Investors demand political certainty<\/p>\n
By Aleksius Jemadu<\/p>\n
BANDUNG (JP): When the minister of finance and leaders of the
\nIndonesian Chamber of Commerce (Kadin) visited the United States
\non a business mission recently, they were confronted with
\nquestions from American investors regarding policy transparency
\nin Indonesia.<\/p>\n
The questions focused particularly on the nation's
\npreparations for a post-Soeharto era. And it was not surprising
\nthat they were curious about who would be the next vice
\npresident.<\/p>\n
It goes without saying that foreign investors will tend to
\nstay away from any country lacking in political certainty and a
\ntransparent regeneration of leaders.<\/p>\n
Government officials and prominent legislative members of the
\nruling party Golkar have always maintained that Indonesia has its
\nown institutional mechanisms to ensure a smooth succession of
\npower.<\/p>\n
Indeed, it was argued that there was no guarantee that
\nannouncing the vice presidential candidate ahead of schedule
\nwould help stabilize the economy. The ruling elite would take it
\nfor granted that the existing institutional mechanisms are
\nreliable enough to ensure a democratic process of electing a
\npresident and vice president.<\/p>\n
Political analysts can only speculate on the reasons why the
\nruling elite insist on not mentioning names of vice presidential
\ncandidates.<\/p>\n
There is a long-held tradition within the dominant political
\norganization, Golkar, to consult with the president-elect before
\nannouncing a candidate for vice president.<\/p>\n
Since it is a foregone conclusion that President Soeharto will
\nbe reelected again for the 1998\/2003 term, Golkar runs the risk
\nof making a political transgression if it announces the name of
\nits candidate for vice president ahead of the Assembly's general
\nsession.<\/p>\n
Politically, announcing the name of Golkar's presidential
\ncandidate could spark an intense and public struggle for power
\namong competing political groups in society.<\/p>\n
The benefit of keeping the situation unpredictable is to
\nprevent political opponents from knowing the specifics. Such
\npolitical uncertainty will in effect scatter the preparations of
\nany political group with different aspirations to that of the
\nruling elite.<\/p>\n
However, it is important to note that as far as power
\nsuccession is concerned, foreign investors seem to have doubts
\nabout the independent functioning of our formal mechanisms. Their
\ndoubts are believed to be based on an observation that in many
\ndeveloping societies critical decisions are made where the
\nconcentration of political power is.<\/p>\n
It is not easy to convince them that our legislative bodies
\nretain a decisive and independent power in a presidential
\nelection. In a developing democracy such as ours the real power
\nof the House of Representatives is known to be structurally
\nembedded in the dominance of an overwhelming executive power.<\/p>\n
In his theory about a prismatic society, Fred. W Riggs (1964)
\ngave an interesting explanation about the functions of political
\nand administrative institutions in developing countries.<\/p>\n
Riggs argued that these institutions give an illusionary
\nimpression of autonomy whereas in fact they are deeply enmeshed
\nin and cross-influenced by remnants of older traditional social,
\neconomic, religious and political systems.<\/p>\n
When a degree of overlapping in governance occurs,
\nconsiderable formalism may be expected. It follows that the mere
\nexistence of formal mechanisms may not necessarily reflect their
\nautonomous function. On top of that, the function of political
\nand administrative institutions are structurally embedded in the
\nconfiguration of vested interests of the politically privileged
\nfew. Consequently, it is difficult to make a clear distinction
\nbetween public interests and private aspirations of the governing
\nelite.<\/p>\n
If this theory can be accepted, then it would be
\nunderstandable why foreign investors doubt long-term political
\ncertainty in Indonesia. Their curiosity to know more about the
\nreal configuration of leadership regeneration in this nation is
\nquite valid.<\/p>\n
Golkar, as the ruling party, has a moral obligation to
\nspearhead more transparency in preparing future Indonesian
\nleaders. Unfortunately, it is precisely this political group
\nwhich first refused to mention the name of its candidate for vice
\npresident.<\/p>\n
The policy of \"keeping everybody guessing\" in this time of
\ndeep economic crisis could have tremendous consequences in the
\nfuture. The survival of the nation might be at stake.<\/p>\n
It is high time to put aside all our partisan political
\ninterests and put more attention on the greater interests of the
\nnation as a whole.<\/p>\n
Act now, or this nation may become entangled in an unending
\nregret.<\/p>\n
The writer is director of the Parahyangan Center for
\nInternational Studies (PACIS) at UNPAR-Bandung. He is also a
\nlecturer of the School of International Relations at the same
\nuniversity.<\/p>",
"url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/investors-demand-political-certainty-1447893297",
"image": ""
},
"sponsor": "Okusi Associates",
"sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com"
}