Turning over a new leaf in RI politics<\/p>\n
Jusuf Wanandi<\/p>\n
It has been a tradition for The Jakarta Post in the last few
\nyears to produce a special edition on developments in the various
\nfields of life during the outgoing year and a projection on what
\nto expect in the coming year. For that purpose The Jakarta Post
\nhas invited some of the best minds in their field to contribute.<\/p>\n
Looking back at developments in the political field in 2004,
\nnothing appeared to be more important than the elections held in
\nApril for the House of Representatives, the Regional
\nRepresentatives Council (DPD) and the local legislatures, as well
\nas the first direct presidential elections in July and the runoff
\nin September. It was Indonesia's year of elections.<\/p>\n
The elections have been fair, peaceful and democratic.
\nIndonesians should be proud of themselves that they have achieved
\nsuch encouraging and positive results. This augurs well for
\ndemocracy and the political maturity of the populace.<\/p>\n
The elections were held in a festive, but serious, mood.
\nPeople were happy and friendly, and everyone in the neighborhood
\nhelped to erect the temporary polling stations, manage the voting
\nprocess, count the votes and send the results to the General
\nElections Commission (KPU). For the first time, the KPU as the
\norganizers of the elections were independent from the government
\nand political parties. They consisted of representatives of NGOs,
\nuniversities and the media. As they were inexperienced, they were
\nnot well organized initially, but in the course of the process
\nthey matured in the job and did a remarkable job in preparing and
\nholding elections that took place without any major mistakes or
\nirregularities.<\/p>\n
Comparing it to the elections held by Indonesia's neighbors,
\nsuch as the Philippines and India, ours did not involve major
\nincidents or fighting. No one was hurt or killed. Members of the
\nlegislature were elected by just over 80 percent of registered
\nvoters, while the president was elected by almost 80 percent of
\nregistered voters.<\/p>\n
It was also seen as a democratic election, because the people
\ndid decide who to vote for by themselves. They were less
\ndependent on social or political leaders than before. This was
\nespecially true in the presidential election where there were no
\npolitical loyalties on the part of voters.<\/p>\n
They have ended their support for the Indonesian Democratic
\nParty of Struggle (PDI-P) that emerged as the biggest party in
\n1999 with 34 percent of the votes. PDI-P only got 19 percent in
\n2004. People were disappointed with PDI-P's poor performance in
\nleading the government especially in the areas of employment,
\ncorruption, law and order problems and regional conflicts in
\nNanggroe Aceh Darussalam (Aceh) and Papua.<\/p>\n
The Golkar Party became the dominant party in the legislature,
\nalthough it gained slightly fewer votes compared to the previous
\nelections, 21 percent of the votes in 2004 as compared to 22
\npercent in 1999. People have not yet come to trust Golkar
\ncompletely.<\/p>\n
Two other parties did relatively well. The Democratic Party of
\nSusilo Bambang Yudhoyono (SBY) got 7.45 percent (gaining 50 seats
\nin the House) although it is a new party. This was a result
\nprimarily of SBY's popularity. It did not have a solid party
\nnetwork, as it was established only two years before the
\nelections.<\/p>\n
The other party was the Prosperous Justice Party (PKS), which
\nis at the right end of the political spectrum. They shrewdly used
\nanticorruption as the main theme of their campaign, instead of
\nsharia or other Islamic themes. They were able to increase their
\nvotes from 1.5 percent in 1999 to 7.5 percent in 2004, and also
\ngained 50 seats in the House.<\/p>\n
Both the Democratic Party and the PKS won in the Jakarta
\nregion, and together have a comfortable majority in the local
\nlegislature, the Jakarta City Council. However, this is no
\nguarantee that they can rule Jakarta, because in the elections of
\nthe speaker of the City Council, they both lost to a candidate
\nsupported by Golkar and PDI-P.<\/p>\n
Greater voter independence was shown in the presidential
\nelections. Although some new elements have come up with the
\nincrease of votes for PKS and the very decent result for the
\nDemocratic Party, in the House of Representatives the majority
\nremains in the hands of the traditional parties: Golkar, PDI-P,
\nthe United Development Party (PPP), the National Awakening Party
\n(PKB) which is supported by NU, the largest Muslim socioreligious
\norganization, and the National Mandate Party (PAN) which is
\nsupported by Muhammadiyah, the second largest Muslim
\nsocioreligious organization.<\/p>\n
In the legislative elections, people were still listening to
\ntheir political or social leaders. However, in the presidential
\nelections, people have shown greater independence mainly due to
\nthe influence of TV which has penetrated the grass roots
\neffectively.<\/p>\n
SBY has benefited immensely from this. Not only is he
\ntelegenic and can speak well on TV, but as Megawati's
\nCoordinating Minister, he has been using it to the maximum for
\nhis popularity. He has become the hope for change and
\nimprovement.<\/p>\n
On the other hand Megawati has been so disappointing to the
\npeople because she never tried very hard to reach out to them.
\nMost importantly, she did not show that she could change and
\nbring real improvements in her leadership if chosen for the
\nsecond term.<\/p>\n
During the campaign she was still surrounded by assistants who
\nwere considered corrupt. She also did not indicate that she would
\nlike to have new people in her Cabinet.<\/p>\n
The people also have demonstrated that they are not in favor
\nof Wiranto despite the backing he received from Golkar, the
\nbiggest party, because they don't trust him after all the
\naccusations of military abuses he was allegedly responsible for.
\nAmien Rais and Hamzah Haz were also rejected because their
\npopularity and their political networks were limited.<\/p>\n
In foreign policy, the year 2004 has brought some change to
\nIndonesia's role in foreign affairs. Indonesia, being the chair
\nof ASEAN, has pursued its idea of an ASEAN Security Community to
\nbe established in parallel with Singapore's proposal for an ASEAN
\nEconomic Community. At the ASEAN Summit in Vientianne, Laos, the
\nPlan of Action was endorsed by the leaders.<\/p>\n
Indonesia's foreign policy was dormant following the crisis of
\n1998 until Hassan Wirayuda showed leadership in 2004, supported
\nby a new generation of bright and young diplomats under him at
\nthe foreign ministry. Indonesia could again provide leadership in
\nthe region, especially in ASEAN. The region has longed for this.<\/p>\n
What to expect in 2005? And what are the factors that will
\ndetermine how 2005 is going to fare?<\/p>\n
The picture of 2005 is still mixed. On the one hand, the
\nchallenges that Indonesia faces are huge. The economy needs new
\ninvestment, including foreign direct investment (FDI) to be able
\nto grow by 6 percent to 7 percent annually, which is necessary to
\novercome the unemployment problem.<\/p>\n
Corruption, which is still rampant, has to be tackled to make
\nthe government credible and restore hope for the future. Regional
\nconflicts in Aceh and Papua have to be settled politically. The
\nrule of law and the court system need significant improvements.
\nLaw and order problems have to be tackled. Above all, leadership
\nat the highest level has yet to show resoluteness and
\ndecisiveness.<\/p>\n
There were high hopes that SBY could exert this kind of
\nleadership that has been so critically absent after Soeharto's
\nfall. However, there was immediate disappointment with his first
\nact in establishing the Cabinet. He has formed a rainbow Cabinet,
\nalthough in fact he got a strong mandate directly from the people
\nwith 51 percent of the vote. The hope now is that he will do
\nbetter in the future and the people are willing to give him the
\nbenefit of the doubt.<\/p>\n
Jusuf Kalla, his Vice President, who remains rather
\ncontroversial, has shown more leadership. There is also hope that
\nhe would be able to lead an economic team that is more business
\noriented. There are some concerns of conflict of interest, but
\nthe team should show that they can overcome those concerns.<\/p>\n
It is still too early yet to make any definite conclusion
\nabout the new government. Although there are some worries about
\nthe Cabinet, it should be given a chance to implement its
\nprograms.<\/p>\n
The second problem for 2005 is the relationship between the
\ngovernment and the legislature. The legislature has become very
\nassertive and is powerful because they have a say on many things:
\nlegislation, budget, appointments of important personnel of state
\nagencies such as the central bank, Supreme Court, police chief,
\ncommander in chief of the Indonesian Military, etc.<\/p>\n
The legislature is dominated by the opposition parties, Golkar
\nand PDI-P. Indonesia's legislature has yet to learn about the
\nrole of the loyal opposition, which could differentiate between
\nvalid criticism and correction of the executive branch and
\nopposition just for the sake of opposition.<\/p>\n
Whether Golkar and PDI-P can really implement this role will
\nmostly depend on the outcome of their respective congress, which
\nwill determine who is going to lead the party in the future. This
\nwill determine whether 2005 will be a new beginning for Indonesia
\nto get back on its feet and to develop again.<\/p>\n
The year 2005 should be a continuation of Indonesia's
\nleadership in regional affairs, starting with the preparation for
\nthe East Asian Summit in Malaysia. The idea of East Asian
\nregionalism has always been supported by Indonesia. However, an
\nEast Asian Summit must be well prepared, so that this regional
\ninitiative can get off the ground and develop in the future.<\/p>\n
Experiences in the region showed that ideas on regional
\ncooperation have begun with a lot of enthusiasm but without
\nworking out their full consequences, particularly on the need for
\ninstitution building in the long term. That has happened with
\nAPEC and the ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF), which continue to
\nstruggle to maintain their relevance. For instance, there should
\nbe clarity about the membership of the East Asian Summit so that
\nit could advance the ASEAN+3 process that is already in place.
\nASEAN also should strengthen her cooperation through implementing
\nthe Plan of Action of the ASEAN Community, before she could play
\na meaningful role in the greater region. Indonesia's leadership
\nwill be critical in the building of regional institutions.<\/p>\n
Chairman of the Board of Directors of The Jakarta Post<\/p>", "url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/turning-over-a-new-leaf-in-ri-politics-1447893297", "image": "" }, "sponsor": "Okusi Associates", "sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com" }