The take-off of reconstruction just at the edge of  a post-conflict situation is a  crucial period that  serves to  test  the validity of  systemic theorizing  vis-à-vis pragmatic  application. There is an attitude  towards expediency  and simplification that sometimes over-shadows scalar priorities and even lineal foundations. Shortsighted unidirectional  appreciation or acceptation of  multi-pronged realities is  an extravagant effort  that leads to  chaos and wastage.  In the race of time, sometimes there are  societal variables  that implode either due to systemic incompatibility or extinction, leaving trails  of undiluted residue which can be an irritant in the lacunae of  reconstruction in the long run.

Contrasting realities  in East Timor should provide the policy-makers a reasonably intelligent  comparative perspective that can  be  a crystal ball  in looking at the  most highly probable outcome.  And having forewarned of such are morally responsible  in charting a  brighter destiny that may not only be  immediately appeasing the discontent  of the rowdy but  should be  perpetually  acceptable by the greatest number and the greatest good.

The socio-cultural perspective is one interesting look.   The suprastructure of society becomes the societal fabric that binds spontaneously or produces  logical patterns of agreement and disagreement.  In this society, it serves as an epitome of  both colonial tradition and  limited modernity.  Religion for one. The influence of  religion is far reaching and transcendental, which serves as  a “dot exe”  command for defining  bono et malo. So far, it has become the best source of consolation in any period of hardship or survival. It sets  the standard of decency and morality. The zealot and the green-eyed may take it against   adventurism and liberality. When it nurtures norms and traditions, it may look-upon deviant objectivity  as a  self-defeating partner. 

In almost  every modern- state, there is a well-settled rule on the separation of Church and State.  This is a  situation in a stable society but  is unlikely in  a state of  transformation and even in recovery. Religion  dilutes itself into politics the moment   she perceives her flock to be in trouble.  Her role in this society has been very visible. It has taken the cudgel as a source of enlightenment in  all periods of persecution.  But she may  find debate with  Simon’s Value-Fact Dichotomy with respect to urgency and practicability especially when she comes in contact with the liberal western influence. 

The social  chasm of  tradition and modernity is a paradigmatic dysfunction  that gives rise  to  social friction.  The two distinct colonial periods in this society have produced two  opposing cultures. It has the long enduring  colonial precepts of dependency while  another became strong believers of freedom and self-determination. The remnants of dependency may still be classified as traditionalist and colonialist . Both  may be  perceived to remain loyal to the grandeur of colonial past while peevishly accepting  the  in-roads of contemporaneous thinking or in-disguise  of  other appellations. The latter may just be another thing of the past which may evolve in disguise into  something of chameleonic strategy.  The color of  politics more often than not  takes form out of necessity of power ambition which is  better than be left out into oblivion. The vehicles of advocacy like social movements and political parties emerged and adopt dynamically by way  of  identification, renewal, modification or  permissible abrogation or rescission of binding ties, through separation or association.  What may be looked upon as impertinent advocacy today may just be the saving grace which essentially determines patterns of loyalty ahead. 

Obtaining realities today in the immediate environment are suggestive of  societal showdown between  tradition and modernity.  This can be said in the social suprastructure, e.g. church, family, media, education, culture and tradition. The recent clash  between the students and law enforcers is indicative of a restless society  trying to assert its identity. It is an identity that has long been suppressed during the periods of upheaval.  A suppressed culture that  is released from bondage as a prize of painful victory. What has been preserved as a tradition has its own followings while on the one hand there is the younger generation who has moved closer to the skin of nationalism and  the cloth of freedom.  It is a new kind of relationship that has been honed from its unhappy dependency which can  readily transform into a cryptonic force with an ultra-keen sense of determining  the appropriate nourishment of their nationalistic fervor while slowly imbibing with suspicion any high-handed foreign action. This kind of empowerment is readily reinforced by the  instant influx of high-consumption culture thus  creating  an irreversible contrast from the old school. An uncontrolled scenario is most likely when tradition and modernity should meet head-on. 

Another point to consider is national identity. The solidification of national identity spawns wider cleavages through which dissent, resentment, discontent, hatred, discrimination and unrest may take its life  and become a modus vivendi of the restless and impatient. There is a society with a strong homogenous origin that is awaiting specific performance by deliverance from the importunes of justice and poverty. The contingency has not yet ceased even by the happening of the resolute condition of  independence. It  may take the form of a different struggle which is no longer a fight  of self-determination but a brewing debacle on how do go about it within and  by and among the people who had somehow placed a high stake of their lives and comfort during the struggle.

This  changing role  in the post-conflict situation is yet another sensitive issue.  One may claim to have a better right of the ivory tower.  Others may have their own stories to tell. In the making of  a greater nation, traditional roles  who have found fulfillment in doing non-traditional roles would now become more  assertive of holding on to it and  may sought  a well deserved place  in the societal infrastructure.  Looking at it, accusations are lodged  by and among  the  institutions which have at least shared a common understanding of self-determination. They may have special reasons for  submitting  now to the people a cause of action  in the determination of who has  the better right of this and that. 

A slight provocation may just lead to a catastrophic proportion. The raving concern here  is  the propensity of people  to attract public indignation even with the slightest provocation or from an insignificant routine.  Crowd of people can easily built-up among the people.  This can be due  to efforts of recognition or  just being assertive that  they are in control.  This has happened so many times before which even led to some painful deaths or injuries. The post-referendum was an exercise of  a fatalistic illogic not necessarily a by-product of religious overtures. This is  the social entrapment of “Kuyog and Bahala Na.” (Bandwagon and Come what may) 

This  fatalistic dysfunction is  scary that even the “Guns of Navaron”  can be of no match at all. In other missions, it happened amidst strong military show of force.  The crowd can swell in their own delight that  civilian authorities may not be able to control that even a military intervention may just be equally ineffective to quell a daring and rampaging civil unrest. The “use of force and the use of  deadly force” as permitted under established Rules of  Engagement would  be an extreme situation. The caveat though is “handle with care.” This is true in a  situation where people stopped listening and that they only wish to  listen to their voices of public outcry for some short of expectations within this timeframe or born out of resentment against  improper decorum or simply what is  not customarily acceptable. Like any other people in the world,  they seem to dislike being dictated too. 

With all honesty and candor,  the conductor like in a  symphony must  orchestrate with  dexterity what produces a euphonic melody that  brings out  the balance of  indigenous  tete-a- tete  foreign legacy.  It is therefore very crucial  to know the difference between what is revered and contingent or  between  what is dictated and essential. 

It lingers on…