Chris McCall – Virtual pariahs after their bloody destruction of East Timor, the Indonesian military and police were turned overnight into prospective friends of the West by September 11.
At the end of this month, the military is set to reap its first major benefit, a package worth US$400,000 to participate in the United States' International Military Education and Training (IMET) programme. It will be the first direct military assistance since 1999 and the first funding for IMET since it was cut off in the wake of the 1991 Santa Cruz massacre in East Timor.
The money is insignificant compared to the sums Jakarta received in the past. But in the words of one analyst, it is the symbolic value that the Indonesian military (TNI) badly wanted. Critics warn the funding is liable to be interpreted by the TNI leadership as a sign Washington is going soft on human rights.
The TNI's human rights record is questionable. Its forces have taken sides in the Maluku conflict and have allegedly killed civilians in Aceh. In the past few weeks Indonesia's special ad hoc human rights courts have also acquittedofficials over the East Timor violence in trials condemned as a whitewash. For most of Indonesia's 24-year occupation of East Timor, Washington armed and trained its military. Indonesia was seen as an important bulwark against communism. Now the truth about Indonesia's occupation is widely known, US officials dealing with the issue have clearly done some soul-searching.
One US official admitted feeling disturbed by some of the TNI's training methods. There are also serious structural problems within the TNI, the official said.
Its men are not backed up properly in the field; its budget is inadequate; it is forced to find most of its funding itself, its equipment is out of date and, in some cases, falling apart. Further, its leaders are unable to improve the situation.
The argument is that the TNI's human rights record will only get better with foreign input, such as sending officers to retrain in military colleges overseas.
These arguments have been heard before. According to US Senator Patrick Leahy, who sponsored the 1999 amendment that froze military ties, the US has pumped about US$1 billion into Indonesia's military since 1950.
"All that time we knew the Indonesian army was a repressive, corrupt and abusive institution," he told a Senate committee in July. "But the Pentagon, throughout those years, said our IMET was improving the army – making it more professional, more respectful of human rights. I remember hearing that many times.
"No high-ranking officer has gone to jail, and several have been promoted. The army continues to arm Muslim extremist militants in other parts of Indonesia. It is involved in drug smuggling, prostitution, human trafficking, illegal logging and many other illicit enterprises. This is well known."
But even Mr Leahy has given the current package a cautious welcome, as an opportunity for the TNI to show it really has changed its spots. There are tight conditions attached. The package will not include direct military training, but may include items like legal and military management courses.
Arguably, September 11 has made Indonesia a more significant player in international affairs. It is the world's largest Muslim country and places like Maluku and Sulawesi have been battlegrounds for Islamic militants waging jihad. It is also in a mess. With the legal system only semi-functional in some areas, it is a potential base for international terrorists. The argument is that the US needs some leeway over such an important country.
In a recent report, the International Crisis Group (ICG) said many Indonesian politicians were reluctant to accept US aid.
"Closer Indonesian-US military co-operation is not universally popular among the political elite in Jakarta. Politicians from Muslim parties in the Indonesian parliament have voiced concern that Islamic organisations more generally will become a target of counter-terrorism efforts and that Indonesia will simply become an American pawn," the group said.
"Human rights defenders are concerned that counter-terrorism initiatives in Indonesia will simply be a green light for a return to some of the repression and surveillance of the Suharto days, particularly given the current leadership of the National Intelligence Agency."
The National Intelligence Agency is led by A.M. Hendropriyono, a former general who has been accused of human rights crimes during a military operation against a Muslim group in southern Sumatra in 1989. Mr Hendropriyono, like chief security minister Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono, is a graduate of the IMET programme.
The ICG report pointed out the culture of the Indonesian military was very different to that of the US military. "The fact that US assistance to civil society programmes remains strong does not lessen the symbolic importance of resuming ties to the TNI at a time when it has made no meaningful progress towards addressing its human rights record," it warned.
[Chris McCall is a Jakarta-based journalist.]