Liu Jianwei liujianwei755@163.com ON Jan. 18, lawmakers in Indonesia’s House of Representatives approved the relocation of its capital city out of densely populated and heavily polluted Jakarta. The current capital is susceptible to earthquakes, which is another factor that contributes to this relocation move. In addition, Jakarta is often characterized as the world’s most rapidly sinking city. As to the new capital, well, it has a name: Nusantara, meaning “archipelago” in Javanese. Right now, the city of Nusantara itself is merely a piece of jungle land, a blueprint in Kalimantan on the island of Borneo with the commitment of a whopping US$32 billion budget amid the pandemic. “The relocation of the capital city to Kalimantan is based on several considerations, including regional advantages and welfare. It is a part of the vision of the birth of a new economic center of gravity in the middle of the archipelago,” said Suharso Monoarfa, the country’s Minister of National Development Planning, according to Indonesia Parliament TV. Relocation of the capital city is a rare occurrence for modern countries. After all, choosing the political center is no easy task for any country in the first place. Relocation certainly commands more convincing justifications, be it political, economic or social benefits implied. In December 2021, Egypt began moving its government from overcrowded Cairo to the yet-to-be-named New Administrative Capital. As an economic booster project, the construction valued at US$45 billion aims at providing many housing and employment opportunities, since Egypt’s population will nearly double in the next 40 years. The new capital city is expected to accommodate 18 to 40 million people by 2050. When Brazil moved its capital from the colonial city of Rio de Janeiro to an inland town named Brasilia in 1960, the move served as a strong political statement to assert its independence. The interior capital was intended to give the country a fresh start and help to develop this region and redistribute the wealth of the nation. The relocation of a capital city may be a sign of political compromise, as in the case of the United States. When the Southern states were worried about a Northern capital and unwilling to help pay off Revolutionary War debts incurred by the North, then Treasury Secretary Alexander Hamilton promised a Southern capital to financially reorganize the country. A patch of undeveloped land between Maryland and Virginia was finally chosen by George Washington in 1790, later known as Washington, D.C. Geographical concern also plays an important role. At the beginning of the 20th century, many cities wanted to become the capital of Australia; Sydney and Melbourne became frontrunners in a heated competition. As a compromise, Australia moved its capital to Canberra in 1913 because of its location as a midway point between Sydney and Melbourne. In 1991, Nigeria moved its capital from the southwestern Lagos to the central Abuja for the same reason. Abuja is a neutral city with no political or ethnical liabilities, a planned city that can better serve the administrative purposes of Nigeria. Security is another reason for moving to a central location in case of warfare with other countries. As an important symbol of nationhood, the capital of a country often represents the entire country to the world. Relocation of a capital city is a huge undertaking that changes the lives of many people involved in the process. Whether the intended goals of relocation can be achieved remains to be seen. (The author is an independent financial investor.) | 