Problems of Regional Autonomy in Contemporary Indonesia

This volume is based in part upon observations made during a six months' visit to Indonesia between August 1956 and January 1957. After an initial period of five weeks spent in the Autonomy and Decentralization Division, Ministry of Internal Affairs, visits were made to three provinces - East Java, Central Sumatra and Sulawesi where, through the courtesy of local officials, facilities were provided for the study of the local government system at all levels. While it is necessary to draw attention to these geographical limitations of the enquiry, the three provinces were deliberately selected as samples with a view to enabling the study of varied and contrasting situations, and the observations made in the paper are couched in general terms, a further qualification must be made. The visits to Central Sumatra and Sulawesi were concluded before the changes of government in those provinces in December 1956 and March 1957. The comments referring specifically to the situations in these provinces have therefore been outstripped by events. It may be assumed, however, that the more permanent problems of local government planning will remain, and it has been thought desirable to describe the situations in the two areas as they were observed, except that some reference to subsequent changes is made in the concluding section of the paper.

About Cornell Modern Indonesian Project Interim ReportsThis title was originally published as an "Interim Report" in the Cornell Modern Indonesia Project (CMIP) series organized by the Cornell Southeast Asia Program. CMIP's first "Interim Report" appeared in 1956, during an era when little scholarship on Indonesia was available, and those studies that did appear often lagged far behind the actual events taking place in the country. George Kahin, director of CMIP at the time, explained in his foreword to the first "Interim Report" that these books were intended to address this lack of timely scholarship and encourage lively critical exchanges among researchers and readers. Therefore, as he explained, the "Interim Reports" would be "explicitly tentative and provisional in character." We believe that an understanding of this historical context is key to a full appreciation of these contributions to the study of Indonesia in the twentieth century.