The Suharto-U.S. Corporate Connection

excerpts from the book

Corporate Predators

by Russel Mokhiber and Robert Weissman

Common Courage Press, 1999

 

The sudden exit of Suharto from the Indonesian presidency has cast the international spotlight on the crony capitalism that enabled Suharto and his family to amass a fortune estimated to be on the order of $40 billion. Bribery and graft, sweetheart government contracts, government-protected monopolies and a host of other schemes made the Suharto family and a small coterie of close friends into billionaires.

Much less noted are the ways in which the Suharto regime facilitated super-profit-making by foreign multinational corporations which eagerly accepted benefits and protections from Suharto's brutal dictatorship.

Foreign multinational corporations benefited from the twin pillars of the Suharto economic program: unsustainable extraction of Indonesia's rich natural resources and unabashed exploitation of poor, unorganized Indonesian workers.

Consider the New Orleans-based Freeport McMoRan, which operates the world's largest gold mine and third largest copper mine in Irian Jaya, the Indonesia side of the island of New Guinea.

The company has ripped the top 500 feet off Puncuk Jaya Mountain, sifting through the dirt for copper and gold. After crushing the ore, mixing it with water and dousing the mix with chemicals to bring the metals to the surface, Freeport dumps the resultant waste rock-more than 100,000 tons a day-into mountain rivers.

Those rivers are the lifeblood of downstream communities of thousands of indigenous people. Environmentalists and the indigenous people themselves charge the rock waste has poisoned the water, killing fish and the riverside forest and making massive flood-plains inhospitable to crops. Freeport denies the charges.

But the Amungme and Komoro peoples are angry enough to have organized ongoing protests. The Indonesian military has met those protests with an iron fist, beating, torturing and killing many of the indigenous protesters. Freeport denies any responsibility for the military's human rights abuses of the protesters, and also denies charges that it has assisted the repression.

The Freeport-McMoRan controversy is typical of resource controversies in Indonesia, with local communities fighting against pillage of their resources and pollution of their lands and water by big national and multinational mining, oil and timber companies operating with the protection of the Indonesian military.

Or consider Nike, which is emblematic of the labor-intensive manufacturers that have located production (directly or through subcontractors) in Indonesia.

Nike subcontractors in Indonesia have two great advantages. First, wage levels in Indonesia are extremely low (though not as low as China and Vietnam). The minimum wage, which the government acknowledged to be below a "living wage," was set at $2.46 a day in 1997. With the collapse of the Indonesian currency, the rupiah, Indonesians' real earning power has dropped by about three-quarters. Stated otherwise, the real wage cost to Nike and other foreign investors has dropped by 75 percent. Under pressure, Nike agreed to nudge up workers' wages, but not to pre-financial-collapse levels.

The second benefit conferred on foreign investors like Nike is vicious repression of workers' attempts to organize. Under Suharto, Indonesia allowed only one official trade union federation. Workers' attempts at independent organizing were routinely quashed, with rival union meetings broken up by security forces and strikers facing threats and firings. Muchtar Pakpahan, the founder and leader of an unauthorized, independent labor federation, languished in an Indonesian jail until he was freed earlier this week.

Against this backdrop, in moving displays of courage, Nike's workers-most of them girls and young women-walked out twice in 1997. Still, conditions in Nike subcontractor factories remain dismal.

Protests against both Nike and Freeport McMoRan in Suharto's Indonesia helped spark solidarity campaigns in the United States. The higher-profile campaign against Nike has recently scored an important victory, as Nike CEO Phil Knight announced the company would require subcontractors to permit independent monitoring of their shops and to enforce U.S. occupational safety standards.

Even if Nike carries out these promises in good faith, much more remains to be done: Knight did not announce an upgrading of wages nor explain how workers' right to organize would be guaranteed in countries that do not respect basic labor rights.

The ouster of Suharto should further empower grassroots and labor activists in Indonesia, which should in turn embolden allies in the United States and elsewhere in the industrialized world to turn up the heat on corporations doing business in Indonesia.

But the overthrow of one of Asia's most brutal dictators should also be a moment of pause for Americans, a time to contemplate the various ways that U.S. corporations helped support, and were supported by, a ruthless autocrat who ruled with the barrel of a gun.


Corporate Predators