This academic paper discusses peacebuilding efforts in Aceh, Indonesia following decades of armed conflict between the Free Aceh Movement and the Indonesian government. It provides historical context on the conflict, which stemmed from Acehnese discontent over the sharing of oil and gas revenues. The author analyzes post-conflict reconstruction using a local participatory approach, emphasizing the importance of addressing past injustices and building structures based on Acehnese culture and values of democracy, equality and justice. The conclusion recommends investing in peace monitoring, independent social monitoring, using resources effectively and transparently, and improving the investment climate to maximize synergies between peace and development in Aceh.

1. An Academic Paper
Introduction of Social and Culture Science
Peace Monitoring with Local
Participative Approach on Aceh
---SUPARYO---
Writer is a student on Library and Information Science Dept.
Islamic State University Sunan Kalijaga Yogyakarta
E-mail: yossy_suparyo@yahoo.com
A. Introduction
After more three decades of continuously armed conflict
(especially Free Aceh Movement—GAM and the Government of
Indonesia), peace and stability are now restored on Aceh. Actually, the
people of Aceh can move and enjoy life in their community without
fear. Perhaps the best proof of the progress made over the past several
years is the fact that the first ever direct democratic local election was
able to stand as independent candidate. Most elements of societies
confident that the election result will contribute to the further
consolidation of the peace progress for the benefit of the people Aceh
and Indonesia as a whole.
In 2006, I visited district of Lhokseumawe, Aceh, only one week,
but I was deeply moved. The impact of the enormous destructions was
still very visible, along the coastline shown how large parts of the
country had been devastated by the tsunami. Villages had totally
disappeared, includes children and their families. I saw the traces of
the devastation everywhere.
1

2. Aceh was not only devastated by earthquakes and the tsunami.
Since three decades ago the violence has also left their marks on the
province and the people. Armed conflict is the most visible form of the
absence of peace. It causes death and destruction. It kills innocent
civilians’ not just combatants. The many cases of armed conflicts are
characterized by gross violations of human rights including
discrimination, deprivation of livelihood, destruction of the
environment, summary killings, abductions, illegal detention, torture,
rape and other sexual abuses.
In 1971, oil was discovered in the region. This changed the face
of Aceh in the eyes of Indonesia and the rest of the world. Foreign oil
companies and state (Indonesian) owned enterprises descended on
Aceh bringing with them “foreigners” as employees. Aceh contributes to
a sizeable portion of Indonesia’s GDP but the Acehnese have seen only
a small portion of the revenues generated by these resources. This
discontent over the sharing of revenues from oil and gas operations
between the centre in Indonesia and the province was one of the prime
reasons for the rise of Gerakan Aceh Merdeka (GAM).
According to Fasha (2005), a Acehnese activist, the long history
of violence in Aceh started with the massive business expansion
facilitated by the "New Order" regime of Soeharto in the 1970s. It was
marked by the entry of forest concession holders, large scale
plantations, mining corporations, and large industries supported by
companies from the United States (US), Japan and Europe. Many
Acehnese paid a heavy price for this situation. They suffered in various
ways such as loss of land, loss of local traditions, getting arrested,
killed or otherwise persecuted during the early 1970s.
In this study, I analyze conflict transformation with local
participative approach. I shall begin with a brief review of some of the
issues often cited in relation to conflict and how it is dealt with in
2

3. different cultures, moving on to the vexed question of transferability of
new models of mediation. In finally, I will measure the peace building
as win-win solution to conflict ending.
B. Searching Violence’s Root and Peace Building in Aceh
Aceh an oil and gas rich province is located on the northernmost
tip of the Sumatra islands of Indonesia and is the westernmost point of
the country. According to Fasha (2005), until the middle of the 17th
century, Aceh was an independent sultanate. From 1641 to 1824, the
kingdom was at the centre of a British-Dutch tussle and finally in
1824, Aceh was granted Independence under the Anglo-Dutch treaty.
In 1873, the Dutch invaded Aceh and colonised the region, Acehnese
were met with fierce resistance and the war between the Acehnese and
the Dutch raged intermittently over the centuries. When in 1949, the
Republic of Indonesia was created from the Dutch East Indies, Aceh
was made a special region (province) of the new country.
Acehnese declared independence from Indonesia in 1953. Their
separatist movement quickly turned into an armed struggle. The
Indonesia Government responded to the armed struggle with force.
State repression against separatist movements is perhaps inevitable
but this was particularly so in Aceh during the long years from 1968 to
1998, when the country was under Suharto’s military rule. GAM is
small in size (it has several hundred full time “soldiers”) and few
weapons, making it vulnerable against the strong and well-equipped
Indonesian Army—the Tentara Nasional Indonesia (the TNI). GAM
has therefore indulged in guerrilla warfare, choosing their place and
time to fight. The movement enjoys the support of many Acehnese,
especially the rural folk, most of whose discontentment with the
Indonesian government is over their economic and social condition.
3

4. In 1999, after the fall of Suharto’s regime, Abdurrahman Wahid
became Indonesia’s first democratically elected President. From that
time on, there have been serious efforts to bring an end to this
protracted violent conflict. Talks between the Indonesian Government
and GAM have continued over the years in spite of many breakdowns
and serious setbacks. Roughly there are two main periods in the peace
talks: The first period is between 1999 and July 2001 and the second
period is from July 2001 to the present (Setya, 2007).
Two peace agreements resulted from negotiations between 1999
and today. One was in the first period that obviously failed, leading to
another agreement in the second period. Both these agreements and
the series of talks came as a result of the third party intervention by
the Henry Dunant Centre (HDC) of Switzerland. HDC attributed the
failure of the first negotiations, in part, to its own low-key involvement
as a third party. Learning from their past mistakes, the current
agreement in the second period has a strong role for the HDC.
In the second period of peace in Aceh are clearly disarmament
zones. Moreover, it is clearly hoped that disarmament will pave the
way for humanitarian aid, reconstruction, and rebuilding. The Zones
are a prelude to demilitarization but they are also a prelude to future
negotiations. This refers to the fact that the process adopted to
establish and keep the Zones going is actually a confidence building
measure that will lead the parties towards a peace agreement. The
Zones in Aceh are established as part of the negotiations that will lead
to a peace agreement.
C. Peace Reconstruction after Local Election: A Local
Participative Approach
I will discuss the process of building an Acehnese society that is
based on local understanding of social justice. According to Diana
4

5. (2002:59) every society needs to be aware of its history, and Acehnese—
unless I have not completely misinterpreted the place and its people—
with their legends, songs and storytelling traditions are particularly
keen on history. Most societies also have white spots in their historical
maps, spaces that are left untouched. But these white spots will always
disturb the social relations unless they are openly addressed. And more
dangerously, they often are the elements that draw the society back to
the vicious wheel of violence.
Wahid (1999) said to establish a truthful picture of the past is to
lay a cornerstone for future society, as discussing injustices that have
occurred in the past will also help to picture how a just society would
look like, and what would be needed to ensure that the past injustices
will not happen again. The main focus should however be in the future,
and not in the past. Similar processes have been ongoing throughout
Indonesian regions since the late 1990s, and are usually referred to by
such terms as reformasi, or regional autonomy and decentralisation.
After some years of delay, Aceh has now joined these reform processes,
and like other Indonesian regions it will need to develop its very own
recipes for reformism and social justice. Indonesia, with its hundreds
socio-cultural systems and traditions, certainly is a proof that one size
and model does not fit all. There are nevertheless some features that
appear to be common, like the prevailing normative pluralism that has
also been acknowledged in the national legislation.
According to Fasha (2005) this normative pluralism, in addition
to the positive law also adat laws and religious laws are taken into
account. Islamic law has been recognized through developing a
nationwide system of religious courts since 1989. Since 2002 it has
been made compulsory to all Muslims in Aceh to follow shari’a, while
elsewhere in Indonesia it is voluntary. The position of adat is far more
5

6. ambiguous, and it has been to a large extent left to the judges to decide
whether they will take local custom into account.
Afterward, it is also important to notice, in respect to the Dutch
colonial ‘adat law school,’ that an effort to codify adat would be to
misunderstand its nature: “Adat as a set of written and unwritten
rules for daily affairs and collective conduct had always been a flexible
and a normative system primarily aimed at reconciliation rather than
rigid verdicts. But when these rules were laid down in monographs and
used in colonial courts, flexibility disappeared and the character of
adat was transmuted into judicial prescriptions framed in timeless
tradition and approved by colonial authorities.”
From my discussions with people in Aceh I have understood that
many people here are of the opinion that the position of local customs
should be strengthened also in Aceh. They are worried that currently
there is an imbalance between adat and religion. Some have also
pointed out that traditionally in Aceh adat and religion have walked
hand in hand, and should not be artificially separated from each other.
Similar remarks are often made in West Sumatra when the
decentralisation and the revitalisation of local social systems are
discussed there. It is clear, nevertheless, that adat and religion are
important sources for Acehnese understanding of social justice, and
they will need to be considered when future society is being planned
and built be it in the field of economy, education, social welfare or
politics.
Aceh as other society is more deeply democratic, moreover, the
more it has state-sponsored and civic for a for policy discussion at least
some of which ought procedurally to influence authoritative decision
(Young, 2000:124). There needs to build up structures in the society
that are based on democracy, equality, accountability, transparency
and other globally recognized principles, as well as Acehnese culture
6

7. with its Islamic values and norms. Local, national and international
agencies all need to play part in the effort. While the measures and
strategies have to be multiple, they all need to be based on commonly
shared principles. These include a consensus over how justice is
understood in Aceh. Such a consensus can only be reached through an
open public discussion on justice. And it is only the people in Aceh who
can determine what justice means in Aceh, even though outsiders like
me can participate in the discussion and present observations and
suggestions. International community, together with the Indonesian
government and the Aceh government have to ensure enough funds for
the peace-building and conflict prevention work in the coming years.
But the ownership of peace belongs to the people in Aceh.
Conflict ending will clearly lead to better prospects for
development. This is certainly true in Aceh. Evidence is strong that the
investment climate in Aceh is severely hurt by conflict. The reliability
of supply chains has been severely weakened, transportation routes
can’t be trusted, costs are high, confidence is low, and businesses are
not willing to invest. At the same time development projects in some
areas are stalled, absenteeism among teachers and students is much
higher than the national average, and in conflict affected areas poverty
incidence is particularly high. A peace agreement that takes root will
thus have a very positive impact on development and poverty reduction
in Aceh. Less obvious is the other direction in the development-peace
relationship. This is the potential impact of development on the success
of the peace.
Evidence from many such conflict and post-conflict situations
around the world indicates three phases of a successful sustained
peace. First, peace must be made. A peace agreement must be signed.
This is the job of the politicians and the combatants. It can be
supported politically by outsiders, and can be made more attractive by
7

8. offers of support. But this stage is driven of course primarily by
negotiators and participants. Second, peace must be kept. Here the
right peace monitoring arrangements need to be in place and financed,
and the peace agreement must been seen to be honored. Some quick
victories in terms of improving public services in the affected areas can
help at this time. Third, peace must be sustained, and deepened. Here
it is vital that citizens see that their lives are demonstrably improved,
and believe that government interventions and the allocation of funds
are fair and transparent.
D. Conclusion and Recommendations
From this study, I came to some important conclusions. There
are four suggestions for all elements in order to maximize the
synergies between peace and development. First, in the immediate
term invest in peace monitoring and humanitarian programs that give
special attention to quick payoffs, especially in the conflict affected
areas. Expand the use of community-driven delivery mechanisms that
have already been proven successful. Second, establish an independent
monitoring of social and economic indicators. It is vital that citizens
and decision-makers have at hand information that can help guide
actions and perceptions. Third, use existing resources more effectively.
There are many opportunities here. Visible progress in this area will
help build trust. Increase public transparency and accountability.
Many citizens of Aceh believe that public resources are not reaching
their intended beneficiaries, and are not being allocated in a
transparent way. Progress in this area can have a powerful effect in
citizen perceptions of a “new” Aceh. Fourth, assess the investment
climate and improve it. Over time it will be the private sector, not the
government that creates jobs and helps Aceh grow. Private businesses
need a better investment climate. Wallahualam bish al Showab.
8

9. Bibliography
Francis, Diana. 2002. People, Peace and Power: Conflict
Transformation in Action. London: Pluto Press.
Fasya, Teuku Kemal. 2005. Ritus Kekerasan dan Libido Nasionalisme.
Yogyakarta: Buku Baik.
Setya, Sentot. “Searching for Peace in Aceh.” Accessed on
www.tempointeraktif.com October, 30 2007
Wahid, Hasyim. 1999. Telikungan Kapitalisme Global dalam Sejarah
Kebangsaan Indonesia. Yogyakarta: LKiS.
Young, Iris Marion. 2000. Inclusion and Democracy. New York: Oxford
University Press.
9