Indonesia - Henry Saragih

Interview Details

• PGA Affiliation: Indonesian Peasant Union, and International Coordinating Committee of La Via Campesina 2000-2017

• Region: Asia - Indonesia

• Language: English

• Interviewee: Henry Saragih

• Interviewer: Olivier de Marcellus

• Date: February 2025 by video conference

• Bio:

Transcript

Olivier: Can you present yourself and your organization first? Okay.

Henry Saragih: I am Henry Saragih, the chairperson of the Indonesian Peasant Union. I was the member of International Coordinating Committe of Via Campesina, from 2000 until 2017.

Olivier: How did you first get involved with People’s Global Action?

Henry Saragih: I connected with the Peoples Global Action in 2000. Or maybe before 2000. 25 years ago. I remember suddenly I was in the People Global Action. Because in 2000, I think there were so many mobilizations in the world. Yeah.

Olivier: As I remember, there were also other members of your organization who came to Cochabamba to the conference in Cochabamba. I think you weren’t there.

Henry Saragih: we delegete three people there. Indra Gunawan Lubis, Hendra Harahap and Mia. One of them, uh, Hendra Harahap. He passed away three years ago.

Olivier: Oh my God. Too bad.

Henry Saragih: Yeah. And they spent time in your home.

Olivier: That’s right.

Henry Saragih: For the preparations.

Olivier: On the way to the Cochabamba. Yes. That’s right.

Henry Saragih: Yes.

Olivier: What was the role that your organization had in PGA? And how was it useful for you?

Henry Saragih: We were in the global mobilization. I think this is our first experience. At the time, we had the one platform against globalization. The neoliberal capitalism. And we have the one platform to build the new alternative. Building the new world. New world. Yeah. Because of that we continue with our slogan, Another World is Possible.

Olivier: So it was with the Global days of Action? Did you participate in those in Indonesia?

Henry Saragih: Yes! Yeah. When we had the call, we organized the mobilization on many issues. On the issue of resources. Agrarian issue. Water, land grabbing issue. And against the liberalization of agriculture, trade liberalization against WTO and against militarism and colonialism. Yeah. Neocolonialism.

Olivier: Yeah. Yeah, that’s a lot. It made it possible to have a very wide mobilization of a lot of different objectives.

Henry Saragih: Yes. A lot of actions and, of course, after that, we link with the World Social Forum too. We started the World Social Forum in 2001 . And uh, because that is very inspirational. To organize the mobilizations in the world. And then the new governments in Latin America, I think gave another nuance, an improvement of the politics.

Olivier: Yes. The progressive governments that made the social forum possible. What was the difference between the World Social forum and PGA? What were the differences or similarities and what were they good for? Was the WSF the same as PGA for you or was it slightly different?

Henry Saragih: Yeah, I think it’s different. With the PGA, and the World Social Forum. But after at the World Social Forum there were many activities. One can say the PGA, is more like the initiator for the action. Of many groups.

Olivier: Yeah. It was really for action. Yeah, yeah.

Henry Saragih: Yes. Many mobilizations. And uh, we can say with many more issues.

Olivier: Was that the first time that your organization was active, in an international mobilization?

Henry Saragih: I think so, because after there were many mobilizations, I didn’t see the we can say the dominant initiative of PGA. You can see many groups, you have many activities . And after that, I can say I lose the specificity of the course of the PGA initiative. And because we can say all the activities and actions, you can say its the People’s Global Action like that.

Olivier: Yeah. You say afterwards there were many other actions in other networks or ?

Henry Saragih: Yeah, yeah. People can easily say we are the people’s global action like that.

Olivier: And so at the time there was, there was no other way of organizing internationally.

Henry Saragih: Yeah. I can say we saw so many international initiatives. And after too, when we see the World Social Forum, uh we can say we need to remake more dynamically the world social movement, forum.

Henry Saragih: In the World Social forum peoples assembly, we meet with the Peoples Global Action people too. Because when we mobilize, we meet with the people in People Global Action organization. And then after day to day like we can say, people’s action in the world are so many. Diaspora I can say. Many initiatives, many actions in the world. And with the many issues and more specific, like Via Campesina. Yeah. We took initiative like the many forums on the issues of the region of the ? issue of the agrarian, issues of agriculture…

Olivier: Like the alliance of Asian farmers?

Henry Saragih: Yeah. We organized like the Nyeleni forum for food sovereignity in Mali Africa 2007.

Olivier: So, were you in Via Campesina, after PGA or at the same time?

Henry Saragih: The same time. Because the Via Campesina emerged at the same time as the PGA.

Olivier: Yeah, yeah that’s right. But they were both useful in different ways?

Henry Saragih: For us, we see not so many differences. Because with Via Campesina we bring food to the organization, uh, mobilization.

Olivier: But so, Via Campesina, what was the difference between Via Campesina and PGA for you? Why were they both useful?

Henry Saragih: They were the same on the mobilisations, but different on the way relation with the building, the structure of the organisation. Yeah. And, in communication with the other institutions . With Via Campesina we build communication through dialogue besides the mobilisation.

Olivier: You had more dialogue between the farmers organisations in Via Campesina.

Henry Saragih: Yeah. Beside we mobilisation we organise dialogue too, not just inside Via Campesina but with the others. Yeah, especially with the UN.

Olivier: Aha. Yes. Were you often came to the UN at the time. There was the

Henry Saragih: In the FAO or in human rights? In Geneva? Yeah.

Olivier: For the farmers rights treaty in the UN. Many of you were coming to my place at the time, huh? Yes.

Henry Saragih: And in Rome, too. At the FAO.

Olivier: So you say PGA was especially useful for organizing action between all different kinds of actions, different organizations. Is that what you mean? From what you say, PGA was, specifically very useful because it was organizing action on an international level?

Henry Saragih: Yes.

Olivier: Also between different kinds of organizations, not just farmers organizations.

Henry Saragih: Yeah. Yes.

Olivier: That’s what it did best. What were its drawbacks for you? What were its weaknesses?

Henry Saragih: I think we can say at the moment. Yeah. Uh. International solidarity, international action, I think, is a good initiative by the PGA. For us we can say it is the first on the international level. Yeah, across the world. Yeah. Yeah. Not just in maybe like continental Europe or in the United States, or Latin America, but PGA, I think stands for the people in all the sectors in the world.

Olivier: Mhm. Yes. That was, that was really the first to do that. Maybe the only because after we there now there are many, many different mobilizations of different networks. It’s difficult to follow everything.

**Henry Saragih:**Yes.

Olivier: Whereas at the time there was only PGA and Via Campesina basically.

Henry Saragih: Yes. And I think that is now our weakness. Yeah. We see Via Campesina less mobilizations too now, and we see the PGA not doing any initiatives for global action. And I think we see now maybe not so many mobilizations again across the world.

Olivier: Not so many really international.

Henry Saragih: Yes. Now.

Olivier: Mhm. Because there are many people who are calling for global action on, on one thing or another, but not general.

Henry Saragih: I didn’t see in 2025 any call for mobilization. From 2000 until 2010. So many, our mobilizations. I see after the food crisis 2008, less mobilization.

Olivier: Uh, after the financial crisis or the food crisis, you say? Huh?

Henry Saragih: Yes. I saw how big our mobilization was in Geneva. Yeah I forgot so many actions mobilized there. Yeah, in Rome, In many places, actions in Indonesia itself, too. And now, People’s Global Action is frankly, weak.

Olivier: Why do you think that People Global Action didn’t continue?

Henry Saragih: It is. I am thinking now: Why? Because the problems still exist.

Olivier: Yeah, that’s for sure.

Henry Saragih: Uh, yeah. The hunger is not yet reduced. And disasters. Yeah. The degradation in employment is increasing still. Yeah? War still there. And the food issue is still a problem. Because that I don’t know why this. And we need maybe more discussion as to answer about this.

Olivier: Yeah. I think that I remember you saying that around 2008 or 2010, the last time you came to Geneva saying we should do PGA again.

Henry Saragih: Yeah.

Olivier: I think one of the problems was that the Latin American movements, they got very involved with their national liberation or maybe even taking power. So there was less interest in international action. But, I agree with you. We should. And now there is the climate issue, too. Now I am working on an international network on the climate issue. I can send you, if you want information on that. Maybe it interests you.

Henry Saragih: Hmm…

Olivier: But there’s nothing like PGA for the moment.

Henry Saragih: Yeah, And if we see the other group. Yeah, we can say like Greenpeace. I see there now there’s less mobilization too. Just looking at others.

Olivier: What do you think that PGA had any influence on later mobilizations. In Indonesia or in other places do you think? Did PGA effects on later mobilizations for you? Uh, you know did it did it leave a heritage of some kind for you?

Henry Saragih: Yes. Of course. Yes in the history, uh, I think the PGA made history. Yeah. We can say a milestone for our movement in the world. And I think we now are facing a new situation. Yeah. How do we continue mobilization and, of course, solidarity in the world.

Olivier: Yes. Now we have the problem with the extreme right. Huh?
Henry Saragih: Yeah.

Olivier: What is the situation in in Indonesia for you now?

Henry Saragih: Ha… to be frank or to be easy, we can say authoritarian populism. Or maybe Neoliberal populism.

Olivier: Like many places. Yeah.

Henry Saragih: The government using the issue of populism. To attract people’s vote. To make the people support them. Like now the government is making the program to give free food for the students. And then, of course, commitment to stop importing food. Mhm. Yeah.

Olivier: So that is good.

Henry Saragih: Yeah. But on the other side, they support the food estate program. The Food estate is the commercialization.

Olivier: Agribusiness.

Henry Saragih: Agribusiness. Agribusiness of the food. And no program for agrarian reform.

Olivier: For the farmer. For the peasants?

Henry Saragih: Yeah. No distributions of land to the farmers. And they now give the concession for the co-operative and for the religious organisation for the mining.

Olivier: For mining?

Henry Saragih: Yes.

Olivier: Big problem. Mm.

Henry Saragih: Uh, but on the other side, they give the opportunity to go for the big company. That I say neoliberal populism.

Olivier: Mhm. Mhm. I see.

Henry Saragih: Combined neoliberal authoritarian populism. Ha! Populism, combined, because in one side they say democratization and rights and voice for the all but the other side they are controlling the people. The type of the repression is changing.

Olivier: Uh huh. How has it changed?

Henry Saragih: Before they don’t allow us to speak. But now they give people free speech. But the other side, when the people speak wrong and they look in the argument, and then they criminalize people.

Olivier: So you can talk, but you can’t say everything.

Henry Saragih: Yeah, but when people are talking, then they go to jail.

Olivier: Yeah. So there’s not really freedom of speech. Well so do you think that PGA should have continued?

Henry Saragih: I think we need to organize again to continue international solidarity actions.

Olivier: Yeah. We need the PGA. its disappearance was a pity. It had very little funding compared to Via Campesina. It was always much weaker.

Henry Saragih: I think now in the social media era. I think we must formulate our mobilization and the project. Maybe we don’t need more meetings like before. Yeah. How do we use social media now? Because it’s totally changed since 2010.

Olivier: You say that we could organize at a distance?

Henry Saragih: Yeah. This tele-conference is simple now. Yeah, yeah. It was difficult for us to speak more deeply, and its now easier.

Olivier: That’s something we should take advantage of being able to organize without actually traveling.

Henry Saragih: Yes, yes. I think we need to formulate our struggles through social media now. And maybe we must build alternative technology tools for the campaign. For example, could we use zoom or WhatsApp for Peoples Global Action, or we can build a new platform?

Olivier: Yes, probably it would be good to have a different platform because, whatsapp anyhow? Is, is controlled now by…

Henry Saragih: Meta. Yeah.

**Olivier:**That’s not good. But yeah, we now use Signal and Telegram. I think they are a little bit more independent. Yeah. Are you on …

Henry Saragih: Before we had the platform “Ubuntu”. I don’t know now if it still continues or not yet.

Olivier: Uh, ubuntu… Uh, for communication?

Henry Saragih: Yes. Still exists?

Olivier: I don’t know, It’s a good question because Ubuntu was an independent software. Yeah. Well that’s a very interesting reflection Henry. Something that wasn’t possible before became possible with PGA because there was a possibility of fax and email, but it was very just that, you know. You had to bring people together. But, now it’s true that we could, we could talk, organize webinars or things like that to have more, better political discussion. Maybe we still need to meet face to face because it’s also interesting, but maybe not so often.

Henry Saragih: Yes. Olivier, I’m very sorry because, suddenly I have an agenda traveling to West Sumatra. Well, I think maybe in 2 or 3 minutes we can end. And then we can make an agenda again maybe next week to continue our speech.

Olivier: Well, uh, consider talking about PGA. I think you explained well what you think. Do you have any last things to say about PGA? Uh, any last reflection about PGA. On what we did right or what we did wrong, I don’t know.

Henry Saragih: Yeah. PGA is important to continue with the new formulation, how we organize our solidarity in the world for action.

Olivier: For action. Yes. Action is for me the most important word. Well, thank you very much, Henry. It was a real pleasure and very interesting. Yes. We must stay in touch. Um, I will send you the information we have. We are. We’re doing this new coalition, which is mostly on extractivism, extractivism and climate. Maybe it will interest you.

Henry Saragih: Yes, please. You send maybe through email. Yeah. The WhatsApp is not so very, uh, secure. It is just for short communication.

Olivier: Very good. Well, thank you very much.

Henry Saragih: Thank you.

Olivier: It was a pleasure. It was a pleasure seeing you!

Henry Saragih: Bye bye.

Olivier: Bye.