Building a Better Indonesia Intelligence

Building a Better Indonesia Intelligence

By David Raja Marpaung

As the intelligence agencies, at least there are three main tasks to be done, namely the function of investigation, raising functions, and security functions. Various views and opinions of increasingly loud sounds in the media since the reform era. But unfortunately, many more negative opinions or views of the developing world, compared to positive issues outstanding. 

This is not apart from the involvement of individual members and BIN (National Inteligence Agency) officials in some cases the law, especially its links with human rights activist Munir's death, BIN face protective equipment and should be an antidote to internal and external threats, turned into a figure which is an extension of the ruler; in this government. BIN and often can not be separated from co-optation of government officials. The main functions and tasks of the actual BIN related with the problem of terrorism or threats of domestic and overseas that could endanger national stability. So a strange thing, if all the problems that occur in this country becomes BIN responsibility.


Understanding the Function of Intelligence

         BIN is actually not as intelligence agencies that wrong or useless, but  its job and qualification depens on to the user which is the President as Head of Government. Based on empirical facts, wherever in this world that the country's powerful intelligence will be strong. America has the CIA (Central Intelligence Agency) is very popular in the cold war era up to now, while Russia has a very famous KGB foreign intelligence and expert in counter-intelligence. Mossad also stunned the world are very good at treating the conflict in the Middle East, so that the Arab countries look helpless against a small country like Israel.


From the example above shows that the role of intelligence was really important when used purely for the sake of the safety of the state. So that the authority of the investigation, raising, and security, and so is an essential function that must be possessed to be able to carry out intelligence work


Intelligence agencies will be crippled if one of its functions is cut or not running optimally. For example, if the intelligence is only authorized investigation, the BIN is like a toothless tiger, or Sukhoi without missiles. Functions of investigation can be done even better by the media or the social and political researcher. So it should be understood that the activity consists of Investigation Intelligence, Raising, and security, so that all three activities that must be attached to your body and the new Intelligence could carry out the task

One case that can be taken is how to deal with terrorist groups in Indonesia. For example  on results of the investigation there is information that a group of terrorist activities and plotting to blow up the bomb. Having no known information and activities, but they are not directly captured into the first agent infiltrated the group to perform in depth and with affect are made, the next activity in the final stage to implement the task of security activities that make an arrest. And when it secured later in the interrogation and sufficient appropriate evidence of new criminal acts submitted to the Police for further processing and forwarded to the Court.

Weak Intelligence Agency in the Reformation era as allowing the emergence of terrorist groups that conduct terror bombings, suicide bombings, bomb the book, and so forth. It is actually not one of intelligence, but which one is the user should the people who use it.Just as the knife at home ladder to cut up tomatoes and onions and so forth, but when used to kill people, "then we should not blame the knife is not the case," that one is not the knife but the wrong people who use it ".


Reliable intelligence


BIN should practice his professional and reliable personnel and adequate equipment, and have the ability to tackle terrorism and other threats against the Homeland.However, despite the strength of BIN personnel, the state must provide an environment mempu a good atmosphere, so that members are not shy or hesitant to do intelligence work.


The success is also supported by the existence of intelligence Intelligence Act which protects intelligence tasks. But now that the Intelligence Act enacted last year is in the process of judicial review in the Constitutional Court. Second, is the leadership factor. Leadership, should be in dealing with legal cases related to each BIN there leader who dare to take responsibility and risks, and not sacrifice men. The third, quality of management and human resources. However great the personnel, but if not properly set and the ability to be improved will be in vain. Fourth, facilities and infrastructure and systems of work, both concepts are closely related to the support level of effectiveness and success in the field of intelligence operations.Fifth, the special authority. With the existence of a special authority, the BIN can move more freely and accelerated well. Even this special authority. should have the support of the legislature and the public. Sixth, the budget factor and its use. One of the major factors fall collapse of the KGB in the 1990s is a remarkable corruption and improper use of the budget, so the state can no longer finance intelligence. During this budget BIN get sizable donations from the government, but its use is expected to be effective and efficient

Redesign Papua Conflict Resolution

Redesign Papua Conflict Resolution
By David Raja Marpaung

Understanding the roots of conflict in Papua• Papua problem has become tangled konfik cycle for few decades in Indonesia, therefore there is no cheap and easy way , except for the hard work of the 'sweating' and a higher risk of all parties.

 • Based on the results of studies that have been made TIM LIPI in Papua Road Map can be concluded that the sources of Papua konfik can be grouped into four main issues, namely, first, marginalization and discrimination experienced by indigenous Papuans as a result of economic development, cultural policy and the mass migration in Papua since 1970 until today. The second problem is the failure of development and it is necessary for such a new paradigm of development in Papua. The third problem is the contradiction of understanding the history of integration and the construction of political identities between Papua and Jakarta. The fourth problem is the experience of a long history of political violence in Papua, especially those committed by state actors against Indonesian citizens in Papua.Reflecting on the mapping of the root causes of conflict in Papua, then at least there is some conflict mitigation solutions that can be offered to the 

A. Short-Term SolutionIn the short term period, there are two things to get attention of the stakeholders in the conflict in Papua.

Phase 1. Desecuritization Papua Conflict• It should be noted that desekuritisasi not mean a total reduction of security forces in Papua. However, desekuritisasi security approach is a model more in line with the principles of democracy and peaceful conflict resolution. Associated with the TNI desecuritization covers the main aspects. First, each placement (deployment) military personnel in Papua have to go through a political decision between the government and the House of Representatives or in accordance with military law mandated mechanisms. It is important to avoid the occurrence of behavioral / illegal operation. Second, the placement of military personnel in Papua should be measured both the quantity, quality, duration and target its operations so that the people of Indonesia as a whole can monitor the performance of TNI in Papua. Then, thirdly, the military should be used wherever possible approaches to non-violence (more persuasive than repressive) in Papua. It is very important, considering the face of 'Indonesia' in Papua is often recognized only to the extent of violence forces rather than as an entity that protects all the people of Papua.

• In relation to law enforcement (police) then they should immediately evaluate the security policies in Papua. Often, law enforcement officers acted in accordance with its identity as the state apparatus, especially in the context of the interests of foreign corporations in Papua. As a result, it is not surprising when there are still people who think that the Papua law enforcement in Indonesia is a form of 'colonization' of the land of Papua is not 'The Indonesia's' sense of justice because they are injured. Discriminatory practices by the authorities should be evaluated by the government because it will further aggravate the face of 'Indonesia' in Papua

• In addition, the Government may use the instrument of internal control in monitoring the performance of state officials in Papua, for example by placing a representative / office of National Human Rights Commission, Ombudsman, Kompolnas, Agency in Papua; It can be effective as a state institution in charge of giving a correction to other state agencies as well as provide security for the people of Papua.

• Strategically, desekuritisasi will foster mutual trust both between governments and people of Papua that the conflict can be resolved without any suspicion by the dominance of the security approach. This then encourages the formation of the next stage.

Phase 2. Strengthen the dialogue as a discourse of conflict resolution• Both the government and the Papuan people must realize that dialogue is a model of conflict resolution that occupy the top priority. Government should be encouraged to realize that so far there has been marginalized politically, socially, economically and culturally to the people of Papua in the context of Indonesia's All. Meanwhile, the Papuan people should also realize that violence is not the only way to remind the government's negligence. Build this awareness is the key for both parties (government and people of Papua) to be able to sit together and discuss solutions to offer.• Discourse dialogue must gain legitimacy from both sides, rather than a party merely to avoid the politicization of the peace efforts of either party. 

B. Long-Term SolutionWhen desecuritization Papua conflict has been implemented and intensified dialogue discourse, then the next step was to conduct a dialogue that includes three stages: 

Phase 1. Identification of actors and issues in the dialogue• In the context of dialogue, identification of actors into the process early will determine the legitimacy of the dialogue. It is important to prevent any parties who feel excluded from conflict resolution and potentially disrupt the dialogue.• Identification of actors should carefully consider the issues to be discussed and the interest to be negotiated in the dialog.• In addition, it should also be noted that a representative of the location of the dialogue as an observer and mediator / party agenda to keep the dialogue remains consistent.

Phase 2. Importance of Reconciliation in Dialogue• The main purpose of dialogue is to build mutual trust between the actors in the conflict to want to talk about conflict resolution that can be agreed.• One of the key elements to build trust is through reconciliation.• Reconciliation requires a mutual understanding between the parties to the conflict that they are 'victims' of conflict with violence.• Therefore, efforts to resolve the conflict by force will only add to the victim in each of the parties without any constructive solution for the future of Papua.

Phase 3. Build understanding that dialogue is sustainability (continuity)• Dialogue is not how fast (instant) to resolve the conflict. However, the dialogue is how to manage conflict more dignified than the use of violence will only lead to losses on each side.• Model ways of thinking (mindset) like it should dominate every actor in dialogue in order not to return to violence in the event of a deadlock in negotiations. Expected when there is deadlock in the negotiations, each actor must hold back and re-scheduled dialogue with a clearer mind.Key Success Conflict Resolution in Papua• Resolution of conflict in Papua is not confined to the central government and the Papuan People alone, but the responsibility of the whole people of Indonesia. Here, the importance of strengthening the awareness of all the people of Indonesia that the identity of 'The Indonesia-ness' in Papua has been held hostage by violence in the conflict. Therefore, non-violent peace efforts to the conflict in Papua have to get the full support of all the people of Indonesia.• As a democratic country, then the ways of conflict resolution through violence in Indonesia is rightly not a priority. Instead, conflict resolution should be put in particular peaceful means through dialogue. Both the government and the groups involved in conflicts in Papua have to stop all acts of violence for any reason.Concluding Note• Settlement of the conflict in Papua is one of the major test for the Indonesian people to be able to resolve the conflict with dignity. In this context, at least Indonesia has had experience in resolving peacefully the conflict in Aceh.• Relies only on the government alone will not guarantee that problems can be resolved peacefully Papua. However, an even more important is to strengthen solidarity and solidity all elements of the Indonesian people to support and engage in real (concrete) in conflict resolution efforts of dignity to our brothers in Papua