Indonesia needs strong leadership, says Wardah Hafidz<\/p>\n
One of the reasons why Indonesia is still dogged by the
\nmultidimensional crisis is because it has no effective,
\ncourageous and sensitive leaders, says sociologist Wardah Hafidz
\nof the Urban Poor Consortium (UPC), the NGO that recently won the
\n2000 Yap Thiam Hien human rights award.<\/p>\n
UPC focuses among others on political education of the urban
\npoor, as indicated in Monday's rally demanding changes in the
\ndraft city budget for the next fiscal year.<\/p>\n
Wardah graduated from the state-owned Teachers' Training
\nInstitute (IKIP) in Malang, East Java. She then became an English
\ninstructor at the Curug Aviation School. She later pursued higher
\nstudies in the United States.<\/p>\n
The following are excerpts from an interview with Wardah by
\nThe Jakarta Post's contributor I. Christianto.<\/p>\n
Question: How do you see the current situation in Indonesia?<\/p>\n
Answer: Most of us want to see radical decisions taken. But
\nthe leaders are now reluctant to do that because they are
\ninundated by numerous problems.<\/p>\n
Our basic problem is elitism. The Dutch, during its
\ncolonization, tried to \"compensate\" Indonesia by launching
\neducational programs for the indigenous people. Our founding
\nfathers then tried to educate the elite although there were also
\ncampaigns on the national education program.<\/p>\n
The New Order regime officially created the floating mass. So
\nthe nation has a mass of people who are totally ignorant and who
\ncan be paid and manipulated. They can also be killed with
\nimpunity when necessary.<\/p>\n
There is only a small group of people, who call themselves the
\nelite, who think that they are responsible to direct and make
\ndecisions for the whole nation.<\/p>\n
Q: What's wrong with this group of people?<\/p>\n
A: I think for a long time this group of people, or the elite,
\nhave been looking only at themselves. As a result, everyone is
\nacting like them. We are only looking at ourselves. Policies are
\nbased on their own perceptions, for their own interests.<\/p>\n
For instance, if I were to always drive my own car or take
\ntaxis, I wouldn't be able to understand the suffering others
\nundergo when taking poor public transportation as they also risk
\nbeing pickpocketed. My daily life would be totally different from
\nthe common man.<\/p>\n
As an example, the pedicab (becak) was categorized as an
\n\"inhumane\" form of transportation and so banned in Jakarta. The
\nbecak was regarded \"inhumane\" because it would appear so for the
\nelite if they had to ride the becak.<\/p>\n
They fail to see beyond themselves that some people do not
\nhave any choice but to ride the becak, as the government has not
\nprovided an suitable alternative mode of transportation. The
\nelite judged that the becak was \"inhumane\" based on their
\npersonal experience.<\/p>\n
Q: What other problems do you see in the elite?<\/p>\n
A: The corrupt mentality remains a serious problem.<\/p>\n
Indonesians realize that corruption, collusion and nepotism
\n(locally known as KKN) has an all-round adverse effect as many
\npolicies and decisions are made to serve the personal interests
\nof the elite.<\/p>\n
Therefore, as Soeharto fell from power and political reform
\nstarted, it was like opening a Pandora box. What we have now is
\ntotal chaos. No authority, no rule of law.<\/p>\n
In a situation like this, the leaders are not brave enough to
\ntake genuine radical moves to cut the practices of the old regime
\nto let us start something anew, just like what we all want.<\/p>\n
If the elite really wants to make a clean break from the past,
\nthe KKN problem must be their top priority.<\/p>\n
Q: How does this relate to our culture?<\/p>\n
A: We must admit that the New Order has strengthened the
\npaternalistic culture. The term bung (brother) was replaced by
\nBapak (Father) and Ibu (Mother). This is a paternalistic symbol
\nwhere the people are regarded as the children of a big family
\nheaded by the Bapak, and assisted by the Ibu.<\/p>\n
Based on this concept, the father holds the power and the
\nchildren must obey and follow him. Such a system was maintained
\nso that those on top will have important and strategic positions.<\/p>\n
However whatever the \"father\" does, \"children\" at the lower
\nlevels will follow. The leadership begins at the top and trickles
\ndown. When there is corruption at the top, it becomes the pattern
\nfor the whole nation.<\/p>\n
There were rebellions in the past, but the New Order regime
\ncurbed them all. People then tried to save themselves, by keeping
\nquiet, otherwise they -- as well as their friends, family, in-
\nlaws, grandchildren, and even neighbors -- would be hurt or
\nkilled. People would think a thousand times before they
\ncriticized the government of the New Order. There were only two
\noptions, to get involved or keep quiet.<\/p>\n
There were \"dissidents\", including among students and the
\nmedia, but they were scattered.<\/p>\n
Q: What do you mean by radical moves?<\/p>\n
A: The prevailing government must take the symbolic gesture of
\nputting Soeharto in jail. But this has not happened. The
\nmilitary, the source of various violence in the country, must go
\nback to the barracks immediately, but it won't happen for the
\nnext six years.<\/p>\n
We should have been able to learn from Thailand, the
\nPhilippines and South Korea. The three nations have successfully
\ninitiated democracy in a transparent way when the military was
\nforced to quit their roles in politics.<\/p>\n
The government could have done that in 1998 soon after
\nSoeharto fell and when the military was pushed to the wall. But
\nit did not happen.<\/p>\n
Q: Why is there no radical move?<\/p>\n
A: Because the current government does not dare make the move. It
\ninstead made compromises. So it has become easy for the country
\nto be terrorized. What we see is only pieces of actions which are
\nnot even taken seriously. This has only worsened the situation.<\/p>\n
This shows that the current leadership is not stern or strict.
\nIt does not dare take radical actions. Meanwhile it has also
\nstarted a new form of KKN.<\/p>\n
Q: What is the government afraid of?<\/p>\n
A: The government and the elite fear the large group of people
\nwho do not have critical awareness. This huge mass of ignorant
\npeople can be manipulated with money.<\/p>\n
But actually the new bureaucrats are haunted by the creation
\nof the former government: a nation without any political
\nawareness. There's no single organized institution at the lower
\nlevels, except for the hoodlums. On the one hand, the current
\ngovernment wants to avoid bloodshed, but on the other hand they
\nwant to keep their interests and control over political, economic
\nand other affairs.<\/p>\n
The elite are also competing among themselves to seize power
\nin 2004. I don't think the elite are keen on what the people
\nwant. Instead of discussing how to resolve the worsening
\nproblems, they are only arguing: what my men will get and what
\nare my shares.<\/p>\n
Q: Can we expect something better from the top leaders, including
\nPresident Abdurrahman Wahid (Gus Dur), Vice President Megawati
\nSoekarnoputri, House of Representatives Speaker Akbar Tandjung
\nand People's Consultative Assembly Chairman Amien Rais?<\/p>\n
A: Gus Dur always tries to compromise. We could have seen the
\nabolishment of Golkar, the return of the military to the barracks
\nand the execution of Soeharto. But the momentum has been lost
\nbecause there has been too many compromises.<\/p>\n
The current top management is more or less involved with the
\nNew Order regime.<\/p>\n
Another of Gus Dur's weakness is that he often changes his
\nstatements. Once he gets new information, he rephrases his words.
\nHe is impulsive. He does not like to be regarded as being not
\nwell-informed, so he tries to answer every question. He does not
\nlike to say \"I don't know,\" or \"Wait, I'll check that first.\"<\/p>\n
Gus Dur has leadership capabilities but not managerial skills.
\nHe was an NGO activist before becoming president. He's not used
\nto discipline. His style in governing has being influenced by him
\nbeing a cleric. This weakness is targeted by his opponents.<\/p>\n
I am just worried that he is becoming manipulative. Once he
\nsaid that there was no KKN in his government, but everyone knows
\nthat is not true.<\/p>\n
Meanwhile, Megawati's political skills are poor. Akbar
\nTandjung is part of Golkar. Though Golkar has been trying to
\ncleanse itself of its (New Order) image. It's even trying to be
\nthe partner of the Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle (PDI
\nP).<\/p>\n
If Golkar had been abolished, it would not have been able to
\ncontest in the election, so it would not have been able to
\ninfluence the decision making process. Golkar needs a political
\npunishment, not just a social punishment.<\/p>\n
Amien Rais is famous for his zigzagging moves. I can't
\nunderstand why he said that Eurico Guterres (leader of the pro-
\nIndonesia East Timor militia) is our brother who defended our
\nflag. Do we need to violate human rights to defend our national
\nflag?<\/p>\n
It's clear that Guterres is a hoodlum trained by the military
\nto terrorize and slaughter his own people. Amien's statements are
\nbased on pragmatic calculations and narrow mindedness.<\/p>\n
Q: How should we select a leader?<\/p>\n
A: Leaders should be, ideally, directly selected by the people.<\/p>\n
But there's no system for that. I believe the people must be
\nheard on what change they want and how they want the change to
\ntake place.<\/p>\n
Q: What are the qualities of a good leader?<\/p>\n
A: A good leader is one who works hard and is committed.<\/p>\n
I think we want to see leaders who have strong principles, who
\nare able to see clearly that we really want to get rid of the
\nproblems we have now. We have to believe in the people, together
\nwe can nurture a leadership with commitment and ethics in a clean
\npolitical system.<\/p>\n
Q: Can good leaders come from the military?<\/p>\n
A: Yes. But military officers can only be leaders in the
\nmilitary, not in the civilian's domain.<\/p>\n
But the military has also been tainted by corruption. The
\nmilitary is also notorious for being irresponsible. We know there
\nis a hierarchy in the military, the soldiers obey the orders
\nwhich come from the top.<\/p>\n
The lower ranking soldiers, however, have always been
\nvictimized. They have been penalized for killing others although
\nthey were only carrying out orders. That's why the military is
\ntoday fractured.<\/p>\n
I was in the Semanggi area (near the Atma Jaya University in
\nJakarta when student protesters were shot) two years ago. I heard
\na commander ordering his troops to move back, but it was not
\nobeyed.<\/p>\n
Q: Will Indonesia have leaders capable of bringing the nation to
\na better state?<\/p>\n
A: I'm convinced that Indonesia will have the right person to
\nlead the nation. I don't think that we are short of capable
\nleaders though the New Order has successfully destroyed our
\nsocial asset.<\/p>\n
Some may be pessimistic as the formal education system, and
\ninformal education at homes are contaminated by KKN practices.
\nBribery is rife among civilians, politicians and the military.<\/p>\n
The common people are also having the same problems. Only few
\nare safe from this social disease. But I don't believe that
\nthere's no one out of the 210 million people who can become a
\ngood leader.<\/p>\n
However, the main problem is, again, how to cleanse the elite
\nfrom practicing policies that serve the interests of their inner
\ncircles.<\/p>\n
Q: How can we improve our condition while waiting for better
\nleaders?<\/p>\n
A: Control is something urgently needed.<\/p>\n
There is an advantage in the current reform era: press
\nfreedom. So the media has a role to play in the selection of
\nleaders and be more critical of the elite.<\/p>\n
But I see that the tradition of rumor mongering of the New
\nOrder still exists. For instance, some media are reluctant to
\npublish the names of ministers who are allegedly involved in fund
\nscams.<\/p>\n
The elite must be put under a spotlight, controlled. If they
\nare committed to change, it's okay, otherwise they will be cast
\naside by the people.<\/p>\n
But, what we see now are people pointing fingers at each
\nother. I hear that some people are now attending \"the evening
\nCabinet meetings\" at the State Palace to seek opportunities. I
\nagree with Sri Mulyani (economist and member of the National
\nEconomic Council) who told me that those close to Gus Dur now are
\nonly the opportunists.<\/p>\n
Those who want to genuinely support and help him have become
\nsick and tired of what has been happening at the palace. They
\nhave left Gus Dur alone. Those who remain include those who are
\nambitious and manipulative. Now we hear rumors that Gus Dur will
\nbe forced to step down, and many people (the opportunists) have
\nindicated that they are ready to hold important positions.<\/p>\n
Q: Is the condition now that bad?<\/p>\n
A: The damage is quite severe.<\/p>\n
It's like a big old tree. It would be difficult to uproot it
\nbut if we do not do this, the problems will remain. Just like
\nwhen you have a serious injury, you would need to undergo
\nsurgery; applying lotions will not help.<\/p>\n
The New Order created this pattern intentionally. It's so
\nsophisticated. Some people say Soeharto learned from many places,
\nand perfected it to be applied here. He is an expert in strategy
\nand is cold-blooded.<\/p>\n
Soeharto also devised various tactics in terrorism and
\nintimidation for the military. This resulted in an effective
\nsystem to halt any attempt to touch him. He carefully studied how
\nto control the nation. He is a fascist.<\/p>\n
Foreign affairs minister Alwi Shihab once told a meeting in
\nBerkeley, \"I was a scholar who prioritized the truth although it
\ncontradicted with my inner voices. Now I'm a politician who has
\nto say that something is true although it is not.\" I think that's
\nthe principle of the current government.<\/p>\n
Q: What kind of leaders do we need?<\/p>\n
A: The people now expect leaders to have leaders who really
\nunderstand the direction the new Indonesia has to take.<\/p>\n
They must know the nation's priorities and what action to
\ntake. The people want to see themselves coming out of this
\ncrisis. This may need courage on the part of the leaders, as
\nthese unpopular moves may put them in peril; but it will save the
\nnation.<\/p>\n
Q: How can we groom leaders like that?<\/p>\n
A: There are certain factors to consider when grooming leaders,
\nsuch as their personality, expertise, and knowledge.<\/p>\n
Their informal education at home, formal education at school
\nthen in the society has to be taken into consideration.<\/p>\n
Since people having been experiencing deceit and falsehood in
\nschool, in the society and at home, they might feel that to
\nsurvive, they have to be manipulative too.<\/p>\n
In addition, it is important to remember that there's the rule
\nof law, and that everyone is equal before the law. We have to
\nreally apply this.<\/p>\n
I once heard a police officer, during a land dispute in Karang
\nAnyar, Central Jakarta, shout, \"I am the law. I am not afraid of
\nthe law. What do you want?\"<\/p>\n
The officer did not think that he was the law and order's arm.
\nSo what the officer conveyed was, \"You can make your own law as
\nthere's no law.\" This shows that the government has failed to
\ncontrol the attitude of the bureaucrat and the rule of the law.<\/p>\n
In addition, Indonesia does not have an open and transparent
\nsystem of selection.<\/p>\n
We have to work hand in hand to select good leaders, starting
\nfrom our neighborhood, provinces and so on, with the direct
\nparticipation of the people. Just begin with a transparent
\nsystem. We don't have to wait for something big on the national
\nscale.<\/p>\n
In some places, there have been protests against appointed
\nmayors. But the protests could have been mobilized by certain
\ngroups. So we really need to have a transparent system and public
\nparticipation.<\/p>\n
Q: How would you describe yourself?<\/p>\n
A: I'd describe myself as individualistic as I enjoy working by
\nmyself.<\/p>\n
In the mid-1980s, I felt that many NGOs were fighting for a
\npiece of the field. I joked at that time I was not an NGO
\nactivist, but an NGI, non-governmental individual. Now I am in
\nthe UPC as I do not have any other choice. I can also say that if
\nyou have a dream, you have to try your best to make it come true.<\/p>\n
I socialized with the common people. My parents, particularly
\nmy father, were informal leaders who often gave advice to the
\npeople in the neighborhood.<\/p>\n
My parents taught us that education is very important. My
\nsibling and I competed to be the best at school. We were also
\nencouraged to become members of organizations. Once my sister
\nintroduced her boyfriend to my parents. He received zero marks
\nfrom my parents as he was not in any organization.<\/p>\n
Interestingly when the Masyumi and Nahdlatul Ulama broke up,
\nthere was also Muhammadiyah. This created factions in my family.<\/p>\n
Q: What was your experience when working as a civil servant?<\/p>\n
A: I felt that I was not fit to be a civil servant. I found the
\nsystem was a means to produce corrupt robots. I thought that I
\nwould get wet if I dropped in the river. My friends told me to
\nstay afloat and not to drown. But I said it was not about
\ndrowning, but getting wet.<\/p>\n
Then I joined the NGOs, dealing with academics, seminars,
\ntrainings and research. I learned about many things and got
\nacquainted with new ideas. In the early 1990s there was an
\neconomic boom which adversely affected the poor in Jakarta. There
\nwere numerous land appropriations but no one assisted or advised
\nthe poor.<\/p>\n
My friends and I thought we had to do something for them. At
\nthe time, there were only a few NGOs dealing with urban affairs
\nas they were mostly concentrated in rural areas. We had to offer
\nadvocacy and empowerment. Our first project was in the poor area
\nof Jelambar, West Jakarta. When the project ended, we established
\nUPC as we wanted something that would have a greater political
\nimpact. UPC is a kind of NGO which is empowered by the people.<\/p>\n
Q: What do you think of NGOs?<\/p>\n
A: During the New Order regime, the NGOs, just like the media,
\nwas quarantined. We were so happy to be heroes though only inside
\na glass room, so to say.<\/p>\n
NGOs are part of the culture and the development of the
\nsociety.<\/p>\n
However the NGOs are not free of corruption. But compared to
\nthe bureaucracy, NGOs are much more transparent in terms of
\ndecision making and financial issues.<\/p>\n
NGOs have a strategic role in the society. One example was
\nwhen groups of farmers staged rallies at the House of
\nRepresentatives' building shortly before the fall of Soeharto.
\nThis showed that there was an attempt to make the public
\npolitically aware.<\/p>\n
I believe the reform era is the momentum people need to
\nimplement the people's sovereignty. We need to see the
\nstrengthening of civil society, so the people can be more well
\norganized and well-informed.<\/p>\n
Q: One of UPC's project was to organize the pedicab drivers. What
\ndid you learn from the pedicab drivers?<\/p>\n
A: Firstly, the regulation banning pedicabs was not a message
\nfrom God which can't be questioned. Regulations are usually made
\nto improve lives. Otherwise, we can always disobey them.<\/p>\n
Most of the pedicab drivers are free men. They are democratic
\nbut they can also be anarchic. It takes time to train them to be
\ncooperative, to work in a team ... I've also learned that we
\nshould have the sensitivity not to push our own likes and
\ndislikes, but listen to what the people want.<\/p>",
"url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/indonesia-needs-strong-leadership-says-wardah-hafidz-1447893297",
"image": ""
},
"sponsor": "Okusi Associates",
"sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com"
}