Revolutionary Spirit: Jose Rizal in Southeast Asia

8. "His Name is Sweet In our Memory"

172 REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT 8 “His Name is Sweet In our Memory” O n 20 May 1962, on the anniversary of the founding of the Budi Utomo — for Sukarno the true beginning of his country’s nationalist movement1 — the self-styled “Mouthpiece of the Indonesian People” tore into the Dutch, the country’s former colonial masters, again. Sukarno criticized the Netherlands for reneging on its promise to resolve the West Irian dispute within a year after recognizing Indonesian sovereignty in 1949. He announced, again, his government’s new policy of liberating West Irian (“before the cock crows on the 1st of January 1963”), if diplomacy failed one final time. And he deployed his iconic army of famous trouble-making nation-makers, again. Jose Rizal, for instance. And I also ask the United States of America, is it true if people say for instance, that the independence of the Philippines was the result of the trouble maker Jose RizalY Mercado, or Aguinaldo. No! That movement was not made byAguinaldo or Jose RizalY Mercado, but it was the movement of history [Sukarno 1962: 6; the capitalized “Y” is in the official English translation]. The particular use of Rizal in this speech, or indeed of Aguinaldo and other pioneers of nationalism, is unusual. Instead of direct praise, or a reference to them as inspiration or source or cause of the nationalist “HIS NAME IS SWEET IN OUR MEMORY” 173 movement, as was his usual practice, Sukarno negates their role — in favour of historical forces. It is a subtle change, but in fact the effect is not negative. The listener does not hear the language as a putdown; the leaders remain singular, attention is directed to them, and their purpose, as always, is to serve as a reflection, or a reiteration, of Sukarno. It is Sukarno who has been accused of mischief-making. Except for this subtle inversion, the speech Sukarno gave at the commemoration of “National Reawakening Day” in 1962 to a mixed audience (mostly local, but with the diplomatic corps in attendance) at the Negara Palace is a characteristic if late example of his powerful oratory.2 Rosihan Anwar has argued that “one cannot deny the substantial role played by President Sukarno” in popularizing Rizal’s name in Indonesia (Rosihan 1961: 298); for that reason, we must take a closer look at Sukarno’s influential speechmaking. The paragraphs before the passage on Rizal are instructive: I know, as I have said the other day at Semarang, that the Dutch hate me very much, the person Sukarno, that the Dutch always say: “Hey, Sukarno is the trouble maker.” It is he who always makes trouble, makes nuisance, makes chaos. Why is it that the Dutch say so? Because the Dutch do not understand history. Because the Dutch do not understand that all the activities of the Indonesian Nation, especially those activities in regard to the achievement of the full freedom of their Fatherland from Sabang to Merauke are not made by one leader but emerge from the hearts of the entire Indonesian Nation. I ask, if the Dutch say that I, Sukarno, is [sic] the trouble maker, is it nice and is it proper if I say, “that Prince Willem van Oranje is a trouble maker”? Was the independence movement in Egypt, the United Arab Republic, the sole result of the work of Arabi Pasha, of Mustafa Kamil? No! The independence movement in Egypt at that time, now the United Arab Republic, was the movement of history which emerged from the hearts of the Egyptian Nation. I also ask: “Was the freedom movement in India the sole result of the work of Krishna Gokhale, of Mahatma Gandhi only, or 174 REVOLUTIONARY SPIRIT Jawaharlal Nehru only, so that the British could properly say for instance that Gandhi was a trouble maker, that Jawaharlal Nehru was a trouble maker?” No! The movement of India was not made by Gandhi, not made by Jawaharlal Nehru. And I also ask the United States of America, is it true if people say for instance, that the independence of the Philippines was the result of the trouble maker Jose RizalY Mercado, or Aguinaldo. No! That movement was not made byAguinaldo or Jose RizalY Mercado, but it was the movement of history [Sukarno 1962: 5–6]. Sukarno continues by calling a roll call of “awakened” nations, those who have seen “an outbreak of the Social Conscience of Men.” He...