Iqra Anugrah

Given Indonesia’s strategic role in the Indo-Pacific, a closer examination on the intersection between this coming New Cold War and Indonesia’s domestic political-economic conditions is needed. I argue that the Indonesian state and ruling class, despite their public rhetoric of an independent foreign policy, have effectively and efficiently served the interests of multinational capital and, by extension, been implicated in Western imperial expansion. Indonesia’s recent hedging toward China should not be seen as a commitment to a multipolar world, but rather a pragmatic elite move of relative nonalignment and a way to perpetuate the existing domestic class rule. This argument is presented through a three-layered analysis of imperialism on the regional level, responses from the state and capitalist class on the national level, and recent trends in anti-imperialist struggles.

This essay focuses on three major technocrats: Ali Wardhana (1928-2015), Widjojo Nitisastro (1927-2012), and Emil Salim (b. 1930). These US-educated economists – famously known as the Berkeley Mafia – served as ministers for the New Order government, oversaw its capitalist reforms, and engaged with the public as educators and public intellectuals. They were not “classical” conservatives in the Western sense, but the élan vital of their vision was conservative, rooted in the fear of destructive “ideological” mobilization and, in contrast, in a faith in the “rationality” of capitalist planning. Their engagement with and later embrace of conservative politics was a result of political necessities in the context of authoritarian consolidation. Therefore, they are best described, I would argue, as accidental conservatives.

Jockeying ahead of the 2024 national elections took center stage in Indonesia’s political landscape in 2023. The selection of President Jokowi’s son for a vice-presidential ticket signaled the continuation and intensification of dynastic politics. The economy faced headwinds, but Indonesia’s trade balance remained in surplus and inflation was tamed. The government promoted its green transition agenda while facing pushback from local communities on environmental and labor issues. In foreign policy, the country hosted the ASEAN Summit, and Jokowi engaged in a flurry of diplomatic travels in the twilight of his presidency.

In Indonesia's most recent presidential elections, voters elected a popular strongman. Iqra Anugrah explains that the recent illiberal direction of Indonesian democracy has its roots in the authoritarian legacy of a political figure from the last century: the charismatic, Machiavellian and hugely influential Ali Moertopo

The electoral victory of the ex-general-turned-cuddly-populist Prabowo Subianto on 20 March marks the continuation of illiberal democracy in Indonesia. However, the moral panic that followed the announcement of his presidency may be exaggerated, writes Iqra Anugrah, who argues for a more nuanced analysis of Indonesia’s current and future political trajectory. The dangers for democracy posed by Prabowo’s impending rule is just a symptom of the larger problem of oligarchic rule in the Global South.

Islamic philanthropy is often seen as a major articulation of Islamic principles of wealth redistribution and social justice, especially in rural and peripheral areas. In this mainstream narrative, the economic mandate of Islam is seen from a prism of noblesse oblige and/or reformism, turning the Islamic notion of solidarity into an individualized obligation for charity and almsgiving. This embourgeoisement of Islamic economic ethics overlaps with and embodies the idea of Effective Altruism (EA), a utilitarian practical philosophy of philanthropy for the most pressing social causes which has grown into a gigantic industry-cum-fad of the global capitalist elites. This article presents a critique of EA, EA-adjacent practices of Islamic philanthropy, and alternative economic proposals for rural welfare. To do so, this article uses insights from critical studies of political thought, critical political economy, and solidarity economy literature as an analytical lens in analyzing EA and Islamic philanthropy and formulating a synthesis of Islamic economic ethics and alter-capitalist rural welfare practices and institutions. This paper concludes that Islamic philanthropy and EA have serious limitations in improving rural welfare, especially in Global South countries such as Indonesia, and shows alternative pathways for agrarian justice.

Debates on the causes of Indonesia's recent democratic decline have mostly focused on institutional, political and attitudinal-behavioural causes. By bringing the rural political economy dimension into this conversation, this article presents another picture of the illiberal turn in Indonesian democracy. Specifically, it examines the implications of elite control over land and coal resources on democratic quality. Based on in-country fieldwork materials and relevant secondary data, it analyses instances of episodic repression, the contraction of democratic spaces and the corrosive effects of coal-fuelled intra-elite clientelism by looking at the elite control of land resources and the influence of political and economic elites benefitting from the coal industry in elections and the broader political arena. Finally, it also discusses the capitulation of key agrarian social movement actors to state interests and its impact on the movement's ability to resist democratic regression. This elaboration shows how the current contour of elite control over rural resources contributes to the declining quality of Indonesian democracy.

Covid-19 pandemic has deepened the impoverishment of the working people across the world. This public health crisis also occurs when austerity policies and the neoliberal mode of governance have become hegemonic. By looking at the Indonesian experience, we seek to understand how working people organizations and local communities navigate the challenges presented by this latest wave of capitalist crisis. Specifically, we look at Indonesian social movement responses to the Covid-19 pandemic and the recently-passed pro-investment Job Creation Omnibus Law. We show the limits and potentials of these responses to challenge capitalist exploitation. Finally, we highlight various attempts by these local movements to present alternatives to post-pandemic, neoliberal capitalism and their connection to the broader global solidarity movement.

Fieldwork often is seen as a challenging and misunderstood intellectual enterprise. Long perceived as the domain of the few, fieldwork and immersion continue to be the chosen methodological techniques for many political scientists. Focusing on my own fieldwork experience in Indonesia since 2015 as an early-career researcher, I discuss and reflect on three types of activities: (1) policy research, (2) dissertation research, and (3) activist work. In particular, I highlight fieldwork serendipities, fieldwork logistics, and my experience in gathering data and interacting with various interlocutors. It is hoped that this self-reflection will help readers to better understand the relationship between researchers and their interlocutors and collaborators, demystify the fieldwork process, and better prepare political scientists who use fieldwork in their research.

Two decades after authoritarian breakdown and democratic transition in 1998, how does the trajectory of Indonesian democracy look? By reflecting on the state of Indonesian politics in the last 15 years, this paper will argue that despite many improvements, Indonesian democracy has experienced a slow process of decline and a deepening of illiberal tendencies. This poses a major challenge for the quality of Indonesian democracy in the near future.

Peliknya persoalan agraria turut memengaruhi kualitas demokrasi di Indonesia. Namun, sebagian besar kajian mutakhir belum membahas hubungan di antara kedua hal tersebut secara komprehensif.Dengan mengambil referensi dari kajian agraria dan kajian sosial komparatif, tulisan ini membahas hubungan antara persoalan agraria dan kondisi demokrasi di Indonesia, terutama di era pascaotoritarianisme. Di sini, diajukan sejumlah argumen. Pertama, empat persoalan agraria utama di Indonesia—perampasan tanah, laju diferensiasi kelas dalam konteks perdesaan, kesenjangan sosioekonomi, dan kualitas demokrasi lokal—berpengaruh secara signifikan pada kondisi dan trajektori demokrasi Indonesia. Kedua, gerakan agraria yang dinamis turut berkontribusi pada proses pendalaman demokrasi. Terakhir, tulisan ini membahas beberapa kemungkinan preskripsi politik dan kebijakan untuk mengatasi persoalan agraria demi memperbaiki kualitas demokrasi di Indonesia.

Kata Kunci: gerakan agraria, Indonesia pasca-otoritarianisme, kaum tani, kualitas demokrasi, persoalan agraria

Iqra Anugrah examines a dramatic demonstration in Jakarta that saw peasant women concrete their own feet for 36 hours to save their farms and local environment from a cement factory. The accelerating rate of land and resource dispossession in post-authoritarian Indonesia has led to a number of confrontations between state and corporate authorities on one side and peasant communities on the other. Many of these conflicts, though garnering much attention from sympathetic activists, remain localised. However, there are moments when peasants and their activist allies decide to scale up their direct action.

Previous attempts by the Indonesian left to move into politics have not met with much success. Iqra Anugrah looks at the Confederation of Indonesian People’s Movements (KPRI), an emerging alliance that is now making preparations to participate in elections in 2017 and 2019. Will it be able to make an impact where others have struggled?

This article is an examination of the case study of the Sundanese Peasant Union (Serikat Petani Pasundan, spp) in post-authoritarian Indonesia. It aims to answer the question of why spp and West Javanese peasant movements in general are able to force local and national state elites to accommodate some elements of agrarian reforms promoted by the peasants. I argue that the new political opportunity structure provides a new opportunity for West Javanese peasant movements and spp to organize as a successful social movement.

The history of labour movement in a Western context is different from that in a non-Western one. If such is the case, insights into the former, or which there is an abundance of studies, cannot be said to unilaterally apply to the latter, on which, on the contrary, there is a dearth of research. The three books under review here – Ingleson’s Workers, Unions and Politics; Suryomenggolo’s Organising under the Revolution on the history of Indonesian labour movement from the 1920s to 1940s; and Christiansen and Scarlett’s edited volume on new social movements in the third world in the 1960s –provide a much-needed addition to and enrich the field of labour history in the Global South with their emphasis on history from below. While the first two works seek to unravel the history of Indonesian workers as experienced by the workers themselves, the edited volume complements them by highlighting the stories of emerging social movements in post-colonial, developing countries, including Indonesia. By doing so, these works make an important contribution to the study of labour history in Asia.

Course Description

There is a declining attention to the role of political ideas, discourses, motives, and networks in the study of Southeast Asian politics. Recent studies on the politics of the region tend to conceptualize political dynamics in institutionalist and materialist terms, such as the workings of electoral politics, authoritarian durability, policymaking processes, and oligarchic power. But it was not long ago that Southeast Asian politics was marked by paradigmatic debates on national trajectories regarding political ethos, pathways to modernity, and culture war.

This course aims to rejuvenate and introduce the rich conversation on modern political ideologies in Southeast Asia, with a focus on the post-1945 period. This is a political theory course that draws insights from other related fields – intellectual history, political sociology, and to a lesser extent comparative politics. It focuses on how Southeast Asians grapple with competing modern political philosophies and formulate their own versions of political thoughts in accordance to local realities and challenges. In this course, we will also highlight strange parallels and divergences between Western and vernacular political ideologies. We will treat Southeast Asian luminaries as creative thinkers in their own right and work with diverse materials, such as archives, essays, treatises, and daily practices, among other things.