'Satay Cabinet': The cost of imposed unity<\/p>\n
Sjahrir, Economist, New Indonesia Alliance (PIB), Jakarta<\/p>\n
One of our founding fathers, Bung Hatta, once said that we
\nshould be able to distinguish between the words persatuan (unity)
\nand persatean (like skewered meat, dissension). Perhaps he meant
\nto say that we must not consider unity as something so absolute
\nthat eventually all elements in the groups wishing to unite are
\nsacrificed. If unity is achieved by force, what we have will be
\npersatean, every piece of meat will be put into the skewer,
\ndevoid of significance in the context of the unity aspired for.<\/p>\n
This analogy may be apt to illustrate today's Gotong Royong
\n(Mutual Help) Cabinet, which may also be construed as the Cabinet
\nof Unity. We can show a long list of examples that illustrate the
\nlack of coordination, the misunderstanding of stipulations or
\nregulations and the absence of policy comprehension, resulting in
\nunwise policies.<\/p>\n
Examples include the privatization of Indosat, the
\nrelationship with the International Monetary Fund, the extension
\nof the shareholders' settlement agreement, the implementation of
\nthe Malino I and II treaties and the follow-up to economic
\nrecovery, particularly related to the performance of and policies
\nof the Indonesian Bank Restructuring Agency (IBRA) and state-
\nowned enterprises. Such examples show that the Cabinet is like a
\nbundle of skewered meat in which the skewer is President Megawati
\nSoekarnoputri while the pieces of meat may be Cabinet members
\nBambang Kesowo, Dorodjatun Kuntjoro-Jakti, Kwik Kian Gie or
\nLaksamana Sukardi.<\/p>\n
Perhaps it is worthwhile to talk about the latest issue,
\nnamely the relationship between the government and the IMF.<\/p>\n
I attended a meeting of political figures at the residence of
\nState Minister of Small and Medium Enterprises and Cooperatives,
\nAli Marwan Hanan on June 10. Kwik Kian Gie took the floor and
\ninstead of talking about the people's economy as scheduled, he
\nkept talking about his attitude toward business tycoons and the
\nIMF.<\/p>\n
Regarding the IMF, he said staff members of the World Bank and
\nthe Board had prepared his draft address for the talks ahead of
\nthe Consultative Group on Indonesia (for June 12). He said firmly
\nthat he would let them prepare the address but the manuscript
\nwould be dumped in a dustbin and he would read the address he had
\nprepared himself. True to his words, the prepared manuscript was
\nmade an appendix of sorts (not dumped into the wastebasket),
\nwhile his own address touched on the points that we have all
\nheard about.<\/p>\n
In essence, he believed the renewal of the relationship
\nbetween the IMF would last only until November 2002 and therefore
\nhe would like this relationship to be terminated. It must be
\nexplained here that there are two categories of countries ending
\ntheir relationship with the IMF.<\/p>\n
There are countries which have \"graduated\" so that they no
\nlonger need the assistance of the IMF. Their economic recovery
\nhas been achieved; a prominent example is South Korea. Then there
\nare countries who have severed their relationship with the IMF
\nbut have been embroiled in problems afterwards. Indonesia is now
\nin a situation in which public opinion would like this
\ntermination to take place. The difference is that in South Korea,
\nthe son of the president can be brought to the court while the
\nspouse of an incumbent president\/minister in Indonesia, cannot be
\nsubjected to any legal action because power politics is stronger
\nthan law enforcement.<\/p>\n
Now to return to the Cabinet of dissension; even if many
\nquarters agree to Kwik's attitude, perhaps it is now time to
\nintroduce governance ethics, which seems to be erroneously taken
\nas the problem of democratization.<\/p>\n
A staff member of the Coordinating Minister of Economic
\nAffairs has said that differences of opinion between government
\nofficials are natural in a democracy. The same thing has also
\nbeen said by people like Laksamana Sukardi and Rini Soewandi. In
\nfact, they are quite wrong in their understanding of
\ndemocratization, and this is also coupled with their lack of
\ncomprehension of what is called good governance.<\/p>\n
Of course Cabinet ministers may differ in opinion but these
\ndifferences must be restricted within the internal affairs of the
\nCabinet. The wider public cannot and may not be involved in their
\ndissension, especially if this is protracted. If a Cabinet
\nminister knows the ethics of governing, not only Kwik Kian Gie
\nbut also many other ministers should ask to resign. In fact,
\neither because of differences of opinion or because of their
\nimpotence in implementing policies, they emerge as controversial
\nand unsuccessful figures (Laksamana, for instance, takes
\nprivatization to mean the sale of shares from a state firm bought
\nby another state-owned firm).<\/p>\n
We therefore see how the public, through the media, are
\nbrought into disputes between ministers or ministers blaming
\ntheir failures on private circles (Laksamana pointed a finger at
\ninsider trading even though he himself has violated the law of
\nprivatization). So, what have we got from the \"reform\"
\nadministration of Megawati?<\/p>\n
First, it is very obvious that price controls are yet to be
\nexercised; therefore the rate of inflation will remain high.<\/p>\n
Second, figures of foreign and domestic investments from the
\nInvestment Coordinating Agency in the first quarter of 2002 shows
\na sharp decline, which was in line with the drop in export and
\nimport figures recorded in the first month of 2002.<\/p>\n
Third, following the leadership change at IBRA, no money has
\nbeen deposited in the state's coffers, while the divestment of
\nBank Niaga is yet to start and has been postponed, so it is said,
\nuntil September.<\/p>\n
Given the above, do we share a rosy feeling about the
\n\"stability of the rupiah\" and the rise in the Composite Share
\nPrice Index -- two factors which appear to have encouraged the
\nPresident to say that we have begun to experience a recovery?<\/p>\n
The answer must be negative. The satay skewer (Megawati) will
\narrange \"the meat pieces\" in her own Cabinet, no matter how great
\nthe differences in policies and the mediocrity of members.<\/p>\n
Indonesians must be convinced that it this nation alone that
\ncan help itself out of the crisis -- without being able to pin
\nhopes on the \"satay\" Cabinet of President Megawati.<\/p>",
"url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/satay-cabinet-the-cost-of-imposed-unity-1447893297",
"image": ""
},
"sponsor": "Okusi Associates",
"sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com"
}