Oleh Roy Thaniago

In Indonesia, its citizens always have a way of dealing with public infrastructure that is rarely on their side: how to strategize. Maybe they understand that expecting their aspirations to be served by the country is the same as expecting Karni Ilyas (the Indonesian political commentator) to not stutter. For this reason, residents have strategized so as not to fold; they strategize because they are rarely invited to be involved.

Public infrastructure development often misunderstands the needs of citizens, or maybe it is not important to know what their needs are. Papuans whose needs are recognition of their sovereignty as human beings, the management of the state budget instead makes tolls and educates rice consumption. The residents of Bukit Duri manage their own living space which is not facilitated by the state, but the city authorities opted to send send soldiers instead of inviting them for negotiating.

In that situation, the owners of capital and the political elite are actually the parties who occupy the top position of the food chain in the country’s business ecosystem. Therefore, public infrastructure exists and is first held to serve their aspirations. Meanwhile, the residents are allowed to duel each other in order to seize access to public facilities. Those who do not get it, are those who plan.

But it is unfortunate for those who are economically and politically weak, because the challenges are twofold. Not only must they strategize, but their strategy is often understood unfairly. If they are not labelled as troublemakers or disruptors of order, they will be reduced to violators of the rules or perhaps even criminals. Their strategies are often failed to be understood as political expressions, let alone political power.