May Day and the Labour Party: A Political Tool for Workers or Trade Union Elite?

International Labour Day 2022 was commemorated [in Indonesia] by the Labour Party as a “May Day Fiesta” at the Bung Karno Sports Stadium (GBK) in Jakarta on May 14. An estimated 30-60 thousand workers attended the fiesta. Even the lower estimate of 30,000 shows an increase in mass mobilisations.

In general, previous actions by the Confederation of Indonesian Trade Unions (KSPI) have only been “bluffs” where Labour Party Chairperson and KSPI President Said Iqbal has threatened that tens of thousands of workers would take to the streets, but only a few thousand or even hundred have attended.

Large mobilisations such as this, however, do not necessarily mean an advance. We also have to pay attention to the content of the mobilisations themselves. They are packaged as “fiestas” – a May Day model usually used by “yellow” [bosses] trade unions working together with the police to moderate May Day actions.

May Day fiestas are usually filled with non-political events such as dances, recreational walks, bicycle riding and door prizes. It is not uncommon for May Day fiestas to attack other labour protests with posters which denigrate street actions.

Although there were demands such as revoking the controversial anti-worker Omnibus Law on Job Creation, it appears that this was just for publication in the mass media. The May 14 fiesta even invited groups whose interests totally conflict with those of workers, such as Indonesian Chamber of Commerce and Industry (Kadin) and groups whose job it is to destroy the labour movement.

They even made space to convey rotten ideas to the workers. During a protest in front of the House of Representatives prior to the Bung Karno Stadium rally, an opportunity to speak was given to the Jakarta military commander and Jakarta police chief. Later Indonesian police chief General Listyo Sigit Prabowo was given an opportunity to speak.

Of course, one of the points in their speeches was an appreciation of how orderly the May Day rally was. They didn’t mention the deluge of billions of rupiah in money spent on repressing working class resistance to the Omnibus Law – activists’ telecommunication devices tapped, hundreds of people assaulted and arrested and the use of live ammunition resulting in the death of two students.

International trade unions were also given an opportunity to present televised speeches. This included trade unions and labour parties from Germany and Brazil. If this is true, then it was truly embarrassing for German trade unions and the Brazilian Labour Party and Trade Union confederation. The German working class suffered under the fascist Nazi regime and the Brazilian working class likewise under the ultra-right Bolsonaro regime.

Said Iqbal meanwhile previously supported the 2014 presidential electoral bid by former General Prabowo Subianto – the son-in-law of the military dictator Suharto – who stands accused of involvement in human rights violations and the abduction and disappearance of pro-democracy activists in 1997-98.

The May Day Fiesta shows that the trade union elite bureaucracy is increasingly holding workers hostage though mass mobilisations with a backward consciousness.

It also shows that the trade unions which claim to be “red” are being progressively sidelined, or are moving towards becoming yellow trade unions.

Yellow Trade Unions

On October 4-5, 2021 the Labour Party (Partai Buruh – PB) held a [founding] congress in Jakarta. It is dominated by the yellow trade union elite bureaucracy. It’s vision is of a prosperous country with 13 platforms of struggle including employment, corruption, social welfare, wages, food, environment and more.

A labour party made up of these yellow trade unions and organisations will of course be reformist. And although we must go beyond capitalism, we must also look at what can be accepted and what objectively is being faced by the working class and oppressed people at the moment.

The main problem with the Labour Party’s vision and platform of struggle is its lack of clarity. It does not clearly articulate the interests of the working class and oppressed people.

When will the Labour Party call for the arrest and seizure of the corruptors’ and the tax cheats’ assets? This, of course, would include the hidden assets of Defense Minister Prabowo Subianto, Tourism and Creative Industries Minister Sandiaga Uno, Coordinating Minister for Maritime Affairs and Investment Luhut Binsar Pandjaitan, Economic Minister Airlangga Hartarto and others.

Perhaps there also must be a call for the arrest and trial of Prabowo, Suharto era armed forces commander Wiranto and former State Intelligence Agency (BIN) chief AM Hendropriyono and the other generals for the crimes against humanity they masterminded.

We also need free education and healthcare, not a health system paid for by contributions by workers and the ordinary people themselves. Perhaps also agrarian reform to meet the demands of farmers for land.

And what about separating religion from politics and the state by, for example, disbanding the Religious Affairs Ministry and stopping government funding for the peak Islamic body the Indonesian Ulama Council (MUI) or other religious institutions, while of course guaranteeing freedom of religion and beliefs for the ordinary people including the Syrah and the Ahmadiyah religious groups?

What about also abolishing militarism by disbanding the territorial military command structure and ending all military operations in Papua? And what about defending our democracy by abolishing all legal instruments which undermine free speech such as the draconian Information and Electronic Transaction (ITE) Law?

It is also very important in such a democratic program to show resistance against the bourgeoisie regardless of which political party backs them. This is what will create within the working class an identity, [something] which can only be meaningful if [workers] understand that their class interests conflict with those of the bourgeoisie.

History of Collaboration

The trade union bureaucratic elite has a long history of collaborating with the various bourgeois factions.

The first National Strike in 2012 – the first since Suharto’s military regime seized power in 1965 – was stopped unilaterally by Said Iqbal on the first day. Iqbal held negotiations with the Labour Minister and asked that the national strike be stopped. The result was far from what had been hoped for – just a ministerial regulation limiting outsourcing to five job sectors.

During plans for the second National Strike in 2013, the Confederation of the All-Indonesian Workers Union (KSPSI) and Indonesian Confederation of Prosperity Labour Unions (KSBSI) in fact deflated and attacked the labour movement by declaring the Anti-Violence Movement which equated violence by thugs with the national strike by workers.

The second National Strike was postponed several times and the call changed from a “national strike action” to a “national protest action”.

The third National Strike in 2014 failed because it was replaced by a national protest action. And that action itself was halted by KSPSI President Andi Gani on the grounds that he had received a phone call from President Joko “Jokowi” Widodo, who pledged that workers would be involved in the drafting of the 2015 state budget and that an economic team would be formed to look into workers’ living costs.

Factory occupations were stopped by the Harmony Declaration on November 8, 2012 which was signed by the Bekasi Investors’ Forum, the provincial and regional governments, reactionary civilian militia groups and the trade union leaders Obon Tabroni, R Abdullah, Joko Tugimin and Sepriyanto. The Harmony Declaration was also used to break up labour protests.

The character of these yellow trade unions’ political struggle can also be seen from their concept of “Go Politic”. Initially, Go Politic was to support trade union members who joined any of the existing political parties – be they the Golkar Party, Prabowo’s Greater Indonesia Movement Party (Gerindra) or President Widodo’s ruling Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle (PDI-P) – without consideration of the ideology of these parties.

This then developed into the KSPI supporting the Prabowo, Gerindra and Justice and Prosperity Party (PKS) coalition while the KSPSI and the KSBSI supported Widodo and the PDI-P. Discussions about establishing a mass based labour party in 2012 were in the end betrayed.

The human rights violations committed by Prabowo were justified by Said Iqbal of KSPI by saying, “Prabowo is said to have human rights issues, but workers don’t relate to this so it’s rather difficult to link it with workers”.

Iqbal then spread racist hatred against Chinese workers and in 2016 joined the National Movement to oust Christian-Chinese governor Basuki “Ahok” Tjahaja Purnama – although this was done under the name of the Indonesian Employees Movement.

In the lead up to the 2017 Bekasi regional elections, Obon Tabroni called for the situation to be “conducive” – meaning that for the sake of the election process labour resistance had to be controlled. Workers who were elected to parliament such as Tabroni and Nyumarno did an about turn and supported the anti-worker and widely unpopular Omnibus Law on Job Creation.

Decline in Mobilisations

Based on experience, electoral intervention by the FSPMI and KSPI has replaced mass mobilisation or efforts to radicalise the masses.

In concert with the decline in the labour movement and the counter-attack against resistance by workers and students to the Omnibus Law, the capacity of the yellow trade unions to launch mobilisations also declined.

The other factor in the decline of mass mobilisations was the perspective of the trade union bureaucratic elite who saw mobilisations not as the principle means of struggle but as a tool to strengthen their lobbying and bargaining position.

It is also important to look at the three main components behind the formation of the Labour Party which have a different and even conflicting histories. These historical difference could become a problem in the future unless the KPBI or the SGBN further accommodate the maneuvers by the yellow trade union bureaucratic elite.

The KSPSI and the KSPI have their roots in the SPSI, which was controlled by the Suharto military regime. The KSBSI meanwhile, played an important political role in resisting the Suharto regime – although it was only as a way to boost their bargaining position to negotiate for better wages and workers’ welfare.

On the other hand, trade unions like the KPBI or even the SGBN can be traced back to the ranks of the People’s Democratic Party (PRD) affiliated Indonesian Center for Labour Struggle (PPBI), which in its early stages, saw the end of the Suharto regime as opening up democratic space where labour politics, including socialism, would find more freedom. Mass mobilisations was the means to realise this political struggle.

Meanwhile elements of the organised working class which are at the forefront of mobilisations, such as the Indonesian Trade Union Congress Alliance Confederation (KASBI), the Populist Democratic Trade Union Federation (F-SEDAR), the Militant Trade Union Federation (FSEBUMI) and so forth, have yet to issue an official statement on their position towards the Labour Party. Several however were prepared to speak to Arah Juang.

Rangga, from the central leadership of the Indonesian Workers Federation of Struggle (FPBI) declared that the Labour Party cannot yet be said to be an alternative because it was born out of meetings by the labour movement elite.

Ilham Jimbo meanwhile, from the FSEBUMI’s research and development department, views the Labour Party as not being initiated by working class political consciousness and also not being free of reformist elements who will capitulate before the bourgeois.

For revolutionaries joining a labour party is a tactical problem which very much depends on the level of radicalisation of ordinary working people themselves. This is because the grip and manoeuvres of the trade union bureaucratic elite can be broken through the radicalisation of the mass of working people.

Unfortunately, the objective situation at present does not support joining the Labour Party. Although over the last two years a new radicalisation has emerged, it is spontaneous in character and revolutionary forces are still small.

And up until now there has yet to be any significant alternative political force to challenge the trade union bureaucratic elite. The large majority of activists are still confined to trade unionism itself or advocacy work.

The struggle to build an alternative (revolutionary) party is a long and difficult road. But it is not something which is impossible. The advanced elements within the trade unions and people’s movement must join together and build a revolutionary party and go beyond trade union workerism and advocacy.

This article was translated by James Balowski from an edited and updated article by Cross Communal member Musa Talutama HERE. The original article published by Arah Juang on November 2, 2021 by Socialist Union leader Dipo Negoro was titled “Partai Buruh – Alat Politik Rakyat Pekerja atau Elit Birokrasi Serikat Buruh?”. This version has been abridged and edited for Red Ant from here.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s