archipelago comprises 17 000 islands, of which only 6000 are inhabited, and encompasses a land area of 2 million square kilometres. The different parts of the population are quite scattered in the world’s most populous Muslim-majority nation, as 60% of the Indonesian people live on the relatively small island of Java while the other 40% are distributed unevenly. Approximately 300 ethnicities exist beside the socio-culturally dominant Javanese group. In addition, the differences between the distinct lifestyles of the five official religious communities (Muslim, Catholic, Protestant, Buddhist, and Hindu) also have a significant impact on the big picture. The difficulties in communication and in traveling as well as the geography of the country have fostered a fragmentation of the society across the islands.

Following three and a half centuries of Dutch colonialism, Indonesia secured its independence after World War II. After a turbulent period, the rising demand for a strong national identity formed one of the world’s most centralised countries during Suharto’s New Order era (1966–1998). However, this situation called for radical changes after the fall of the regime. As a result, Indonesia is now the most decentralised political system in Asia. Thanks to this U-turn not only a unique future is seen for Indonesia, but also a special developmental path is predicted which cannot yet be modeled precisely.

This study aims to outline the most important factors and circumstances which accompanied the unique process of decentralisation in Indonesia and to examine the key challenges to effective new regionalism and the questionable necessity of (de)centralistic reforms. In addition, the dilemmas about the possible post-Suharto scenarios are examined as well as the potential of bottom-up vs. top-down reforms and initiatives, emphasising the role of the multiple ethnic groups and the role of the military; furthermore, it aims to evaluate the achievements and criticise the shortcomings of the system referring to the relevant legislation and application of the pertinent laws.