The Citarum River, which winds its way through West Java past terraced rice paddies and teeming cities, is an assault on the senses. Visitors can smell the river before they see it.
Some fishermen still make their living off the river’s fouled waters, but many are no longer casting lures. Instead, they row their boats through floating garbage, foraging for old tires and other trash they can sell.
The river, considered by many environmentalists to be among the world’s most polluted, is woven tightly into the lives of the West Javanese.
It provides 80 percent of household water for Jakarta’s 14 million people, irrigates farms that supply 5 percent of Indonesia’s rice, and is a source of water for more than 2,000 factories, which are responsible for a fifth of the country’s industrial output, Asian Development Bank figures show.
Villagers living along its banks use the Citarum’s dangerous waters to wash their clothes — and themselves.
Almost everyone sees the river as something of a dump: a convenient receptacle for factories’ chemical-laced effluent, farms’ pesticide-filled runoff and human waste.
As a result, in stretches of the river near Jakarta, fish have been almost wiped out, destroying the livelihoods of thousands of fishermen.
“I know the color of the river is not right,” said Sutri, the owner of a small restaurant in Bekasi, an industrial suburb of Jakarta. “But I don’t know anything about dangerous chemicals. Anyway, there is nowhere else for me to get water.”
Sutri said she washed the restaurant’s dishes in the river, along with her clothes and her children.
Environmentalists blame rapid, and unregulated, industrialization and urbanization over the past 20 years for the degradation of the 8,050km2 river basin.
The environmental damage is already costing lives. Flooding, caused by deforestation and drains clogged with garbage, is a constant problem in cities along the Citarum.
The list of woes is worrying enough that the development bank committed this month to provide Indonesia with a US$500 million, multiyear loan to finance a wide-ranging cleanup and rehabilitation plan devised by the bank and the government.
The money would be used to clean the Citarum and the West Tarum Canal, which connects it to Jakarta, and to create a long-term plan for how to best use the river. A portion of the loan would go toward setting up an independent organization that would become the steward of the Citarum.
But even before the bank has begun to dole out the loan, it faces opposition from local civic groups. They fear that the government is taking on too much debt and that there are inadequate protections to ensure that the poor see enough benefits and that the money is not lost to the corruption that is endemic in Indonesia.
“We are worried that the money could be lost through corruption,” said Nugraha, 30, a community activist who has been working to clean up this Jakarta suburb since he graduated from high school.
“And we are worried the farmers will be left out,” he said. “The focus seems to be on the people of Jakarta, not the local people here.”
That the battle lines are being drawn so early, and despite the obvious need for change, is not surprising.
“Water wars” in the US and elsewhere can be nasty affairs.
Like most such battles, the fight over the Citarum will revolve around the complex issues of equity, economic development and environmental protection. Coming up with a plan that satisfies everyone’s needs will be difficult.
Raising community activists’ concerns, the first US$50 million of the Asian Development Bank’s loan is designated for cleaning up the canal that brings the river’s waters to Jakarta, and for additional treatment plants. Because of health concerns, residents of the city rarely drink out of the tap, opting instead for bottled water.
Christopher Morris, a water resources engineer with the development bank, says it is committed to financing projects over 15 years that will benefit all the river’s users. Not all of the projects can be done quickly, he said.
“We are taking a long-term approach while recognizing there are some things we can fix quickly,” Morris said. “But changing the behavior of the community takes a lot of careful planning and preparation.”
Among the goals: Building waste treatment plants to clean household water for the Greater Jakarta area; creating more dams so that additional water will be available for growing communities like Bandung, Indonesia’s fourth largest city; and simply cleaning the river so people living near it, including fishermen, can again depend on the source of water.
The plan calls for reforesting stretches of the river basin to help erosion and landslides that clog the river and regularly cause floods in Bandung, in Bekasi and elsewhere.
The tricky part of the work will be getting the many people who rely on the river for their living, or simply to live, to agree to changes. Conflicts can arise over the allocation of water between farmers who use it for irrigation and city dwellers. And trying to get farmers to use more efficient irrigation methods, so there is more water for others, can be challenging.
The solution proposed by the Asian Development Bank and the Indonesian government is a “water council,” with half the representatives from government agencies and half from the communities involved and nongovernmental organizations.
What authority the council would have remains to be seen; different levels of government already disagree about water allocation.
Of particular concern to community activists is how this council might be manipulated, becoming yet another avenue for corrupt practices.
Morris said the bank had not been blind to the opportunities for the money to be misused. That, he said, is why the bank decided to parcel the loan out over many years.
“The point is to make the money available to the government in an efficient way, so they aren’t sitting with a loan and paying charges on it until they actually need to use it,” he said. “But it also allows us to put in some safeguards and implement our anti-corruption policies and other policies the Asian Development Bank promotes.”
A gap appears to be emerging between Washington’s foreign policy elites and the broader American public on how the United States should respond to China’s rise. From my vantage working at a think tank in Washington, DC, and through regular travel around the United States, I increasingly experience two distinct discussions. This divergence — between America’s elite hawkishness and public caution — may become one of the least appreciated and most consequential external factors influencing Taiwan’s security environment in the years ahead. Within the American policy community, the dominant view of China has grown unmistakably tough. Many members of Congress, as
After declaring Iran’s military “gone,” US President Donald Trump appealed to the UK, France, Japan and South Korea — as well as China, Iran’s strategic partner — to send minesweepers and naval forces to reopen the Strait of Hormuz. When allies balked, the request turned into a warning: NATO would face “a very bad” future if it refused. The prevailing wisdom is that Trump faces a credibility problem: having spent years insulting allies, he finds they would not rally when he needs them. That is true, but superficial, as though a structural collapse could be caused by wounded feelings. Something
Former Taipei mayor and Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) founding chairman Ko Wen-je (柯文哲) was sentenced to 17 years in prison on Thursday, making headlines across major media. However, another case linked to the TPP — the indictment of Chinese immigrant Xu Chunying (徐春鶯) for alleged violations of the Anti-Infiltration Act (反滲透法) on Tuesday — has also stirred up heated discussions. Born in Shanghai, Xu became a resident of Taiwan through marriage in 1993. Currently the director of the Taiwan New Immigrant Development Association, she was elected to serve as legislator-at-large for the TPP in 2023, but was later charged with involvement
Out of 64 participating universities in this year’s Stars Program — through which schools directly recommend their top students to universities for admission — only 19 filled their admissions quotas. There were 922 vacancies, down more than 200 from last year; top universities had 37 unfilled places, 40 fewer than last year. The original purpose of the Stars Program was to expand admissions to a wider range of students. However, certain departments at elite universities that failed to meet their admissions quotas are not improving. Vacancies at top universities are linked to students’ program preferences on their applications, but inappropriate admission
RSS