America's foremost Indonesia scholar was an activist for peace
Daniel S Lev
As word spread around the world of George
Kahin's death on 29 January, at age eighty-two, the many who knew him
or his work must have paused for a time to reflect on the huge empty
space. Judging from an obituary in the New York Times, even those who
fought with him had to concede that this was an extraordinary scholar
filled with integrity, honesty, and courage.
One can reasonably argue that he was above all a research scholar or
educator or political activist, each with persuasive evidence. A former
student of his once came up with the pat analysis that Kahin had two
distinct sides, scholar and activist. It missed the point completely.
Kahin drew no lines between the demands of scholarship and those of
public engagement or undergraduate and graduate education. They were
bound up with one another inextricably by a powerful sense of
intellectual and personal responsibility unfettered by anything like a
hungry ego. Kahin never hedged on the purposes of knowledge, but
assumed that whoever possessed it was obliged to make it useful
wherever it might count for the sake of a universal public good. If he
was a genuinely capable scholar and teacher, he was also a genuinely
moral man with a sense of justice the size of Mt Everest.
The sheer volume of Kahin's work during the last half century seems
unlikely for one man, and the variety of it is astonishing. Along with
the late John Echols he developed Cornell University's Modern Indonesia
Project and the Southeast Asia Program, which drew graduate students
from around the world. As director of the CMIP, Kahin sought out
promising students, encouraged and supported them, gave advice, not
orders, and treated them as colleagues, not underlings. (His courtesy
and consideration, as most of his students will attest, knew few
bounds; he once talked with John Smail and me for half an hour before
either of us understood he thought we should get haircuts before our
Ford grant interviews.)
Kahin's scholarship was not flashy or pretentious, but consistently
careful, solid, uncluttered, and trustworthy. His first book, Nationalism and revolution in Indonesia
(1952), remains a standard work, fifty years later, required reading
for anyone who wants to understand modern Indonesia. His essays and
articles from the 1950s, and the short book on the Bandung Conference,
are still worth reading for what they have to say about Indonesian
politics and the problems of American foreign policy in Southeast Asia.
The texts he edited in the early 1960s on Modern Governments of Asia
and Governments and Politics of Southeast Asia, largely the work of his
students, are long since out of print; nothing since on Southeast Asia
matches the quality of the latter, unfortunately.
Critic
By the time the Vietnam War began to take shape in the mid-1960s,
Kahin, long immersed in America's adventures throughout Southeast Asia,
was well prepared to deal with it. He quickly became one of the most
active and best known critics of the war, and in some circles is better
known in this connection than for his Indonesian studies. At the first
national teach-in in May of 1965, Kahin led off for the anti-war
position against a stand-in for McGeorge Bundy, who had withdrawn. It
was no match. He and John Lewis later wrote The United States in Vietnam (1967, 1969), which helped to define the arguments against the war. A decade later Kahin's book, Intervention: How America became involved in Vietnam
(1979, 1986) provided ample detail on the disaster. By then, Kahin had
become one of the most persistent critics of American foreign policies
in Southeast Asia. Returning to his Indonesian interests, he and his
wife Audrey, a specialist in modern West Sumatran history, published Subversion as foreign policy,
which related the destructive relationship between the United States
and Indonesia from the revolution onwards; another book that will last.
Kahin did not relax much after his retirement from Cornell in 1988,
despite serious health problems. At a United States-Indonesia Society
(USINDO) meeting in Washington, DC, near the end of 1999, meant to
discuss fifty years of American-Indonesian relations, Kahin, then
suffering congestive heart failure and more, led off with a paper that
was vintage Kahin: detailed evidence, careful analysis, no punches
pulled. His friend Soedarpo, about the same age as George, followed
suit in supportive comments, making it hard for anyone there inclined
to celebrate American contributions.
In an age of self-advertisement and career manoeuvres, not least among
academics, Kahin's character isn't all that easy to understand. He grew
up in Seattle, the son of a respected lawyer and a mother who taught
part-time at the University of Washington, went to one of the city's
best private schools, did his undergraduate education at Harvard, a
master's degree at Stanford, and his PhD at John Hopkins. He was not an
outsider, clearly, but one of those few anywhere who did not choose the
obvious route to quiet success. At the start of the second world war,
still a student at Harvard, he devoted himself to helping Americans of
Japanese descent who were about to be shipped off to internment camps.
He never stopped criticising the arrogance, injustices, brutalities,
and stupidities of state power, wherever, and spent little time
worrying about the consequences for himself. He won honours for his
work; he was elected president of the Association for Asian Studies,
his books were well reviewed, his colleagues and students admired him,
and he made capable opponents sweat. Kahin showed little interest in
his own prominence, however, and took in stride the disfavour power
visits on critics. During the late 1940s or early 1950s, the American
government blocked his passport for a time. The New Order government in
Indonesia denied him a visa but also awarded him a medal, which sums up
nicely his odd impact in high places.
Daniel S Lev (dlev@u.washington.edu) recently retired as professor in political science at the University of Washington, Seattle.
|