Rewriting History: The Persistent Shadow of De-Sukarnoization and Indonesia’s Contested Past

JAKARTA, July 17, 2025 – History, they say, is written by the victors. In Indonesia, this adage resonates deeply, especially when examining the tumultuous period surrounding the nation’s founding father, Sukarno, and the subsequent efforts to reshape his legacy. The controversial rewriting of Indonesia’s history, particularly the so-called “de-Sukarnoization” campaign, has cast a long, enduring shadow over the country’s collective memory, demonstrating how power can manipulate narratives and influence the understanding of an entire era.

For decades following Sukarno’s fall from power in the mid-1960s, a systematic effort was undertaken to diminish his role and portray his leadership in a less favorable light. This campaign, often referred to as “de-Sukarnoization,” was spearheaded by the New Order regime under President Suharto. Its aim was clear: to consolidate the new regime’s authority by discrediting the old, thereby justifying the political changes that had occurred.

This rewriting wasn’t just about subtle nuances; it involved a wholesale alteration of textbooks, public discourse, and state-sanctioned narratives. Sukarno’s achievements, particularly his pivotal role in securing Indonesia’s independence and his leadership in the Non-Aligned Movement, were downplayed or entirely omitted. Instead, emphasis was placed on alleged failures, his perceived proximity to communist elements, and the chaotic aspects of his later years.

Baca Juga:

Motoran 12 Jam Terjang Hujan! Dedi Mulyadi Bongkar Fakta Kondisi Jalan Jabar Jelang Lebaran

The impact of this historical revisionism was profound. Generations of Indonesians grew up learning a version of history that was heavily influenced by the New Order’s agenda. The complexities of Sukarno’s era, the nuanced political struggles, and the ideological clashes were often simplified into a black-and-white narrative designed to legitimize Suharto’s rule and demonize his predecessor.

However, with the fall of the New Order in 1998 and the dawn of the reformasi era, there has been a growing push to re-examine these historical accounts. Scholars, historians, and public intellectuals have begun to challenge the long-held narratives, advocating for a more balanced and critical understanding of Sukarno’s legacy and the events that led to his decline. This re-evaluation often involves accessing previously restricted archives and embracing diverse perspectives.

The controversy surrounding the writing of history underscores a fundamental truth: history is not static. It is a dynamic field of inquiry, constantly reinterpreted through new evidence, shifting perspectives, and evolving societal values. The struggle over Sukarno’s legacy highlights the ongoing tension between official narratives and the pursuit of a more comprehensive and accurate historical truth.

Today, while Sukarno’s image has largely been rehabilitated, and his status as a national hero reaffirmed, the echoes of de-Sukarnoization still linger. It serves as a powerful reminder of how political power can shape the past to serve present interests. This ongoing debate about who writes history, and for what purpose, remains a vital part of Indonesia’s democratic journey.

Ultimately, the controversy surrounding the writing of Indonesian history, particularly the period of de-Sukarnoization, offers crucial lessons for any nation. It emphasizes the importance of historical literacy, critical thinking, and the relentless pursuit of truth, ensuring that the past, in all its complexity, truly informs the future rather than being manipulated by it.(*)