Pro-Government Militias
Pam Swakarsa (Indonesia)
Basic Group Information
| Name assigned by coder: | no |
| PGM ID Number: | 293 |
| Country: | Indonesia |
| Date formed: | Nov. 7, 1998 |
| Accuracy of date formed: | month |
| Details of Formation: | Pam Swakarsa is a generic term meaning 'self security' or 'civilian guard'. They have been set up and used in numerous contexts. The first group was recruited by the military in November 1998 during Indonesia’s transitional period in order to secure a Special Session of the People's Consultative Assembly (MPR). It was founded by Abdul Gafur. |
| Date dissolved: | Aug. 15, 2005 |
| Accuracy of date dissolved: | month |
| Details of Termination: | After the devastating tsunami at the end of 2004, the Free Aceh Movement temporarily stopped fighting. In the months afterwards the Indonesian government and rebels of the Free Aceh Movement started a new round of negotiations. With the signing of a peace deal on August 15, 2005, Aceh received far-reaching autonomy and the decade long fighting came to an end. There is no evidence that suggests the Pam Swakarsa is active after this date. |
| Termination Type(s): | government defects |
Former and Successor Group Information
| Predecessor group(s): | none |
| Successor group(s): | none |
| Private Military Company? | no |
| Former Group? | no |
| Former Armed Group? | no |
| Former Rebel Group? | no |
| Former Rebel Group UCDP ID: | none |
| PGM Becomes Rebel Group? | no |
| Successor Rebel Group UCDP ID: | none |
Government Relation, Support, and Training
| Government Relation: | informal (type 1) |
| Created by the Government?: | yes | Main Creating Government Institution: | military |
| Government Link(s): | military (institution) |
| If link to party, name of party: | None |
| Training and Equipment: | yes |
| Shared Information and Joint Operations: | yes |
| Shared Personnel: | no |
| Type(s) of Material Support: | domestic government; military |
| State Sponsor(s): | none |
| Other Connection(s): |
Group Characteristics
| Membership: | religious; village/rural; unemployed; adolescents; criminals |
| Primary Membership: | local |
| Alternative Primary Membership: | no information |
| Location: | Jakarta, Lombok, West Nusa Tenggara Province, East Timor, Central Java |
| Force Strength: | [100000, 609000] |
| Target(s): | civilians; unarmed political opposition, government critics; rebels, insurgents, or other armed group; students |
| Purpose(s): | protect state, national or religious institutions; self-defense and security; anti crime; fight insurgents |
Ethnic Characteristics
| Ethnic Target(s): | none |
| Quality of Information for Ethnic Targeting: | not applicable |
| Ethnic Membership: | none |
| Quality of Information for Ethnic Membership: | not applicable |
| Ethnic Purpose: | none |
| Quality of Information for Ethnic Purpose: | not applicable |
Other Information
| Other Information: | Pam Swakarsa is the overall term for this militia, which consists of several local sub-groups, e.g. Amphibi or Buru Jejak. Almost every village had its own group. Later in Lombok, a group’s size as a private militia could be seen as an indication of an individual’s mass following. Violence committed by the group led the population to demonstrate against its actions. |
New Variables from Meta-Analysis
Purpose
| Purpose: | The group was mainly intended as a kind of substitute for the regular police to secure the People’s Consultative Assembly (MPR) during Indonesia’s transitional period. This meant that members acted against student protestors. Pam Swakarsa were used as civilian auxiliaries to the security forces. They were supposed to defend themselves and provide security in communities. According to a later report, they were then also used as private militias and protection forces for candidates. |
| Relative Benefit(s) of PGM Use | deniability of violence |
Treatment of Civilians
| Treatment of Civilians: | Protests that the group was meant to contain turned violent, which resulted in the injury of civilians. Members attacked protestors, threw rocks at students and were blamed for massacres of independence supporters whom the group was ordered to kill. The PGM also arbitrarily attacked civilians, beating them. While the group was meant to provide security, it spread fear among the population. It was not held accountable for its actions. More generally, the empowerment of groups like Pam Swakarsa threatened to undermine the authority of police and had the potential to escalate conflicts. |
| Type(s) of Violence against Civilians: | killing; beating |
Reasons for Membership
| PGM Members Coerced? | no |
| PGM Members Paid? | yes |
| Reasons for Membership: | Based on the group’s background of radical Islam, religious convictions were one reason for becoming a member. Some people joined out of material incentives, such as payment or food. Criminals and thugs were also members, suggesting that they joined for some kind of material benefit, e.g. from protection rackets. |
| PGM Members Killed? | no information |
PGM Size
| Size: | Initially, about 125,000 people were recruited in 1998 to protect the MPR. It is reported that after its formation in 1998 the number of members grew, partially due to taking in members from similar groups. Two of the sub-groups (Buru Jejak and Amphibi) claimed to have 40,000 members in 1999. Another source from 2003 states that Amphibi alone as the largest group had 480,000 members and Pam Swakarsa as a whole consisted of approximately 600,000 individuals. |
Weapons and Training
| Weapons and Training: | Members of the group were armed with guns, machetes, spears, and sticks. In 2002, it is stated that the group did not receive military training while another source in 2004 reports that it was trained by the military. |
Organisation
| Organisation: | The PGM was subordinated to the military and the police and acted as a partner to the police. Almost every village had its own group. In 2003, subgroups were used as private militias to protect candidates in addition to their role as police auxiliaries. According to a source the subgroups had links to officials at different levels of society, making them difficult to control by the central government. |
Reference(s) for Meta-Analysis
Evidence
- Examine the evidence for this coding.