•    HOME   
•    NEWS   
•    BUSINESS   
•    INTERNATIONAL   
•    TECH   
•    SPORTS   
•    LIFE & TIMES   
•    OPINION   
•    MY JAKARTA   
•    BLOGS   

In Telling the Story of Indonesia, Truth is Better Than Veiled Reality

Youths from inter religious community in a rally to campaign for pluralism at Malioboro street, Yogyakarta. A new survey released on Saturday found that 95.4 percent of 2,500 people questioned across Indonesia believed that religious freedom should be respected. (JG Photo/Boy T. Harjanto)

The hardest part about being a foreign student, at least for me, is knowing how to present your country to your foreign friends. The dilemma is always one of knowing whether to be an overly positive ambassador, or a realistic one. The first type refers to an ambassador who always talks about what is good and tries to hide what is bad. In this sense, you are like a salesperson promoting a product to potential customers. On the other hand, a realistic ambassador tells the “truth” about his country, as far as he is able to understand it.

I know many overly positive ambassadors — so many, in fact, that I’ve lost count. They are the ones who try to save face for Indonesia whenever negative news surfaces about the country. They will convincingly argue that the real condition is not that bad and that it is just that the media has been exaggerating to get their slice of market share.

Realistic ambassadors are far more scarce. I don’t know what life experience has eventually led me to join this group. I am not going to write about what kind of people are in this group — that would be like writing about myself. Rather, I would like to share two experiences that I encountered in which foreigners ask me questions about Indonesia.

The first experience was when a French friend asked about religious life in Indonesia. I told her that we have six recognized religions. She responded, “That’s cool! You have so many religions but you are able to live harmoniously.” Ouch, that struck me. I had two options at that time: To affirm or correct her statement. By doing the first, I would be a good Indonesian, promoting the harmony of the country to the world. I chose the second. I told her that harmony was not always present. Some of the time it was, but at other times it was not. I then described some conflicts we faced as a country, how some radical groups are acting like parasites on the society and — most importantly — how we as a country are struggling to deal with the problem. I mentioned as examples some Islamic groups that are staunch defenders of minority rights.

The second experience came when a fellow American Fulbrighter asked about how many ethnic groups Indonesia has. I proudly described to him the diversity of Indonesia’s cultures. Unlike my French friend, he asked, “Do you ever have problems with that diversity?” That was so straight. I answered, “Yes, of course.” This time I referred to the fact that we were for 32 years under an authoritarian regime, so when democracy came it was a kind of euphoria. Everyone wanted to talk, but no one wanted to listen and when everyone noticed that no one was listening to them, they became angry and sometimes even violent. But again, I closed it with that mantra: “But you know what, we are working on that and we have made significant progress.” That was my way of answering. I think some people would see it as a lack of pride in being Indonesian. I am saying it loud and clear: They are wrong.

I have a good reason for always telling both the good and the bad. Whenever someone says “Indonesia,” I believe he is referring to Indonesia as a whole. He does not mean only the Muslims, the non-Muslims, the Javanese, or any other particular group. And you know what, included in Indonesia are also the Ahmadiyah families who were ousted from their own homes, the church congregations prevented from praying, the followers of local religions who have difficulties getting a national identification card because their religion is not recognized and the Chinese Indonesians experiencing racial discrimination. They are part of Indonesia too and whenever someone tells a story about Indonesia, it is better that those groups are included in the story.

I remember when I first came to the United States. During the Fulbright orientation period, I was told by a facilitator that many Americans are prejudiced. In another session, a professor said that it is not an impossibility that there are Americans who do not like us — foreign Fulbright students — because we are seen as taking their seats in college and using their money to pay for it. OK, so what did I learn from those two “warnings?” That Americans are bad? No. That I have made wrong decision to come here? No. What I learned is that it is OK to be open, to talk about things the way they are.

I believe that to tell the good and the bad is the right thing to do. After all, this is an exchange experience, not a face-saving mission. I do not need to save anyone’s face here. If anything, what I need to do is to learn other people’s cultures, and let them learn about mine. And to my understanding, no learning can take place if what is available is only artificial goodness. Finally, we are still sure that we in Indonesia are moving forward, right? If so, then we do not need to be ashamed of the problems we have now. They are only part of our learning process and someday we will be rid of them.


Nathanael Gratias is a Fulbright Student at Loyola University in Chicago. The opinions expressed in this article do not represent those of the US Department of State or the Fulbright program.

Talk Back is a forum for you — our readers — to express your opinions on current affairs, people, places, cultures, religions, events, issues and more. To contribute, e-mail your blog post, ideally between 300 and 800 words, to blogs@thejakartaglobe.com. The author agrees to be edited for clarity, accuracy and decency.