Golkar advances as others fight: Expert<\/p>\n
The Golkar party, among the strongest of the New Order
\nlegacies, is about \"to score a goal\" while everyone else is busy
\nfighting one another, says Riswandha Imawan, a lecturer in
\npolitics at the Yogyakarta-based Gadjah Mada University.<\/p>\n
Question: We are seeing the rise of \"New Order\" elements,
\ndemonstrated by situations like the resistance towards the trial
\nof human rights violators in East Timor. Your comment?<\/p>\n
Answer: I agree, and that's the consequence of two major
\nthings. Firstly, the neglect of the reform movement to focus more
\nintensively on principle issues instead of personalities.<\/p>\n
We have forgotten the major issue -- that toppling down
\nSoeharto is not the same as destroying his regime which had five
\nbasic, solid sources of power: authority, law, economy, culture
\nand the military.<\/p>\n
The reform movement was content when Soeharto's legitimacy to
\npower was destroyed; then we wasted all our energy on the
\npolitical figures, while the four main pillars of the New Order
\nregime remained to be \"neutralized.\"<\/p>\n
Of the economy, Attorney General Marzuki Darusman has admitted
\nthe existence of New Order economic powers trying to wipe out
\ntraces of debts under the bank liquidity support facilities;
\nregarding the law we can see how Tommy Soeharto escaped in front
\nof the police; culturally, we can still witness how many people
\nsay they feel pity towards the Cendana family (Soeharto's
\nfamily), which is now harassed by police.<\/p>\n
This means the New Order has succeeded in influencing public
\nawareness; corruption and its various political sins, in
\nparticular involving the former first family, is considered so
\nnatural that it is perceived that the Cendana family don't
\ndeserve the treatment they are now receiving.<\/p>\n
Then there is the fact that the 10 best graduates from the
\nMilitary Academy pledged loyalty to Soeharto when they were
\ninaugurated. The last inauguration by Soeharto was in 1997.<\/p>\n
At that time the graduates were lieutenants, now maybe they're
\nonly majors. So it's nonsense to imagine that the TNI dare stand
\nup against Soeharto unless the military is purified from former
\nforces.<\/p>\n
The bureaucracy has also been dominated by Golkar. So if,
\nduring the selection process for a new Chief Justice, Muladi is
\nsaid to be tainted by his involvement in the New Order ... who
\nwasn't? Therefore the reform movement has revealed a gap between
\nthe spirit to destruct the old system and current reality.<\/p>\n
What we have now is a replica of the New Order under different
\ncircumstances ... the problem has been neglect towards both the
\nbasis of legitimacy and the introduction of a new paradigm.<\/p>\n
Q: How about indications of Golkar trying to strengthen itself
\nthrough what looks like efforts to secure important positions to
\ncontrol the Prosecutor's Office, the House of Representatives and
\nthe Central Bank? What about other figures, or other political
\nparties?<\/p>\n
A: Other figures are too busy with their own petty problems. Just
\nlike in the past when the New Order managed to make the
\nIndonesian Democratic Party busy with its own frictions.<\/p>\n
Other parties are preoccupied by consolidation and fund
\nraising ahead of the 2004 elections, because their infrastructure
\nis indeed lacking.<\/p>\n
Competition over financial resources is continuing, not only
\nat the ministerial level, but also from Director Generals and
\ndirectors of state owned firms.<\/p>\n
The only position which no one is competing over is the
\nministry of womens affairs.<\/p>\n
Political actors are also too engrossed in the issue of
\nSoeharto and Tommy -- but only to the degree of their
\npersonalities.<\/p>\n
This is one reason that people accept Golkar's redemption.<\/p>\n
If Golkar's redemption relates to figures like (dismissed
\nGolkar legislator) Bambang Warih, this would still be acceptable,
\nbut if it's Akbar Tandjung saying that how could we believe him?<\/p>\n
The rise of figures resented by reform supporters, like
\nMuladi, has been possible because of the scandals surfacing
\nduring the selection of important posts like that of the Chief
\nJustice, which has diverted the attention of political actors.<\/p>\n
Q: Do you think the new politicians have been too reactive in
\nresponding to problems involving the executive?<\/p>\n
A: Not entirely. What's happening is a coincidental political
\ndevelopment involving the reform supporters which turned out to
\nbe in favor of Golkar.<\/p>\n
The new politicians in the House are undergoing a learning
\nexperience, through which they seek a point of balance in their
\nattitude -- balancing the stigma of the legislature's impotency
\nunder the New Order and the real current needs for political
\nstability.<\/p>\n
The rivalry between the President and the House was beyond
\nanyone's expectations, primarily because of Gus Dur's weak
\nlegitimacy judged by the votes gained by his National Awakening
\nParty in the 1999 elections. It was hard to imagine Gus Dur
\ndaring to plunge into conflict with the House.<\/p>\n
Secondly, the Gus Dur of the past was the most neutral figure
\namong political factions; both between political groupings for
\nand against the New Order, and also among factions within
\nopposing groups of the regime.<\/p>\n
The current problems are because he changed, which seems to
\nhave become the source of conflict itself. Golkar nowadays is
\nlike a second striker appearing from a blank spot in the right
\nposition to score a goal, while everyone else is unaware, too
\noccupied with fighting each other.<\/p>\n
Q: Is the rivalry between the President and the House more a
\ndifference in style?<\/p>\n
A: The important question now is whether Abdurrahman Wahid is a
\nsource of our problems or a solution? His political maneuvers so
\nfar have provoked squabbles among reform supporters.<\/p>\n
If he is indeed the source of the problem, just make him step
\ndown, although this must involve cautious consideration.
\nNevertheless, we must acknowledge the complexity of the New
\nOrder's legacy that Abdurrahman faces.<\/p>\n
Q: Do you have particular suggestions?<\/p>\n
A: The reform movement must regain unity to, among other things,
\nsettle or neutralize this legacy. If necessary, we could promote
\na new symbol for leadership who has not been entangled by the
\ncurrent conflicts.<\/p>\n
Amien Rais is involved, and his political career is almost
\nending. Megawati is clearly in a traditional conflict with Amien
\nand his political bandwagon. To avoid disintegration of the
\nreform movement, one alternative is a new political leader.<\/p>\n
For this purpose it seems we can't hope for leadership from
\nthe 1998 reform movement, nor from the three political figures
\nwho were part of the Ciganjur group (Gus Dur, Megawati and Amien
\nRais. The group also included Yogyakarta Governor Sultan
\nHamengkubuwono X).<\/p>\n
Akbar does not count as an alternative; he only got a free
\nride on the reform movement. I suggest that Sultan Hamengkubuwono
\nX could be a symbol of new political leadership.<\/p>\n
We can only maintain Gus Dur as national leader if he can
\nchange his controversial political style. Secondly, he must be
\nopen to advice from others. This, I think, is crucial. (Asip A.
\nHasani)<\/p>",
"url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/golkar-advances-as-others-fight-expert-1447893297",
"image": ""
},
"sponsor": "Okusi Associates",
"sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com"
}