Abstract
Indonesia’s northwesternmost province of Aceh has been the scene of one of the most catastrophic natural disasters and large-scale reconstruction efforts in human history following the 2004 Indian Ocean earthquake and tsunami. It has also been the site of one of Asia’s most protracted armed separatist conflicts, as well as a uniquely successful case study on the global map of conflict resolution. Since 2005, when an internationally mediated peace process in Helsinki led to resolution of the Aceh conflict, the province has become the subject of Indonesia’s biggest experiment with democratic decentralization via the conferral, in 2006, of “self-government” to Aceh within Indonesia. Many scholars use the provincial capital of Banda Aceh as a base, not least because of the city’s historical and contemporary relevance as a center of important events and moments of transformation. Yet, to date, little attention has been paid to Banda Aceh itself as the primary unit of analysis. In this chapter, we provide a Banda Aceh-centered analysis of transformations within and about Aceh since 1998. This is done by tracing the changing position of the city provincially, nationally, and internationally, as well as internally in its relations with other (mostly rural) parts of Aceh. In so doing, we bring into view largely overlooked urban-rural cleavages and interrelations.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
It is beyond the scope of this chapter to discuss the Aceh conflict in any depth. Most sources, however, agree that Acehnese resentment toward the Indonesian state has been aggravated and perpetuated by the latter’s exploitation and neglect (including Jakarta’s siphoning of Aceh’s vast oil and gas reserves), broken promises about Aceh’s “special region” status, and human rights abuses against Acehnese civilians during Indonesian military operations. For more detailed studies of the causes of the conflict, see, especially, Kell (1995), Morris (1983), and Robinson (1998).
- 2.
The original British spelling of “Aceh” was generally preferred by the GAM, reflecting the rebels’ rejection of the modern Indonesian spelling. Despite his outspoken opposition to most other things Dutch, GAM’s founding leader, Hasan di Tiro, also used the old Dutch spelling of “Atjeh” to establish the “Atjeh Institute in America” and GAM’s “Ministry of Information of the State of Atjeh Sumatra” (Kementerian Penerangan Negara Atjeh Sumatra). See, for example, Hasan di Tiro (1965, 1984).
- 3.
Indonesia has been an important site for scholarly work problematizing the conventional urban-rural dichotomy including McGee’s (1991) concept of desakota, which combines the Indonesian words for village and town/city. However, this term applies more readily to extended urban regions on the densely populated island of Java than it does to the experiences of less populous cities, such as Banda Aceh, and their surrounding regions.
- 4.
In 2004, Banda Aceh had a population of 264,168, which was reduced to 203,553 after 61,065 Banda Aceh residents died in the Indian Ocean tsunami and earthquake (Nurdin 2006, p. 116).
- 5.
The apparent normalcy of Banda Aceh, despite the conflict, was illustrated by regionalist architecture in the city under Suharto. As Hellman (2003) argues, during the New Order, kebudayaan (culture) and kesenisan (art) were “utilized by the government to outline the idea that Indonesia consists of a certain number of discrete cultures, each represented by a unique set of art and aesthetics stockpiled in the performing arts, architecture, textiles and clothes” (p. 13). In architectural terms, this took the form of the development of “traditional” styles including the atap joglo Javanese roof style, which was embellished with regionally specific decorations (Kusno 2000). In Aceh, such regional variations included designs inspired by the Acehnese royal hat and the famous Cakra Donya bell, but any symbolism related to the politics of Acehnese identity was notable only for its absence (Nas 2003).
- 6.
According to one opinion poll conducted in June 1999 by the Medan-based Waspada newspaper, 56% of Acehnese wanted a referendum on independence, compared with 23.5% who favored autonomy within the Republic of Indonesia (see Waspada 1999).
- 7.
Banner hanging on the wall of the Baiturrahman Mosque at the November 1999 rally.
- 8.
Introduced on 22 September 1999, Law No. 44/1999 was the first of its kind to formally acknowledge the largely symbolic “Special Status of the Province of Aceh Special Region” in the fields of religion, education, and customary law. Law No. 18/2001 was passed by Indonesia’s national parliament on 19 June 2001 and changed Aceh’s name to Nanggroe Aceh Darussalam (lit; Abode of Peace). The so-called NAD law conferred more extensive powers of autonomy to Aceh including generous fiscal decentralization provisions that were barely implemented and the right to enforce aspects of Islamic law (Shari’a), which was partially implemented.
- 9.
Two regional autonomy laws governed decentralization in Indonesia’s other provinces (except Papua): Law No. 22/1999 on “Regional Government” and Law No. 25/1999 on “Fiscal Balance between the Central Government and the Regions.” These 1999 laws were amended by Laws No. 32 and 33 of 2004, respectively.
- 10.
Under the LoGA, Aceh is entitled to retain 70% of oil and gas revenues generated within its borders, compared with the other provinces (except Papua), which receive 15% of oil profits and 30% of natural gas revenues (Law No. 25/1999). Aceh is also awarded 80% of revenues in the forestry, fisheries, general mining, and geothermal mining sectors, like Indonesia’s other provinces.
- 11.
This was the finding of two national corruption reports in 2003 produced by Bank Indonesia’s Center for Research and Education of Central Banking (PSPK) and the Economics Faculty of Padjadjaran University (FE Unpad). See Sinar Harapan (2003).
- 12.
A key problem under both the special autonomy law and the LoGA was that neither the Finance Ministry, which was responsible for collecting and redistributing revenues back to Aceh and Indonesia’s other provinces, nor the stated-owned oil and gas companies in Aceh, namely, Pertamina and ExxonMobil Oil Indonesia, publicly disclosed the latter’s profits, with the result that Aceh’s political leadership did not know how much resource-generated revenues Aceh was entitled to receive.
- 13.
According to the World Bank, US$4.9 billion in projects and programs had been allocated for the post-tsunami reconstruction effort by June 2006, and an additional US$3.1 billion had been pledged, bringing the total reconstruction budget to about US$8 billion. Of these allocated projects, most were funded by donor organizations (US$2 billion) and NGOs (US$1.7 billion), while the Indonesian government contributed US$1.2 billion (World Bank 2006, p. xvi).
- 14.
This strategy was inspired partly by the experience of Malaysia’s Federal Land Development Authority (FELDA), which, from the 1950s, expanded agricultural production and alleviated rural poverty through the resettlement of mostly landless Malays onto land newly opened for cultivation (see also Phelps et al. 2011).
- 15.
Land degradation and conversion point to future problems associated with rural poverty and reduced economic opportunities (Budidarsono et al. 2007, p. 35).
- 16.
This could even manifest into heightened demands for partition, as has already been shown through the demands by a locally based “ALA-ABAS” movement for the partition of Aceh into three separate provinces. As an interviewee at the Ministry of Home Affairs (MOHA) put it, “I said to Aceh colleagues, be careful. When you treat the kabupaten [districts] and kota [cities/mayoralties] disproportionately, you will be in trouble because the southeast Aceh will say, ‘why we should obey to Aceh, we are not so Acehnese, we should make our own province’—that’s the danger. As long as there is no prosperity approach, I’m afraid it will happen like that” (Director, Regional Government Affairs, MOHA, Jakarta, 15 January 2008).
References
Amnesty International. (2001). Briefing on the deteriorating human rights situation in Aceh for participants in the ASEAN forum, July 2001. Indonesia: Amnesty International.
Badan Pusat Statistik (BPS)/Badan Perencanaan Pembangunan Daerah (BPPD). (2000). Propinsi Daerah Istimewah Aceh, Aceh dalam angka, BPS Propinsi Daerah Istimewah Aceh and BAPPEDA Propinsi Daerah Istimewah Aceh [Special province of Aceh in numbers]. Government of the Republic of Indonesia: Banda Aceh.
Budidarsono, S., Wulan, Y. C., Budi, L. J., & Hendratno, S. (2007). Livelihoods and forest resources in Aceh and Nias for a sustainable forest resource management and economic progress (ICRAF Working Paper No. 55). Bogor: World Agroforestry Centre.
Czaika, M., & Kis-Katos, K. (2009). Civil conflict and displacement: Village level determinants of forced migration in Aceh. Journal of Peace Research, 46(3), 399–418.
Davies, M. N. (2006). Indonesia’s war over Aceh. Last stand on Mecca’s porch. London/New York: Routledge.
di Tiro, H. (1965). The political future of the Malay Archipelago. New York: Atjeh Institute in America.
di Tiro, H. (1984). Masa-depan politik dunia Melayu [The future of Malay world politics]. Sumatra: Kementerian Penerangan Negara Atjeh Sumatra.
Hellman, J. (2003). Performing the nation: Cultural politics in New Order Indonesia. Copenhagen: Nordic Institute of Asian Studies.
Human Rights Watch. (2002). Accountability for human rights violations in Aceh. Human Rights Watch/Asia Division 14(1)(C). Human Rights Watch, Asia Division.
International Crisis Group. (2005). Aceh: A new chance for peace (Asia Briefing No. 40). Jakarta/Brussels: International Crisis Group.
Kell, T. (1995). The roots of Acehnese rebellion, 1989–1992. New York: Cornell Modern Indonesia Project.
Koalisi NGO HAM Aceh. (1999). Daftar nama-nama korban penembakan misterius (petrus) [List of names of mysterious shooting victims], 19 October 1998–2 June 1999. NGO Fact Sheet.
Kusno, A. (2000). Behind the postcolonial: Architecture, urban space and political cultures in Indonesia. London/New York: Routledge.
Leitmann, J. (2007). Cities and calamities: Learning from post-disaster response in Indonesia. Journal of Urban Health: Bulletin of the New York Academy of Medicine, 84(1), 144–153.
Mahdi, S. (2007, February 24–27). Where do IDPs go? Evidence of social capital from Aceh conflict and tsunami IDPs. Paper presented at the first international conference of Aceh and Indian Ocean Studies, Banda Aceh.
McGee, T. G. (1991). The emergence of desakota regions in Asia: An expanded hypothesis. In N. Ginsburg, B. Koppel, & T. G. McGee (Eds.), The extended metropolis: Settlement transition in Asia (pp. 3–26). Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.
McGibbon, R. (2004). Secessionist challenges in Aceh and Papua: Is special autonomy the solution? (Policy studies 10). Washington, DC: East-west Center.
McGibbon, R. (2006). Local leadership and the Aceh conflict. In A. Reid (Ed.), Verandah of violence. The background to the Aceh problem (pp. 315–359). Singapore/Seattle: Singapore University Press/University of Washington Press.
Miller, M. A. (2004). The Nanggroe Aceh Darussalam Law: A serious response to Acehnese separatism? Journal of Asian Ethnicity, 5(3), 333–351.
Miller, M. A. (2006). What’s special about special autonomy in Aceh? In A. Reid (Ed.), Verandah of violence. The background to the Aceh problem (pp. 292–314). Singapore/Seattle: Singapore University Press/University of Washington Press.
Miller, M. A. (2009). Rebellion and reform in Indonesia. Jakarta’s security and autonomy policies in Aceh. London/New York: Routledge.
Missbach, A. (2007). Managing heterogeneity within a ‘transnational community of co-responsibility’. Exploratory snapshots of Acehnese diasporic life experiences in Sydney. In E. Streifeneder & A. Missbach (Eds.), Indonesia—The presence of the past: A festschrift in honour of Ingrid Wessel. Berlin: Regiospectra.
Morfit, M. (2007). The road to Helsinki: The Aceh agreement and Indonesia’s democratic development. International Negotiation, 12(1), 111–143.
Morris, E. E. (1983). Islam and politics in Aceh. A study of center-periphery relations in Indonesia. PhD thesis, Cornell University, Michigan.
Nas, P. J. M. (2003). Ethnic identity in urban architecture: Generations of architects in Banda Aceh. In R. Schefold, P. J. M. Nas, & G. Domenig (Eds.), Indonesian houses: Tradition and transformation in vernacular architecture (pp. 133–154). Singapore: Singapore University Press.
Nurdin, M. (2006). Banda Aceh overview—After one-year tsunami. Journal of Disaster Research, 1(1), 116–117.
Parthasarathy, D. (2010, January 4–8). Intermediate urbanism? The spatiality of caste, class and capital in India. Paper presented at the international symposium on making global cities and the world economic crisis, Shenzhen, China.
Phelps, N., Bunnell, T., & Miller, M. A. (2011). Post-disaster economic development in Aceh: Neoliberalization and other economic-geographical imaginaries. Geoforum, 42, 418–426.
Robinson, G. (1998). Rawan is as rawan does: The origins of disorder in New Order Aceh. Indonesia, 66, 127–156.
Silvey, R., & Elmhirst, R. (2003). Engendering social capital: Women workers and rural-urban networks in Indonesia’s crisis. World Development, 31(5), 865–879.
Sinar Harapan. (2003, March 31). ‘Korupsi di Aceh, penduduk miskin meningkat. Sinar Harapan.
SIRA (Sentral Informasi Referendum Aceh). (1999, May). Acehnese consistently fight for referendum in spite of having intimidation, Press Release.
Taufik, A. (2001, January 29). Aceh. Regions. Tempo.
TempoInteraktif. (2001, January 29). Deplu Bantah Larang Wartawan Asing. TempoInteraktif.
The Jakarta Post. (1999a, July 31). Garuda raises capacity to Aceh. The Jakarta Post.
The Jakarta Post. (1999b, August 2). SMAC to serve Banda Aceh. The Jakarta Post.
The Jakarta Post. (2003, April 29). TNI sets up Aceh media center. The Jakarta Post.
Waspada. (1999, June 7). Hasil lengkap jajak pendapat waspada: 56% referendum dan 25.3% otonomi luas. Waspada.
World Bank. (2006). Aceh public expenditure analysis. Spending for reconstruction and poverty reduction. Washington, DC/Jakarta: The World Bank.
World Bank. (2007). World development report 2008—Agriculture for development. Washington, DC: The World Bank.
World Bank. (2008). The impact of the conflict, the tsunami and reconstruction on poverty in Aceh. Aceh poverty assessment 2008. Washington, DC: The World Bank.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2013 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Miller, M.A., Bunnell, T. (2013). Urban-Rural Connections: Banda Aceh Through Conflict, Tsunami, and Decentralization. In: Bunnell, T., Parthasarathy, D., Thompson, E. (eds) Cleavage, Connection and Conflict in Rural, Urban and Contemporary Asia. ARI - Springer Asia Series, vol 3. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-5482-9_6
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-5482-9_6
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-007-5481-2
Online ISBN: 978-94-007-5482-9
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawSocial Sciences (R0)