How Large Con icts Subside: Evidence from Indonesia Patrick Barron The Asia Foundation | Sana Ja rey University of Chicago | Ashutosh Varshney Brown University Indonesian Social Development Papers Since 1998, Indonesia has been undergoing a momentous political and economic transition. The fall of the New Order, the economic crisis, and radical decentralization have changed the political, economic and social context. Within this new context, power relations are in flux, How Large Conflicts Subside: identities are being renegotiated, and institutions are changing. Changes in incentives, and in the role of formal and informal institutions at various levels, have altered the ways in which Evidence from Indonesia individuals and groups relate to each other and the state. Understanding this new context, and the ways in which various actors (national and international) can promote progressive social change is important. The Indonesian Social Development Papers series aims to further discussion on a range of issues relating to the current social and political context in Indonesia, and to help in the generation of ideas on how democratic and peaceful transition can be supported. The series will cover a range of issues including conflict, development, corruption, governance, the role of the security sector, and so on. Each paper presents research on a particular dimension of social development and offers pragmatic policy suggestions. Papers also attempt to assess the impact Patrick Barron of various interventions—from local and national actors, as well as international development The Asia Foundation institutions—on preexisting contexts and processes of change. Sana Jaffrey University of Chicago The papers in the series are works in progress. The emphasis is on generating discussion amongst different stakeholders—including government, civil society, and international institutions— Ashutosh Varshney Brown University rather than offering absolute conclusions. It is hoped that they will stimulate further discussions of the questions they seek to answer, the hypotheses they test, and the recommendations they prescribe. Series editor name July, 2014 Indonesian Social Development Paper no. 18 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Papers in the Indonesian Social Development series are not formal publications of the World Bank. They This paper is based on the National Violence Monitoring System (NVMS) project currently being are published informally and circulated to encourage discussion and comment between those interested implemented by the Government of Indonesia’s Coordinating Ministry for People’s Welfare (Kemenko Kesra in Indonesian development issues. The findings, interpretations, judgements, and conclusions expressed Deputi 1) in partnership with the World Bank and the Habibie Center. Generous funding for this project in the paper are those of the authors and should not be attributed to the World Bank, to its affiliated has been provided by the World Bank’s Post Conflict Fund and the Korea Economic and Peace-building organiations, or to members of the Board of Executive Directors or the government they represent. Transitions Trust Fund. Support was also provided by USAID-Serasi project and AusAID. Please direct comments to the author: sjaffrey@uchicago.edu The authors led the design of the instruments and methodology for data collection. Implementation of this project has been made possible by our partnership with Jasa Layanan Riset Indo (JRI-Research). In particular we would like to thank Rita Maria, Embun Maharani, Airino Thamrin and Tanta Skober for their extraordinary effort in overcoming the numerous logistical and technical obstacles we have encountered over the years. Cover Photograph by Adrian Morel We would also like to thank Willem Rampangilei, Suprayoga Hadi, Dewi Fortuna Anwar, Imron Rasyid, Blair Palmer, Sidney Jones, Najib Azca, Marcus Kostner, Sonja Litz and Adrian Morel for providing critical institutional and analytical support. iv v Contents PREFACE III ACKNOWLEDGEMENT IV EXECUTIVE SUMMARY VI 1. INTRODUCTION 1 2. THE NATIONAL VIOLENCE MONITORING SYSTEM DATASET 2 2.1 Why build a new violence dataset in Indonesia? 2 2.2 Constructing the NVMS 6 3. THE EARLY TRANSITION YEARS: LARGE–SCALE SUBNATIONAL VIOLENCE (1998–2003) 7 3.1 Predominant forms of violence 8 4. THE POST–CONFLICT PHASE: HIGH FREQUENCY, LOW FATALITIES (2004–2012) 11 4.1 Levels of post–conflict violence and its impact 13 4.2 Sites of post–conflict violence 15 4.3 Composition of post–conflict violence 16 5. MANAGING THE POST–CONFLICT PATTERN: IMPROVED SECURITY RESPONSES 19 6. CONCLUSION 22 REFERENCES 23 vii 1 INTRODUCTION The last two decades have witnessed an extraordinary spate of literature on large–scale subnational conflicts. Scholars have for the most part concentrated on why violent conflicts begin. As a consequence, we know a great deal about the outbreak of civil wars and riots. Considerably less attention has been paid to how and why large conflicts subside. There is, of course, a growing literature on how civil wars end and why they recur. However, such studies have tended to conceptualize periods of civil war and peace as dichotomous states. This prevents consideration of the forms of violence that often emerge in ‘post–conflict’ situations. The so–called peaceful phase can also have a lot of violence, though such violence may fall short of a full–fledged civil war. Stated differently, temporal variation in patterns of communal violence of one kind—escalation of small incidents into large scale violence, or transformation of “sparks” into “fires”—has been extensively studied, but how and why large–scale violence subsides space remains, on the whole, inadequately understood. As a consequence, we know little about how spatial units marked by large–scale and/or extended riots move towards relative peace, and what prevents reescalation. This paper turns its gaze towards the second kind of temporal variation: how sites of large–scale violence move towards a phase of substantially lower violence. Our materials come from Indonesia, where several provinces experienced grotesque violence after the fall of President Suharto and the collapse of the New Order (1965–97). The period of high violence lasted roughly from 1998 through 2003. Since then, violence has continued to occur but has declined in intensity and scale. Provinces caught in highly destructive violence have moved to a phase where large–scale violence is largely absent. Small–scale violence has continued to occur frequently, often taking on new forms. Furthermore, areas previously affected by high levels of violence continue to harbor specific vulnerabilities. Why has large–scale violence precipitously declined? How did the new phase of lower violence come about? We seek to answer these questions by examining evidence from the National Violence Monitoring System (NVMS), a new dataset that records the incidence and impact of violence in Indonesia over a 15–year period since Indonesia’s democratic transition commenced in 1998. We argue that it is changes in state responses to violence that, to a large extent, account for the observed temporal variation. In the early post–Suharto years, small episodes of violence quickly escalated into large–scale conflicts. There were widespread political uncertainties and rapid shifts in institutional powers, including major security sector reforms, such as the separation of the police from the military, contributing to the inability and often unwillingness of state actors to intervene effectively. Only when the state began seriously to address the problem of large–scale violence in Indonesia did the civil wars and communal 1 Introduction conflicts come to an end. Gradual consolidation of power by political actors and changing political will from the center allowed for a series of peace agreements and security operations that ended these large–scale conflicts. These factors also led to improvements in the incentives and ability of the security THE NATIONAL VIOLENCE MONITORING 2 forces to respond effectively to violence when it emerged. Larger episodes of violence have thus been contained, though they have not been fully eradicated. We argue that improved response to violence by SYSTEM DATASET the Indonesian security forces is a key reason for the decline of large–scale violence in Indonesia. We are, however, not confident that a new and enduring equilibrium has emerged. But what has happened thus far has lasted long enough to qualify as a new phase, whose principal properties can be dissected and analyzed. While greater policing capacities of the Indonesian state need to be acknowledged, it should The new Indonesian National Violence Monitoring System (NVMS) dataset, which we created and now use also be noted that the police remains incapable of, or disinterested in, preventing smaller acts of violence. to make our arguments, provides the most comprehensive and accurate quantitative picture to date of It now prevents the worst outcomes, but stops well short of generating the best results. Why this is so the nature and impact of violence in post–Suharto Indonesia.1 The dataset records all incidents of violence should be analyzed separately. It is not our focus here. in 16 provinces, which represent all major island groups and account for about 53 per cent of Indonesia’s population, as reported by over 120 local news sources. 2 The selected provinces include the ‘high conflict’ The rest of the paper is divided into five sections. First, we describe the new National Violence Monitoring provinces that were affected by large–scale violence following Indonesia’s democratic transition as well System (NVMS) dataset, perhaps the largest subnational dataset of its kind anywhere in the world. as ‘low conflict’ areas that were not. For the high conflict provinces, data has been compiled since 1998 Following this, Section 3 provides a descriptive analysis of the initial post–Suharto violence. Section 4 to allow us to see how violence in these areas has evolved over time. For low conflict provinces, data has presents the main features of the new phase of lower violence that has emerged since 2003. Section been collected, by and large, since 2005, which allows us to compare them with high conflict provinces 5 explains how and why this new phase has been maintained, with a primary focus on the changing to assess the extent to which convergence might have occurred. By 2012, the NVMS had recorded 30 responses of security forces to incidents of violence. Section 6 concludes. distinct variables for 163,466 incidents, which collectively resulted in 36,222 deaths, 132,110 injured, 75, 937 buildings damaged, 4,322 kidnappings, and 22,529 sexual assaults. As far as we know, the NVMS is the largest dataset of violence created for any single country. 3 Table 1 summarizes its scope. 2.1 Why build a new violence dataset in Indonesia? The NVMS is the latest in a series of datasets that record incidents and impact of violence in Indonesia. Our efforts to design this new dataset stem from the deficiencies of earlier attempts, each of which is summarized below. UNSFIR The most comprehensive and accurate information about violence in Indonesia’s early transition period came from the UNSFIR dataset, which covers the period 1990–2003. In 2000, lack of systematic statistics on post–Suharto violence motivated the effort by Varshney and his colleagues at the United Nations Support Facility for Indonesian Recovery (UNSFIR). In doing so, they turned to newspaper reports of violence based 1 The NVMS dataset is a continuation of the Violent Conflict in Indonesia Study (ViCIS) dataset that collected baseline data for 16 provinces in Indonesia from 1998–2009. In January 2012, the ViCIS methodology, initially developed by the authors of this paper, was adopted by the Government of Indonesia’s Coordinating Ministry for People’s Welfare (Kemenko Kesra) to allow for continuing ongoing data collection under the National Violence Monitoring System (NVMS) program. Kemenko Kesra maintains full ownership of the data and has published it on the project site: www.snpk–indonesia.com 2 The data collection methodology, specifically the use of newspaper sources, is explained later on. 3 ACLED is probably the largest violence dataset containing events data at the subnational level for multiple countries (Raleigh et al. 2010). It records 57,000 violent incidents between 1997 and 2012. This is less than 40% of those in the NVMS, even although ACLED covers 50 countries. (Indonesia is not included in ACLED.) The number of incidents in ACLED for individual countries is often small. In Cambodia, for example, the dataset contains 357 incidents between 1997 and 2010. Other single country datasets of violence have proliferated but are also smaller than the NVMS. The Colombia dataset used by Daly (2012), for example, includes 7,729 violent events. Weinstein’s newspaper events dataset contains 1,400 violent incidents in Mozambique (1976–2004), 800 in Uganda, and more than 4,000 in Peru (Weinstein 2007). 2 3 The National Violence Monitoring System Dataset The National Violence Monitoring System Dataset Table 1: Coverage of the National Violence Monitoring System (NVMS) dataset on the methodology used to build a dataset of riots in India. 5 After an initial attempt using national–level sources, a second database (UNSFIR–2) turned to provincial newspapers (Varshney, Tadjoeddin, and Number Panggabean 2010). Period Total Total Population of local Recent history of Province of Data Incidents Deaths (million) newspapers large–scale violence Available Recorded Recorded There are a number of limitations to UNSFIR–2 for our purposes. First, the statistics do not go beyond 2003. used As such, the dataset tells us little about how violence has evolved after the large–scale conflict in several Active civil war between Aceh 4.5 8 1998–2012 16,892 11,217 of Indonesia’s regions ended. Second, the dataset does not include smaller incidents of violence. This GAM and GoI until 2005 made sense given that the goal was to assess levels of violence in the early post–Suharto period, when Christian–Muslim Maluku 1.5 7 1998–2012 4,910 3,348 communal violence most deaths were the result of the large–scale ethno communal violence engulfing a number of provinces. 1999–Feb 2002 However, the exclusion of smaller incidents means that much of the violence that has occurred since these Christian–Muslim cataclysmic communal conflicts ended is missed. 6 Finally, the UNSFIR dataset does not include Aceh, the North site of Indonesia’s most deadly civil war, and Papua, where low–level insurgency has persisted since 1964. 1 5 1998–2012 1,692 3,404 communal violence Maluku High conflict provinces 1999–2000 The purpose of the UNSFIR dataset was to cover collective violence short of civil war.7 Ethnic violence between Central 2.2 8 1998–2012 5,438 1,771 Dayak and Madura Following UNSFIR’s innovative attempt, newspapers have been widely acknowledged as a reliable, if not Kalimantan communities in 2001 perfect, source to collect violence data in Indonesia (Varshney 2008). Others have since sought to improve Ethnic violence between and extend UNSFIR’s work. For example, additional studies have shown that provincial newspapers, while West Dayak and Madura 4.4 5 1997–2012 15,893 2,141 providing a more accurate picture than national ones, still significantly under–report levels of violence. Kalimantan communities in 1997 and then again in 1999 Barron and Sharpe (2005) compared death tolls from UNSFIR–2 with those from a violence dataset using sub–provincial papers for twelve districts in two Indonesian provinces for 2001–2003. Employing the Christian–Muslim Central same definition as UNSFIR, they found three times more deaths from collective violence. Using a broader 2.6 11 1998–2012 5,847 1,297 communal violence Sulawesi 1999–2001 definition of violence, and more extensive source materials, the NVMS contains 44 times as many incidents Persistent low–level between 1998 and 2003 as are included in UNSFIR–2. Papua 2.7 1998–2012 11,903 1,468 insurgency since 1963 14 Persistent low–level PODES West Papua 0.7 1998–2012 2,856 283 insurgency since 1963 Since 2003, the Indonesian government’s statistical bureau has collected data on violence through its East Nusa PODES survey, which is conducted every three years. The nationwide survey asks village heads about 4.8 11 1998–2012 10,620 1,522 – Tenggara violence that has occurred in the past year and the impact it has had. However, PODES has significant Lampung 7.6 6 1998–2012 9,042 1,116 – weaknesses. For one, the accuracy of the violence data is questionable. In areas with large–scale violence, PODES appears to over report fatalities. The 2003 survey—which provides data on violence between Greater Anti–Chinese riots in May Low conflict provinces 28 5 2005–2012 19,768 3,116 September 2001 and August 20028 —reported that of the 4,849 people who died from conflict across Jakarta 1998 4 Indonesia, 4,106 lost their lives in the high violence provinces of West and Central Kalimantan, Central West Nusa Sulawesi, Maluku, North Maluku, and Aceh (Barron, Kaiser, and Pradhan 2009). NVMS data for the same 4.5 6 2005–2012 5,708 566 – Tenggara provinces records 3,415 deaths from violence. In contrast, it appears that in lower conflict areas PODES North under–reports violence.9 While, the 2005 PODES reported that just 276 people were killed from violent 2.2 6 2005–2009 8,194 517 – Sulawesi conflict nationwide (Vothknecht and Sumarto 2011), NVMS data for the same period found 1,207 deaths South 8 6 2005–2009 5,135 738 – Sulawesi North 13 10 2005–2009 14,049 1,583 – 4 We include Jakarta in our list of low conflict provinces because the May 1998 riots, while killing more than 1,000 people, lasted for Sumatera a few days and there has not been large–scale violence since. East Java 37.5 15 2005–2009 25,519 2,135 – 5 On the Indian dataset, see Varshney (2002). The tradition of using newspaper analysis to code conflict and contentious incidents goes back much further. See, for example, Snyder and Kelly (1977). Total 125.2 123 – 163,466 36,222 –  6 UNSFIR, for example, do not record any incidents of violence in Maluku province in 2003 while NVMS records 115 incidents which led to 28 deaths. 7 For the difference between forms of collective violence, including riots, and civil wars, see Varshney (2007). Source: NVMS, Population figures from 2010 Census (Badan Pusat Statistik) 8 The enumeration of the survey was completed in August 2002. Given that PODES was rolled out over a period of time, the preceding 12 months may be different for different areas. 9 The PODES figures were estimates based on just one year of data. 4 5 The National Violence Monitoring System Dataset The National Violence Monitoring System Dataset from conflict for just 16 Indonesian provinces, half the Indonesian total.10 Another limitation of using 2.2 Constructing the NVMS PODES to assess temporal patterns of violence is that the dataset does not provide a full time series. It Putting the dataset together took four years and involved four main steps.16 The first involved deciding contains information on violence that occurred in the year preceding each enumeration. This means we the scope of violence to be covered and the areas to include. Our final sample ensured that data included only have data for one year out of every three. areas with high, medium and lower levels of violence. While the data are not formally representative of all of Indonesia, the large coverage (53% of the Indonesian population live in areas surveyed), wide Police and NGO data geographic spread, and inclusion of areas with a range of violence levels gives us confidence that the Official police data, used in global assessments, also significantly under–report violence. A comparison of observed patterns extend to other parts of the country. police violence statistics in the Greater Jakarta area with incidents reported in local newspapers found that the former under–estimated murders by 80% and rapes by 65%.11 Where police capacity is lower than in The second step was to decide which sources to use in each province. Extensive source assessments were Indonesia’s capital, police data are likely to miss even more. conducted in the selected provinces, aimed at mapping the availability and quality of both media and non–media sources.17 These assessments confirmed that subnational media, while not perfect, were the In addition to the sources listed above, violence data is also collected and collated by several NGOs. These best source for information on violence in Indonesia. To minimize the weaknesses of media sources, we datasets are often assembled in response to a particular policy problem and are limited both in scope and adopted two strategies. First, multiple newspapers were collected from each province based on a mapping in the sources used. For example, data collected by the Institute Titian Perdamaian (ITP) records just 600 of district coverage, violence reporting policies and political affiliations of media sources. This ensured incidents of “conflict or violence” in 2009 across all of Indonesia, resulting in 70 deaths, 395 injuries and that one could make up for the possible flaws of one newspaper by another source. Newspapers with overt 421 damaged buildings (ITP 2010). In contrast, the NVMS dataset for 16 provinces, found 4,138 incidents of political biases and those that did not fact–check stories were entirely excluded. Second, where media violent conflict in the same period, resulting in 267 deaths, 4,442 injuries, and 828 damaged buildings.12 coverage was low or reporting was dubious, non–media sources were used to supplant and triangulate the data. Another point about datasets is in order. Our motivation was not only to create a dataset that provided more comprehensive coverage but also one that would allow for the disaggregation of violence, which one Following source selection, researchers were sent to each province to collect all available archives by would need to track changes in forms over time. Most available cross–national and single country datasets photographing each page of every newspaper. Over 2 million newspaper images were digitalized during on violence tend to focus on one type of violence such as civil war or communal conflict (Blattman and this process. Trained coding teams in Jakarta then combed the images and clipped articles related to Miguel 2010). While these datasets are useful for analyzing these particular categories of violence, they do incidents of violence. A standardized coding template was completed for each article. For each incident not permit investigation of how violence might evolve from one form into another — e.g., from a localized over 30 variables were coded: when and where the incident took place; whether it was a crime or a conflict; inter–personal fight over land ownership into a larger inter–communal clash.13 its physical impact (deaths, injuries, people sexually assaulted and kidnapped, all gender disaggregated, and buildings damaged); the actors involved; the issue that appeared to drive the violence; the form The NVMS attempts to address these deficiencies. It uses a broad definition of violence, while also coding violence took; and the weapons used, etc. Important for our purposes here, information was also coded on multiple dimensions of violence. The NVMS database records all incidents of violence where intentional what interventions were taken to try to stop escalation and whether they were successful. Where articles physical damage is done to persons or property. Incidents are classified into four main categories: conflict, reported different levels of violence and casualties, the more conservative figures were used.18 crime, domestic violence and violence used by law–enforcement agencies.14 Conflict incidents are further categorized by the type of dispute: for example, resource–related, electoral, governance–related, Data gaps were filled using reports of violence from other sources. This involved systematically going separatist, ethno–communal or vigilante violence. Disputes categories are further broken down by the through academic articles and books on violence in Indonesia, and monographs on violence in particular specific trigger: for example, land conflict or wages under resource disputes, and national or local elections provinces. We also reviewed policy papers including those from the International Crisis Group and Human in electoral disputes.15 As we will demonstrate in the following sections, our approach allows us to study Rights Watch. Events recorded in other datasets (including UNSFIR–2) were incorporated where there were the evolution of violence into multiple types and forms over time. archival gaps. Finally, we asked experts on particular conflicts to look at the data on their provinces to assess plausibility and to try to identify any inaccuracies. 10 A further 864 people were killed from violent crimes, 143 from domestic violence, and 75 from security force responses to crime or conflict. Data are for June 2004–May 2005. 11 Police reported that in 2011 there were 68 murders and 64 rapes in the Greater Jakarta area (Marhaenjati and Arnas 2011). The NMVS reports 328 murders and 182 rapes that year. 12 If we include violent crime, domestic violence and security force violence, there were 19,929 violent incidents in 2009, resulting in 1,959 deaths, 14,307 injuries, and 1,493 damaged buildings. It appears that ITP use a similar inclusive definition of violence 16 More information on the process is provided in Barron, Jaffrey et al. (2009). to that employed by NVMS. Their report includes a discussion of small–scale forms of conflict including routine violence and 17 Prior use of the newspaper method in a number of Indonesian provinces shows that it provides a reasonable picture of violence mob beatings. patterns and trends. For a detailed assessment see Barron and Sharpe (2005). 13 In a recent special edition of Perspectives on Politics, a number of contributors call for the inclusion of a wide range of forms of 18 To ensure that the coding process was standardized, 156–page manual was produced and systematic quality control procedures, political violence within the same research studies and agendas to allow for an assessment of the ways in which they are related including checking a large proportion of articles, were also employed. The coding team was initially trained for one week to learn (Isaac 2012). the concepts employed and how to select codes for subjective categories and was given refresher training on a regular basis. 14 A violent conflict incident is defined as one where violence was triggered by a preexisting dispute between two parties. Detailed description of the coding process and the coding key can be found at: http://www.snpk–indonesia.com/Methodology/ 15 A complete list of definitions and classifications can be found at: http://www.snpk–indonesia.com/Methodology/Definition?lang= Index?lang=en&randdo=44e6b8dc–d55c–4d2d–a129–c4671112bee4&userid=7119958 en&randdo=b595ee8a–7125–4343–baac–3d84c29b4b40&userid=7116989 6 7 The early transition years: Large–scale Subnational Violence (1998–2003) THE EARLY TRANSITION YEARS: 3 to intervene in local disputes—a result in part of the separation of the police from the military—led to a security vacuum allowing for violence escalation in some place (Tajima 2012). The result was that Indonesia witnessed roughly half a decade of large–scale violence in many areas of the country. LARGE–SCALE SUBNATIONAL VIOLENCE (1998–2003) 3.1 Predominant forms of violence Two forms of violence — separatist civil war and communal violence — were especially deadly. Table 2 includes data for eight provinces that saw the highest levels of violence, and shows that the largest share of fatalities stemmed from separatist rebellions and inter–communal unrest. The other forms of routine violence, such as conflict over issues such as land, were less prominent. Violent crime also resulted in As is well known, the years following the fall of Suharto witnessed high levels of violent conflict. Violence, thousands of deaths. of course, had been a defining feature of the New Order regime for three decades. General Suharto came to power on the back of a massive anti–communist massacre (1965–1966), when over half a million people lost their lives (Cribb 1990; Robinson 1995; Heryanto 2006). Throughout the New Order years (1965–1997), the security arms of the state used violence to retain control, build power, and scare off challenges.19 State–sponsored violence included the petrus (or ‘mysterious’) killings of alleged criminals from Table 2: Violence by type in eight Indonesian provinces 1998–2003 1983–1985, when as many as 2,000 might have died (Bourchier 1990; Barker 2001; Siegel 1998). The military, which received a small share of its budget from official state sources, also used violence to generate income (Liem Soei Liong 2002). At times state repression and coercion led to armed resistance. Separatist Proportion of all violence– Type of Violence Deaths related deaths violence ebbed and flowed in Papua from 1964 and in East Timor and Aceh from 1976 onwards, resulting in harsh counter–insurgency operations that killed many. Communal rioting also occurred, in particular in the Conflict late Suharto period, with outbreaks in Situbondo and Tasikmalaya in Java and Banjarmasin and Makassar Ethno–Communal in Kalimantan and Sulawesi (Sidel 2006). However, the violence that accompanied the fall of the New Order was new in both scale and nature. The early post–Suharto years undoubtedly saw the highest levels of Inter–religious 6,509 74.79% violence since the 1965 killings. In the 17 provinces for which we have data, 21,495 people lost their lives Inter–ethnic 2,158 24.80% between 1998 and 2003. 20 Other 36 0.41% The reasons for the rise in violence have been debated extensively elsewhere and need not detain us for Total Ethno–Communal 8,703 45.1% long, for our purpose is to examine the decline in violence, not its outbreak. Globally, as a host of scholars have shown, violence often emerges during authoritarian breakdowns21 and when rapid economic Separatist 6,997 36.30% declines take place. 22 In Indonesia, the period from 1998 to 2003 was indeed one of major national level Resource–related 106 0.55% political and socio–economic change driven by parallel transitions from authoritarianism to democracy (reformasi ) and from a centralized to decentralized polity (desentralisasi ) as well as changes to the structure Governance–related 54 0.28% of Indonesia’s economy following the Asian financial crisis (krismon). These national–level changes Electoral 12 0.06% constituted a ‘critical juncture’, as the rules of the game—what institutions would emerge, and whose interests they would represent—were redefined (Bertrand 2004). In this context, local leaders in different Vigilante 117 0.61% parts of the country responded by using violence to cement or extend their control of the local political Other and economic arena (Klinken 2007) and religious leaders used violence to assert and maintain their Crime 2,959 15.4% authority in time of change (Sidel 2006). The weakening of the capacity and will of state security forces Domestic violence  152 0.8% Law enforcement 112 0.6% 19 See, in particular, the articles in Anderson (2001) and Colombijn and Lindblad (2002). 20 Data are for: Central Kalimantan, West Kalimantan, Maluku, North Maluku, Aceh, Central Sulawesi, East Nusa Tenggara, Papua, and Unclear 64 0.3% West Papua (from NVMS); and Banten, Jakarta, West Java, East Java, Central Java, Riau, West Nusa Tenggara, and South Sulawesi (from UNSFIR–2). This figure does not include deaths from East Timor. The figure is an underestimate as UNSFIR does not record TOTAL 19,276 many smaller incidents of violence. 21 Mansfield and Snyder (1995), Snyder (2000), Hegre et al. (2001) and Huntingdon (1991). Source: NVMS. Data are for: Aceh, Central Kalimantan, Central Sulawesi, Maluku, North Maluku, Papua, West 22 Chua (2003), Paris (2004) and Cramer (2006). Papua and We st Kalimantan. 8 9 The early transition years: Large–scale Subnational Violence (1998–2003) The early transition years: Large–scale Subnational Violence (1998–2003) Table 3: Summary of early transition violence in Indonesia around two years later set Malays against the Madurese. In February 2001, Dayaks in Central Kalimantan attacked the Madurese over the course of a few weeks, resulting in 90 percent of the Madurese population Period of large– fleeing the province (ICG 2001). While the violence in West and Central Kalimantan was shorter than that in Province Form Deaths Injuries Buildings scale violence Maluku, North Maluku and Central Sulawesi, there were similarities. Fatalities were high (over a thousand Aceh Civil war Jan 98–end July 0523 10,613 8,546 9,230 in each province, except Central Sulawesi—Table 3), violence was highly organized, government services came to a halt, and clashes were spread over large geographic areas. North Communal Aug 99–end June 00 3,257 2,635 15,004 Maluku Beyond these areas of extended violent conflict, incidents of episodic large–scale violence also became Maluku Communal Jan 99–end Feb 02 2,793 5,057 13,843 more common. The biggest of these were the massive riots that engulfed Jakarta in mid–May and that preceded the fall of Suharto. Anti–Chinese riots also hit other Indonesian cities such as Medan in North East Timor Civil war Jan 98–end Dec 99 1,485–1,585 N/A N/A Sumatra and Solo in Central Java (Purdey 2006). An estimated 1,193 died in Jakarta alone; 24 the riots in West Jan 97–end Feb 97 / Solo led to 33 deaths and Rp 457 billion (US$ 46 million) of property damage in a city of just 400,000 Communal 1,103 646 3,830 Kalimantan Feb 99–end Apr 99 people (Panggabean and Smith 2010). The 2002 Bali bombing killed over 200 people while the Australian Central Embassy in Jakarta was attacked in 2004 and the Marriot Hotel in Jakarta in 2003 (and again in 2009). The Communal Feb 01–end Apr 01 1,031 77 1,998 Kalimantan early post–Suharto period can thus be characterized as a time of high violence with the greatest impact concentrated in a small number of provinces, but with episodes of violence rising across the country. For Central Communal Apr 00–end Dec 01 517 579 6,004 some analysts, the risk of Indonesia fragmenting Balkans–style was real (Emmerson 2000; Aspinall and Sulawesi Berger 2001). Total 20,799–21,799 17,540 + 49,909 + Source: NVMS. Timor data from CAVR (2005). In two provinces, long–running civil wars gained new momentum. In Aceh, the war between the secessionist Free Aceh Movement (GAM) and the Indonesian military heated up with at least 8,775 killed between 1999 and 2003 and a further 1,521 losing their lives in 2004. In East Timor, 1,400–2,600 people were killed as the province parted from Indonesia, adding to the tens of thousands of deaths during the Indonesian occupation (CAVR 2005). Papua, too, saw separatist violence, although this was much more sporadic than in either Aceh or Timor. Other provinces experienced escalated communal violence. As we have said, the New Order era was certainly not free of inter–religious and inter–ethnic unrest, but episodes were usually short–lived, burning out after a day or two, often after the arrival of the military. In contrast, new communal violence in five Indonesian provinces continued for months or years, resulting in enormous destruction of lives and property. In Central Sulawesi and Maluku, the cleavage was primarily a religious one; in North Maluku, ethnic violence morphed into inter–religious battles. Violence endured in North Maluku for almost a year; in Maluku and Central Sulawesi for multiple years. Extended communal violence also broke out in Indonesian Borneo. For around three weeks from late 1996 to early 2007, while Suharto was still in power, ethnic Dayaks in West Kalimantan attacked the migrant Madurese community; a second round of violence 23 Best estimates are that between 1,574 and 6,074 people were killed in Aceh between 1976 and the end of 1997. These figures are calculated by subtracting deaths in Aceh for the 1999–2005 period (as reported in NVMS) from Aspinall’s (2009: 2) estimates of the number of deaths over three decades of violence in Aceh. 24 Data from UNSFIR–2. 10 11 The post–conflict phase: High Frequency, Low Fatalities (2004–2012) THE POST–CONFLICT PHASE: 4 The decline in deaths was largely a consequence of the large–scale communal conflicts coming to an end. After the initial turbulence that accompanied the fall of Suharto, new rules of the game were forged that reduced the incentives of elites to support — actively or passively — the escalation of violence. 27 Rainbow cabinets, which contained most elements of political society, were formed; the military, realizing that core HIGH FREQUENCY, LOW FATALITIES (2004–2012) interests were not under significant threat, pledged loyalty to civilian political institutions. The resulting political stability allowed the state to start addressing the large–scale conflicts that had been a by–product of the early stages of transition. At least two mechanisms were important. First, the state was able to more effectively coopt belligerents Figure 1 shows the decline in violent deaths in 15 provinces for which we have time series data until (for example, through peace accords and deployment of post–conflict assistance in Maluku, Sulawesi 2009. 25 The big wave of violence experienced its peak in 1999 when the toll stood at over 4,500 deaths. The and Aceh). Second, relative political consensus led to the more effective deployment of state coercion, following two years saw similar levels of violence but by early 2002 the death toll began to decline as peace as the security forces began to ensure adherence to the terms of settlements, preventing conflicts accords were concluded in Central Sulawesi and Maluku. By 2003, annual fatalities had reduced by half. from reescalating. Figure 1: Decline of violence–related deaths in Indonesia While the overall decline of violence has been dramatic across the country, the process of deescalation has not been uniform. Figure 2 shows the patterns of deescalation in different parts of Indonesia. We observe 5000 a sharp drop in violence followed by uniformly low levels of violence throughout the post–conflict period All provinces in areas where capacities of warring groups for violence were destroyed (North Maluku). Aceh experienced Aceh 4000 a similarly rapid deescalation of civil war violence following the Helsinki Memorandum of Agreement 3000 Figure 2: Patterns of deescalation in Indonesia–decline in violence–related deaths 2000 West Kalimantan Central Sulawesi 800 450 700 400 1000 350 600 300 500 250 0 400 200 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 300 150 200 100 Source: NVMS and UNSFIR–2. 100 50 0 0 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 19 19 19 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 19 19 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 In our judgment, the end of 2003 is a distinctive cut–off point to distinguish the high conflict phase from the low conflict one. The clear exception to this is the civil war in Aceh, which was only concluded North Maluku Aceh 2000 3000 in August 2005. As we know, all cut–offs in empirical analysis are to some extent arbitrary, as ours might 1800 2500 appear to some. However, by the end of 2003, Indonesian observers were beginning to believe that a new 1600 1400 2000 phase of low conflict had set in. This is why most assessments of large–scale violence in Indonesia, such 1200 1000 as UNSFIR, focus on the events up to 2003. Following this trend, we refer to the 2004–2012 period as the 800 1500 post–conflict phase. 26 600 1000 400 500 200 0 0 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 9 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 19 19 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 19 19 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 25 Data are for the provinces mentioned in footnote 20, with the exception of Riau, which is not included because we do not Source: NVMS. have post–2003 data. The year 2004 data are missing for the four provinces on Java, South Sulawesi, and West Nusa Tenggara. Smaller–scale violence is likely under–reported for the earlier years given that we rely on UNSFIR–2 for some provinces for the pre–2005 period. 26 To account for the ongoing violence in Aceh until 2005, we have separated Aceh in all cumulative analysis. 27 Barron (2014: chapter 8) provides a fuller discussion. See also, Mietzner (2009), Crouch (2010) and Horowitz (2013). 12 13 The post–conflict phase: High Frequency, Low Fatalities (2004–2012) The post–conflict phase: High Frequency, Low Fatalities (2004–2012) (MoU) between Gerakan Aceh Merdeka (GAM) and the government. However, new types of violence, most more fatal in these places. Controlling for the population difference between the two samples, we find notably related to local elections and resource distribution, have since appeared in Aceh. The deescalation the former to be true: the frequency of violent incidents is 36% greater in high conflict areas than in low process has been more gradual in other areas. Central Sulawesi continued to experience outbreaks of conflict ones, while the deaths–to–incident ratios are similar in both samples. religious violence for several years even after a government brokered peace agreement was signed in December 2001. West Kalimantan witnessed two episodes of anti–Madurese violence in rapid succession If we narrow our focus to look only at collective violence, defined in the dataset as those incidents that before it finally subsided. involve mobilization of a group of 10 or more individuals to participate in a riot or a clash, we also see continued differences between high conflict and low conflict provinces. We find that the frequency of While the pace of deescalation varied between provinces, all high conflict areas in Indonesia have one collective violence is significantly higher in the former (Figure 3). The fatality rate of collective violence feature in common: despite some experiencing sporadic but frequent outbursts of post–conflict violence, — the ratio of deaths per incident — is seven times higher in high conflict provinces than low conflict a full reescalation to the levels of the early post–Suharto period has not occurred. A new phase has come provinces, even in the post–conflict period. 30 Given the description in the preceding paragraph — namely, about, in which violence continues to occur but does not rise beyond a particular threshold. the frequency of violence being greater in high–conflict provinces, not the fatality rate — this finding may seem surprising, even contradictory. The seeming contradiction can be resolved if we note that the figures 4.1 Levels of post–conflict violence and its impact above are about overall violence, whereas figures in this paragraph are about collective violence. It is also Compared to the conflict period (1998–2003), the post–conflict period (2004–2012) saw a 79% reduction worth reporting that incidents of collective violence in post–conflict areas have been on the rise since in annual violent deaths in the provinces previously ravaged by communal conflict. Aceh has seen a 94% 2006 (Figure 4). decline in annual fatalities since the civil war was brought to an end in August 2005. 28 With the exception of injuries in areas of previous communal conflict, other impacts from violence have also declined (Table 4). Given the steep decline, is it reasonable to conclude that violence levels in these areas have normalized? By normalization, we mean returning to all–Indonesia averages. To examine the degree of convergence Figure 3: Collective violence in post–conflict period (annual ave./100,000 people) with the rest of the country, we compared homicide rates29 in the high and low conflict provinces. The data indicates that in the post–conflict period, high conflict provinces still experience a homicide rate 6 that is 32% higher than that in the low conflict ones. A higher number of homicides can indicate either of Low-Con ict Provinces two phenomena: deadly violence occurs more frequently in previously high conflict areas or violence is High-Con ict Provinces 5 Table 4: Decline in impact of violence 4 4 Post–Conflict Provinces Aceh (except Aceh)  2   Annual Annual Annual Annual Ave Ave Post– % Ave Ave Post– % Conflict Conflict Change Conflict Conflict Change Period Period Period Period 1 Deaths 1,738 365 –79% 1,330 82 –94% 0 Injuries 3,006 3,272 9% 1,079 472 –56% Incidents Deaths Injuries Buildings Kidnappings 43 31 –27% 346 27 –92% Source: NVMS Buildings damaged 7,391 674 –91% 1,164 90 –92% Source: NVMS. 30 In high conflict provinces, every 1.3 incidents of collective violence result in a death in the post–conflict period. In low conflict 28 Average annual fatalities in Aceh during 1998–2005: 1,738. Between 2006–2012 the number declined to 365 provinces, every 10 such incidents result in a death. Notably, the ratio of injured persons and buildings damaged to incidents is the 29 Average annual deaths per 100,000 people. same across high and low conflict provinces. 14 15 The post–conflict phase: High Frequency, Low Fatalities (2004–2012) The post–conflict phase: High Frequency, Low Fatalities (2004–2012) Figure 4: Collective violence over time in High Conflict Provinces Figure 5: Post–conflict violence concentrated in old conflict sites 1400 Maluku Incidents Deaths Injuries Building Damaged 1200 Central Sulawesi West Papua 1000 Central Kalimantan Papua 800 West Kalimantan 600 North Maluku Aceh 400 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 200 Post-Con ict Period (% of total deaths from 4 most violent districts from con ict period) 0 Con ict Periode (% of total deaths from 4 most violent districts) 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Source: NVMS. Source: NVMS. 4.2 Sites of post–conflict violence In some cases, like Maluku, Papua and Aceh, there has been virtually no change in the share of violence Highly localized concentration of violence was one of the defining features of Indonesia’s high conflict accounted for by these areas. This finding is consistent with research elsewhere, suggesting that areas that period. The UNSFIR study concluded that between 1990 and 2003, 85% of collective violence deaths were experience large–scale violence are likely to remain vulnerable to new, often interlinked forms of violence concentrated in 15 districts that represented just 6.5% of Indonesia’s population (Varshney, Tadjoeddin, in the post–conflict period. 34 and Panggabean 2010). To examine how concentration levels have changed in the post–conflict period, we restricted our sample of violent deaths to only those that result from incidents of collective violence (the 4.3 Composition of post–conflict violence definition used by UNSFIR) and included data from all 16 high and low conflict provinces to form a larger So far, we have shown that violence is more frequent in provinces with a prior history of large–scale sample. 31 Using the UNSFIR definition, we find that in the post–conflict period, districts that represent conflict. Within these provinces, post–conflict violence tends to be concentrated in old sites. But is the new just over 13% of the country’s population account for 85% of collective violence deaths. 32 While this figure violence merely a continuation of the old conflicts at lower levels, or have new types of violence emerged? indicates a lower level of concentration than in the past, collective violence is still quite concentrated. 33 Figure 6 shows the composition of violence in the eight high conflict provinces during the post–conflict Within the sample of high conflict provinces, we find that not only is the violence still highly concentrated period. 35 Compared with the early post–Suharto years that were dominated by ethno–communal and in these areas but that it also tends to occur in the same sites that experienced the highest levels of separatist violence (Table 2), in the post–conflict period, some of these types of violence have continued, violence during the conflict period. Figure 5 compares the share of violence–related deaths that occurred but new ones have emerged making the composition of violence much more diverse. in the four most violent districts in each province in the conflict period with the share of deaths in the same districts in the post–conflict period. We can see that with the exception of North Maluku, the most Ethno–communal violence still accounts for a quarter of all conflict deaths in the post–conflict areas violent districts in the conflict period still account for more than 40% of the total deaths in the province. in the second phase. Continuation of low–level religious violence in Poso and Ambon, intensification of tribal warfare in Papua and the rise of village rivalries explain why this is still the largest category of conflict. Even though normal life has long been restored in (most of) these areas, small incidents involving members of different religious groups, or even rumors of such an incident, can trigger violent reaction. A relatively recent example of this was in May 2013 when, during a torch passing ceremony associated with 31 The actual list of provinces included in the UNSFIR study is slightly different from the one used for NVMS. UNSFIR excluded Aceh, Papua and West Papua and included West and Central Java. NVMS includes the former but excludes the latter. However, none of the commemoration of a local hero, clashes, apparently triggered by a disagreement over protocol, broke the districts from West and Central Java were included in UNSFIR’s 15 most violent districts. 32 Calculated for the period 2005–2009 for which data from all high and low conflict provinces is available.We compare the population as the number of districts is not comparable between the UNSFIR and the NVMS sample due to rapid frequent district splitting during between 1998 and 2008. 33 When we unrestricted our sample to include all incidents of violence, collective or individual, we find similar levels of 34 The World Development Report of 2011 (World Bank 2011) makes this argument for post–civil war areas. We find that this it also concentration: 85% of all violent deaths are accounted for by districts that represent 40% of the country’s population. This holds true also for areas that experienced prolonged episodes of large–scale communal violence. suggests that collective violence is more concentrated than other forms of violence. 35 High conflict period is 1998–2003 for all provinces except Aceh, where it is 1998–2005. 16 17 The post–conflict phase: High Frequency, Low Fatalities (2004–2012) The post–conflict phase: High Frequency, Low Fatalities (2004–2012) Figure 6: Composition of post–conflict violence in high conflict provinces Violence related to local elections has also risen, particularly in areas with a history of separatist violence. In Aceh for example, the number of violent electoral incidents has increased from an average of seven a Ethno-Communal Others year (in the conflict period) to 47 per year as a result of fierce political competition between rival factions Violence Type Deaths Governance 4% 4% of the former rebel group. 40 In fact, the NVMS data shows that following the decline of the separatist Conflict 906 Electoral violence, levels of other forms of violence, including criminal activity, have increased in Aceh and tend to 7% peak around the local elections. As Figure 7 shows, overall levels of violence have spiked around election Crime 2,352 18% Separatism time in Aceh. Papua and West Papua provinces have also seen a steady rise of electoral violence against Domestic Violence 455 the backdrop of an ongoing insurgency. Between 2008 and 2012, 48 deaths were recorded as a result of disputes during local elections, making Papua the site of the most violent elections in the country (NVMS). Law-enforcement 149 26% TOTAL 3,862 Figure 7: Violence in Aceh over time 20% Vigilante Resource 21% All Incidents Separatist Incidents Injuries Building Damaged 3000 Source: NVMS 2500 MoU between 36 GoI and GAM Elections Elections out between Christian and Muslim residents in the Mardika and Batumerah hamlets in Ambon. Clashes 2000 lasted for several hours resulting in 55 injuries and the burning of five houses and 11 vehicles. 37 Rumors of impending bomb blasts, later dispelled by the police, sent residents looking for safe locations and 1500 the city was shut down for the day. 38 Despite the residual communal tensions evident in these sporadic 1000 post–conflict outbreaks, it should be reiterated that Indonesia has managed to avoid a major outbreak that would remind one of the pre–2003 period. 500 The post–conflict period in Indonesia has been accompanied by rapid economic growth, political and 0 institutional change including direct local elections and decentralization. One consequence has been a 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 rise in resource–related violence, mostly land disputes, which have increased from 76 average incidents a year in the conflict period to 158 in the post conflict period. 39 According to some observers, land disputes between groups and individuals have existed for decades (Habibie Center 2012). However, the recent Source: NVMS. influx of outside investment for palm oil plantations and mining projects has raised the stakes in these disputes. This has resulted in a spate of violent confrontations between communities, private company employees and even government officials. An example of this kind of dynamic is found in Central Maluku Before we proceed to a causal examination of trends, let us summarize the argument thus far. We have district in Maluku province, the site of intense Christian–Muslim violence in 1999. Between 2005 and noted that violence in the second phase has not reescalated to the levels seen in the early post–Suharto 2012, a complex land dispute, involving claims by multiple villages, has claimed 33 lives with scores more days. However, we have also documented three other trends. First, we showed that despite the dramatic injured and hundreds of buildings destroyed (NVMS). So far, the conflict does not appear to be drawn decline of violence–related deaths, the frequency of violence in post–conflict areas has remained high. along religious lines as villages of the same and different religious affiliations are in competition with Indeed, the frequency of collective violence incidents has increased since 2006 resulting in a growing one another (Habibie Center 2012). However, given the recent history of religious violence between these number of injuries and property damage across these areas, though each incident is less fatal. Second, we villages a possible reframing of the issue is an ongoing concern for the government, which has attempted, showed that violence is still concentrated in provinces that previously experienced large–scale conflict unsuccessfully to mediate the dispute. and, within these, it is highly concentrated in districts that were particularly affected by conflict in the past. Third, we traced changes in the composition of violence to show how old triggers of violence such as ethnic and religious tensions continue to account for a major share of violence, but also how rising levels of 36 These areas were the location of the first outbreak of communal violence in Maluku in 1999. resource and electoral disputes have created new avenues for violence in the post–conflict period. 37 NVMS. 38 For further examples, see Barron, Azca, and Susdinarjanti (2012). 39 The rise of resource related violence is not unique to the ‘high conflict’ areas of Indonesia. Analysis of the ‘low conflict’ areas shows that there is no significant difference in the frequency these incidents between the two samples. 40 See ICG (2012b). 18 19 Managing the Post–conflict Pattern: improved Security Responses 5 Figure 8: Change in incidence of collective violence in high conflict areas and interventions by security forces MANAGING THE POST–CONFLICT PATTERN: Incidents All-Violence Incidents of Collective Violence IMPROVED SECURITY RESPONSES Attempted Intervenions by Security Forces Successful Intervenions by Security Forces 3000 1200 2500 1000 Why has violence not reescalated to the older level? Recall that the initial deescalation of violence 2000 800 in Indonesia was attributed to two factors related to the political rules of the game at the center. A new consensus on the lack of desirability of escalated regional violence led to state–sponsored peace settlements. Moreover, such a political shift also allowed for a more effective deployment of security 1500 600 personnel to prevent escalation of violence. 1000 400 We argue these two factors continue to play a key role in ensuring lower levels of violence, despite many underlying causes of large–scale violent conflict remaining in place. Eruption of episodic violence in 500 200 post–conflict areas is usually met with a stern response from the highest–level officials in the central government; this translates into swift security interventions on the ground. In many cases, local police 0 0 units have been quickly reinforced by rapid deployment of regional reserves. 41 In extreme cases, assistance 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 is sought from the stand–by military units that have been stationed in these areas since the initial Source: NVMS. conflict. Our data shows that this active management of the security situation has worked well to prevent massive casualties. Beyond collecting information on incidents of violence, their impact and triggers, the NVMS also records where an ‘intervention’ was made to stop the violence during the course of an incident. If made, the identity This paradox can be explained by the rise in interventions by security forces that has accompanied the of the intervener is coded (such as the law enforcement agency or civilian leaders) along with the result upsurge in collective violence incidents. During the conflict period, only 10% of these incidents saw any of the intervention. An intervention is coded as successful if the intervener is able to stop the violence interventions from the security forces. Following 2006, however, security forces have intervened in about and is able to disperse the actors involved (either through arrests or other means). Figure 8 shows how half of all collective violence incidents. While the majority of security interventions were attempted by both interventions by security forces, and success, have increased over time in the province that saw the Indonesian military during the conflict period, in the post–conflict period the police is the primary large–scale violence. responder, accounting for over 80% of all interventions. 42 Similarly, the success of interventions has risen steeply with an average success rate of over 85%. In short, intervention by the security forces in collective Overall, incidents of individual violence (corresponding with the left axis) have remained uniformly high violence incidents has increased and helped limit further violent escalation. over the years. However, the number of collective violence incidents (corresponding with right axis) has risen steadily following an initial deescalation around 2004. The number of such incidents tripled between While we attribute the relatively lower levels of fatalities to increasing and improved security force 2006 and 2012. In the previous section, we showed how this surge in collective violence incidents has been interventions, we are not making any claims about the long–term effectiveness of this strategy. The accompanied by a sharp increase in the number of injuries and damaged buildings but not deaths, which number of interventions only represents attempts to halt the violence in an incident that has already have remained low. occurred. It does not tell us anything about the attempts to prevent such incident from occurring in the first place. The Indonesian security agencies have been widely criticized for not following up security action with broader law enforcement measures such as arrest of perpetrators or control of the smaller–scale violence (ICG 2012c). 41 See, for example: McRae (2013) on improved security responses in Poso; Wilson’s (2013) account of security responses to riots in East Kalimantan; and ICG (2011, 2012b) on responses to violence in Ambon. 42 Although the percentage of military interventions has increased gradually over the last four years. 20 21 Managing the Post–conflict Pattern: improved Security Responses Further, while we claim that this damage control approach is responsible for keeping fatality levels relatively low in high conflict areas, we are by no means implying that interventions by Indonesian security forces are adequate across the universe of cases. Of late much has been written in the local and 6 CONCLUSION international press about the unwillingness of local police forces to intervene and stop violence against minorities. Documentary evidence has surfaced in many cases where mobs have attacked members of the Ahmadiyya community, while police officers have looked on. 43 Indeed when we check the rate of interventions in low conflict areas, we find that it is much lower (30%) than in the high conflict areas. The strategy of swift intervention in response to collective violence incidents that is practiced in high–risk areas does not appear to take place in areas that have not seen large–scale conflict in the past. By way of conclusion, let us recapitulate our principal arguments. We have made three substantive arguments and one methodological. First, Indonesia has witnessed a significant decline in violence since Finally, we are not making any claims about the sustainability of this approach to violence management in 2004. A paradox, however, marks this decline. Incidents of violence have remained high, but fatalities per the future. In fact, when we note that violence continues to be widespread in areas with an acute history of incident have come down. Large–scale violence is precipitously lower than in the immediate post–Suharto violence, the fragility of the current equilibrium perhaps becomes apparent. That violence is being artfully years (1998–2003), but small–scale violence remains unabated. Second, provinces that experienced managed through a series of successful security interventions is no guarantee that this strategy will work high levels of violence in the early period continue to be more violent in the later period, compared to in the future. provinces that previously witnessed low levels of violence. There is no nationwide spatial convergence in in the intensity of conflict. Third, effective security interventions by the state, embedded in a new political settlement, especially in the high–conflict provinces, are an important cause of the decline in overall violence. The state is on the whole able to prevent the escalation of those episodes of violence, which in its judgment have the potential to turn into larger conflagrations. It is not entirely clear that this conflict management strategy will necessarily work in the long run unless the polity addresses the underlying causes of conflict. Our final conclusion is methodological. Conflict studies have so far tended to concentrate on one kind of violence (for example, Muslim–Christian, Sinhala–Tamil, Hindu–Muslim, Chinese– pribumi, etc), or one form of violence (for example, riots or civil wars). Collecting data on all forms of violence together allows one to see how forms of violence can change over time, even when a period of peace, as we normally understand it, sets in. Forms of violence can morph as time goes on. 43 For details see report by the Asian Human Rights Commission http://www.humanrights.asia/news/urgent– appeals/AHRC–UAC–071–2012 22 23 References Chua, Amy (2003). World on Fire: How Exporting Free Market Democracy Breeds Ethnic Hatred and Global Instability. New York: Doubleday. Anderson, Benedict R. O’G. (ed.) (2001). Violence and the State in Suharto’s Indonesia. Ithaca, N.Y.: Southeast Asia Program, Cornell University. Colombijn, Freek and Thomas Lindblad (eds.) (2002). Roots of Violence in Indonesia. Singapore: Institute of Southeast Asian Studies. Aspinall, Edward (2009). Islam and Nation: Separatist Rebellion in Aceh, Indonesia. Stanford, CA.: Stanford University Press. Cramer, Christopher (2006). Civil War is Not a Stupid Thing: Accounting for Violence in Developing Countries. London: Hurst & Company. Aspinall, Edward and Mark T. Berger (2001). “The Breakup of Indonesia? Nationalism after decolonisation and the contradictions of modernity in post–cold war Southeast Asia.” Third World Quarterly 22(6): Cribb, Robert (1990). The Indonesian killings of 1965–1966: studies from Java and Bali. Melbourne: Centre of 1003–1024. Southeast Asian Studies, Monash University. Barker, Joshua (2001). “State of Fear: Controlling the Criminal Contagion in Suharto’s New Order,” in Crouch, Harold (2010). Political Reform in Indonesia After Soeharto. Singapore: Institute for Southeast Benedict R. O’G Anderson (ed.) Violence and the State in Suharto’s Indonesia. Ithaca, N.Y.: Southeast Asian Studies. Asia Program, Cornell University, pp. 20–53. Daly, Sarah Zuckerman (2012). “Organizational Legacies of Violence: Conditions Favoring Insurgency in Barron, Patrick (2014). “Barriers to the Consolidation of Peace: The Political Economy of Post–Conflict Colombia, 1964–1984.” Journal of Peace Research 49(3): 473–491. Violence in Indonesia.” DPhil thesis. University of Oxford. Emmerson, Donald K. (2000). “Will Indonesia Survive?” Foreign Affairs 79(3): 95–106. Barron, Patrick, Muhammad Najib Azca, and Tri Susdinarjanti (2012). After the Communal War: Understanding and Addressing Post–Conflict Violence in Eastern Indonesia. Yogyakarta: CSPS Books. The Habibie Center (2012). “Map of Violence in Indonesia (January–April 2012).” Available at http:// snpk–indonesia.com/AnalysisReport/Index?lang=en&randdo=42dc15e1–aaeb–43be–a5a1– Barron, Patrick, Sana Jaffrey, Blair Palmer, and Ashutosh Varshney (2009). “Understanding Violent Conflict 76147c80ed9e&userid=7120158#sthash.3bvisH0F.dpuf (accessed June 26th 2014) in Indonesia: A Mixed Methods Approach.” Social Development Paper no. 117. Washington, D.C.: World Bank. Hegre, Håvard, Tanja Ellingsen, Scott Gates, and Nils Petter Gleditsch (2001). “Toward a Democratic Civil Peace? Democracy, Political Change, and Civil War, 1816–1992.” American Political Science Review Barron, Patrick, Kai Kaiser, and Menno Pradhan (2009). “Understanding Variations in Local Conflict: 95(1): 33–48. Evidence and Implications from Indonesia.” World Development 37(3): 698–713. Heryanto, Ariel (2006). State Terrorism and Political Identity in Indonesia: Fatally Belonging. London: Barron, Patrick and Joanne Sharpe (2005). “Counting Conflicts: Using Newspaper Reports to Understand Routledge. Violence in Indonesia.” Indonesian Social Development Papers no. 7. Jakarta: World Bank. Horowitz, Donald L. (2013). Constitutional Change and Democracy in Indonesia. New York and Cambridge: Blattman, Christopher, and Edward Miguel. 2010. “Civil War” Journal of Economic Literature, 48(1): 3–57. Cambridge University Press. Bertrand, Jacques (2004). Nationalism and Ethnic Violence in Indonesia. Cambridge: Cambridge Huntingdon, Samuel (1991). The Third Wave: Democratization in the Late Twentieth Century. Normal: University Press. University of Oklahoma Press. Bourchier, David (1990). “Crime, Law and State Authority in Indonesia,” in Arief Budiman (ed.) State and Civil Institut Tititan Perdamaian (ITP) (2010). Violence Increased Dispersedly: Analysis of Variant, Pattern and Society in Indonesia. Clayton, Victoria: Monash University, pp. 177–212. Structure of Conflict and Violence in Indonesia in 2009–2010. Available at: The Timor–Leste Commission for Reception, Truth and Reconciliation (CAVR) (2005). “7.2 Unlawful Killings (accessed 12 July 2012). and Enforced Disappearances” in Chega! The Report of the Commission for Reception, Truth and Reconciliation in Timor–Leste (CAVR). Dili: CAVR. Available at: < http://www.cavr–timorleste.org/ International Crisis Group (ICG) (2001). “Communal Violence in Indonesia: Lessons from Kalimantan.” Asia chegaFiles/finalReportEng/07.2–Unlawful–Killings–and–Enforced–Disappearances.pdf> (accessed Report no. 19. Jakarta/Brussels: ICG. 27 June. 14 May 2013). 24 25 International Crisis Group (ICG) (2011). “Indonesia: Trouble Again in Ambon.” Asia Briefing no. 128. Jakarta/ Sidel, John T. (2006). Riots, Pogroms, Jihad: Religious Violence in Indonesia. Ithica, N.Y.: Cornell Brussels: ICG. 4 October. University Press. International Crisis Group (ICG) (2012a). “Indonesia: Cautious Calm in Ambon.” Asia Briefing no. 133. Jakarta/ Siegel, James (1998). A New Criminal Type in Jakarta: Counter–revolution Today. Durham, N.C.: Duke Brussels: ICG. 13 February University Press. International Crisis Group (ICG) (2012b). “Indonesia: Averting Election Violence in Aceh.” Asia Briefing no. Snyder, David and William R. Kelly (1977). “Conflict Intensity, Media Sensitivity and the Validity of 135. Jakarta/Brussels: ICG. 29 February. Newspaper Data.” American Sociological Review 42: 105–123. International Crisis Group (ICG) (2012c). “Indonesia: The Deadly Cost of Poor Policing.” Asia Briefing no. 218. Snyder, Jack (2000). From Voting to Violence: Democratization and Nationalist Conflict. New York and London: Jakarta/Brussels: ICG. 16 February. W. W. Norton & Co. Isaac, Jeffrey C. (2012). “New Approaches to the Study of Violence.” Perspectives on Politics 10(2): 235–241. Tajima, Yuhki (2012). “The Institutional basis of Intercommunal Order: Evidence from Indonesia’s Democratic Transition.” American Journal of Political Science 57(1): 104–119. Klinken, Gerry van (2007). Communal Violence and Democratization in Indonesia: Small Town Wars. London: Routledge. Varshney, Ashutosh (2002). Ethnic Conflict and Civil Life: Hindus and Muslims in India. New Haven: Yale University Press. Liem Soei Liong (2002). “It’s the Military, Stupid!,” in Freek Colombijn and J. Thomas Lindblad (eds.) Roots of Violence in Indonesia: Contemporary Violence in Historical Perspective. Singapore: Institute of Varshney, Ashutosh (2007). “Ethnicity and Ethnic Conflict,” in Charles Boix and Susan C. Stokes (eds.) The Southeast Asian Studies, pp. 197–226. Oxford Handbook of Comparative Politics. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 274–295. Mansfield, Edward and Jack Snyder (1995). “Democratization and the Danger of War.” International Security Varshney, Ashutosh (2008). “Analyzing Collective Violence in Indonesia: An Overview.” Journal of East Asian 20(1): 5–38. Studies 8(3): 341–360. Marhaenjati, Bayu and Farouk Arnas (2011). “Police Say Crime Is Down, as Are Rights Violations.” The Jakarta Varshney, Ashutosh, Mohammad Zulfan Tadjoeddin, and Rizal Panggabean (2010). “Patterns of Collective Globe. 31 December. Available at: (accessed 14 May 2013). Lynne Rienner, pp. 19–50. McRae, Dave (2013). A Few Poorly Organized Men: Interreligous Violence in Poso, Indonesia. Leiden: Brill. Vothknecht, Marc and Sudarno Sumarto (2011). “Beyond the Overall Economic Downturn: Evidence of Sector–specific Effects on Violent Conflict from Indonesia.” DIW Discussion Papers no. 1105. Berlin: Mietzner, Marcus (2009). Military Politics, Islam, and the State in Indonesia. Singapore: Institute of Southeast German Institute for Economic Research. Asian Studies. Weinstein, Jeremy M. (2007). Inside Rebellion: The Politics of Insurgent Violence. Cambridge: Cambridge Panggabean, Samsu Rizal and Benjamin Smith (2010). “Explaining Anti–Chinese Riots in Late 20 th Century University Press. Indonesia.” World Development 39(2): 231–242. Wilson, Chris (2013). “‘Ethnic outbidding’ for patronage: the 2010 riots in Tarakan, Indonesia.” Southeast Asia Paris, Roland. (2004). At War’s End: Building Peace After Civil Conflict. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Research 21(1): 105–129. Purdey, Jemma (2006). Anti–Chinese Violence in Indonesia, 1996–1999. Singapore: Singapore University Press. World Bank (2011). World Development Report 2011: Conflict, Security and Development. Washington, D.C.: World Bank. Raleigh, Clionadh, Andrew Linke, Håvard Hegre, and Joakim Karlsen (2010). “Introducing ACLED–Armed Conflict Location and Event Data.” Journal of Peace Research 47(5) 1–10. Robinson, Geoffrey (1995). The Dark Side of Paradise: Political Violence in Bali. Ithica and London: Cornell University Press. 26 27