Searching for new development alternatives<\/p>\n
By Aleksius Jemadu<\/p>\n
BANDUNG (JP): The urgency of establishing a new development
\nmodel for crisis-stricken economies in Southeast Asia, especially
\nIndonesia, is self-evident. Whatever the final outcome of the
\nelections, the new government will have to formulate a new
\ndevelopment model to combine economic liberalization and
\npolitical democratization. As it has turned out, the past
\ncombination of authoritarianism and economic growth has failed,
\nand therefore will be abandoned. What kind of political economy
\nshould Indonesia have in the post-Soeharto era?<\/p>\n
Unfortunately, during the campaign period major reform-
\noriented political parties such as the Indonesian Democratic
\nParty of Struggle (PDI Perjuangan), the National Awakening Party
\n(PKB) and the National Mandate Party (PAN), which are seen as
\nlikely to dominate the House of Representatives, failed to
\nconvince the public that they have the capacity to propose new
\ndevelopment alternatives. Most of their campaign statements were
\ntoo conventional.<\/p>\n
For instance, in one television advertisement, the leader of
\nPDI Perjuangan, Megawati Soekarnoputri, declared with a loud
\nvoice the nation's big problems such as massive unemployment,
\noutrageous foreign debt and millions of school dropouts. And then
\ncame her party's promise to solve all those problems. However, we
\nwere not told how her party would go about overcoming these
\nproblems.<\/p>\n
Rarely, if ever, did reform-oriented party leaders explain
\ntheir new conception of development. Their popularity owes more
\nto the victimization of Soeharto than to their own brilliant
\nideas. Reform-oriented political leaders do not deserve people's
\nsupport if they are only good at pinpointing Soeharto's mistakes
\nbut poor at providing alternative solutions.<\/p>\n
A few years before the economic crisis hit Indonesia, the
\nWorld Bank praised the Indonesian government for its success in
\nliberalizing the economy while sustaining economic growth.
\nHowever, it seemed to be indifferent, if not blind, to the
\nauthoritarian and corrupt nature of the political regime which,
\nas it has turned out, only led to the impoverishment of millions
\nof people.<\/p>\n
Today Indonesians can no longer accept the idea that human
\nrights and democratization can be dispensed with in the name of
\neconomic development. The new government should be able to give a
\nproper response to people's demands for democracy and economic
\ngrowth.<\/p>\n
It is argued that in the postcrisis era, Indonesia's major
\ndevelopment objectives remain essentially the same. They include
\nthe generation of political stability and order as favorable
\nconditions to economic development and economic growth itself.
\nWhat then is the difference between the old development model and
\nthe new one as far as the accomplishment of these objectives is
\nconcerned?<\/p>\n
First, under the old authoritarian political regime, the
\ngovernment monopolized the interpretation of the meaning of their
\npolicy objectives in such a way that it could manipulate them for
\nthe benefit of a privileged few. Now the government is obliged to
\nconvince the people that it has good political morality to
\njustify its policy objectives. Thus, the meaning of political
\nstability and economic development and the way these objectives
\nare achieved have to be morally and politically justified.<\/p>\n
Second, in the old era centralization of power was used as the
\nmain mechanism to generate political stability and order. In
\ntoday's era of reform, there is a need to emphasize the principle
\nof constitutionalism, the practice of which could lead to the
\nestablishment of state institutions capable of providing order,
\nreliability and participation for various interests in society.
\nConstitutionalism refers to a strong commitment to apply
\nconstitutional principles in organizing and implementing
\npolitical power through state institutions. For instance, the
\nlegislative body should check the implementation of presidential
\npower so that it cannot violate the constitution.<\/p>\n
Third, if in the past, open opposition to government policies
\nwas prohibited, now the political parties that do not join the
\nruling government coalition should be allowed to function as
\nopposition forces in the parliament to ensure effective control
\nto prevent the abuse of political power by the executive body.<\/p>\n
Fourth, an excessive reliance on the mobilization of foreign
\ncapital has led our economy into a debt trap. Isn't it high time
\nnow to develop a better appreciation and utilization of our own
\ndomestic resources? According to a report in the June 10 edition
\nof Far Eastern Economic Review, other crisis-hit economies like
\nSouth Korea and Thailand now tend to emphasize domestic economies
\nto stimulate new growth.<\/p>\n
Given the abundance of Indonesia's natural resources and the
\nexistence of a huge market for consumer goods, there is no reason
\nwhy we cannot try such strategy here.<\/p>\n
With these new development alternatives, Indonesia still has a
\nchance to see a brighter day tomorrow.<\/p>\n
The writer is a lecturer of the Department of International
\nRelations at the Parahyangan Catholic University in Bandung.<\/p>",
"url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/searching-for-new-development-alternatives-1447893297",
"image": ""
},
"sponsor": "Okusi Associates",
"sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com"
}