What we need is leadership -- FOR MONDAY'S EDITION<\/p>\n
------------------------
\nSayidiman Suryohadiprojo
\nFormer governor of
\nNational Resilience
\nInstitute (Lemhanas)
\nJakarta
\n------------------------<\/p>\n
State Minister of National Development Planning Kwik Kian Gie
\nhas surprised many people when he strongly suggested that
\nIndonesia should terminate its relationship with the
\nInternational Monetary Fund (IMF) at the end of 2002.<\/p>\n
In fact, this is not the first time that Kwik has expressed
\nhis dissatisfaction with the IMF. But that he did it as a member
\nof President Megawati Soekarnoputri's Cabinet, is something that
\ncauses surprise. Because it is public knowledge that Dorodjatun
\nKuntjoro-Jakti, the current coordinating minister for economic
\naffairs, is a staunch defender of Indonesia's relations with the
\nIMF.<\/p>\n
In Indonesia Kwik is not alone in his negative opinion of the
\nIMF. Rizal Ramli, who served as coordinating minister for
\neconomic affairs and minister of finance in former president
\nAbdurrahman Wahid's cabinet, shares this view. And so are other
\neconomists, many of them with important positions in Indonesian
\npublic life. But on the other side Dorodjatun also has friends
\nwho share his views. Some of them are equally strong in their
\nbelief and even dare to say that Indonesia will go bankrupt
\nwithout the IMF's support.<\/p>\n
The debate that developed between the economists with
\nconflicting views heated up and might be very interesting for the
\nintellectual elite. But it does not ease the difficult life of
\nthe common people and their heavy economic burden. And a debate
\nbetween ministers of the same Cabinet about such an important
\nissue is definitely counter-productive for Megawati's leadership
\nof the nation.<\/p>\n
It is a fact that many economists in the world have expressed
\na strong criticism of the way the IMF is playing its role in
\nsupporting developing nations. Not long ago Dr. Joseph E.
\nStiglitz, Nobel Prize laureate for economy in 2001, and former
\neconomic adviser to then president Bill Clinton and former chief
\neconomist of the World Bank, had stated that the IMF's stance on
\nmarket fundamentalism is principally false. Namely, that the
\nmarket of itself will create a balance between supply and demand
\nand is a key for growth and development. IMF's prescription to
\nthe nations it is supposed to support has caused much more human
\nsuffering than solving those nations' economic problems.<\/p>\n
Stiglitz also stated that the IMF and the U.S. Treasury
\nDepartment were more inclined to aim their efforts at defending
\nthe interests of big investment bankers than paying attention to
\npoor and developing nations.<\/p>\n
With the credentials of Stiglitz as an economist and his
\nexperience with the World Bank and the U.S. government, we must
\nassume that what he stated publicly contains the truth. And
\nStiglitz is not the only economist of international fame that
\ncriticizes the IMF and its behavior.<\/p>\n
Looking from this point Kwik and his partners are on the right
\nside. However, Dorodjatun and his friends are equally convinced
\nof Indonesia's uncertain future when it drops the IMF.<\/p>\n
Malaysia has shown that it could solve its economic crisis
\nproblems without IMF support. Already at the start of the crisis
\nin 1997 Malaysia decided not to request support. And Malaysia is
\nnow in a good and safe economic position. That is proof that a
\ndeveloping nation facing economic crisis need not have the IMF's
\nsupport. We can therefore say that Dorodjatun's pessimism might
\nbe an exaggeration. After Malaysia, Thailand and South Korea also
\nopted to dropping IMF support. The conclusion is that it might
\nnot be impossible for Indonesia to do the same. That makes Kwik
\nthe man with the right intention for Indonesia.<\/p>\n
If that is true, why was Kwik unable to steer the Indonesian
\neconomy in safe waters when he was the economic coordinating
\nminister. The same goes for Rizal Ramli. Both of them as the boss
\nor commanding generals of Indonesia's economic struggle were in
\nthe position to free Indonesia from IMF support and take the
\ncountry out of its present economic troubles. But they were not
\nable to deliver any progress in the bad situation.<\/p>\n
Without being an economic expert one can observe that nothing
\nhas fundamentally changed during their time as Indonesia's
\neconomic czars. It is therefore questionable whether that with
\ntheir track records they would be able to steer Indonesia out of
\nthe crisis without IMP support.<\/p>\n
It is very sad for an Indonesian patriot to realize that today
\nthe other Asian nations have already left the crisis that started
\nin 1997, but Indonesia alone is still fighting to get out. Of
\ncourse, any thinking Indonesian would very much welcome
\nIndonesia's self reliance and not longer has to depend on the
\nIMP, World Bank or any other international financial institute.
\nIndonesians envy Malaysia that has been successful in its
\neconomic struggle, whereas Indonesia basically has similar
\ncapabilities. Moreover, Indonesia is gifted with a lot of
\nvaluable natural resources, in particular oil and gas.<\/p>\n
But Malaysia was able to achieve success because it has the
\nright leadership in the person of Prime Minister Mahathir
\nMohamad. It is doubtful whether without his leadership success
\ncould have been achieved.<\/p>\n
We also see China's economic progress because of the
\nleadership of Deng Xiaoping, who started economic reform in a
\nvery fundamental way in 1979. Later he was replaced by Jiang
\nZemin and Zhu Rongji who were all very strong in leading China
\ntoward progress. Without that strong leadership China would not
\nbe in the position it is today.<\/p>\n
Also Germany after World War II was able to demonstrate a
\nWirtschaftswunder or economic miracle because of the leadership
\nof Konrad Adenauer supported and later replaced by Ludwig Erhard.
\nIt is quite interesting that among the names just mentioned only
\nLudwig Erhard is an economist. Mahathir is a medical doctor
\nturned politician, Deng Xiaoping a People's Liberation Army (PLA)
\ngeneral with the engineers Jiang Zemin and Zhu Rongji, and Konrad
\nAdenauer the lawyer. It is not the basic background that is
\nimportant, but the capability to demonstrate leadership in
\ndifficult times.<\/p>\n
It is clear that the problem for Indonesia is not the question
\nof dropping or maintaining IMF support. But the capability of our
\nelite to demonstrate the right leadership. Do we have people who
\nhave a strong enough ambition to create a strong national
\neconomy? Are there people who strongly want to alleviate the
\npeople from poverty, provide food and homes, education and health
\nservices attainable for every one in this nation? And are they
\nalso ready to perform the leadership and management to achieve
\nthese goals by motivating the people and taking them along for a
\nstruggle to produce results.<\/p>\n
What we need is the leadership that can set the example and
\nget the people's trust. In Indonesia we say Jer Basuki Mawa Bea,
\nif you want to be successful you must be prepared to suffer
\nfirst. Not leadership that only can talk without doing anything
\nimportant. Let us suggest to our economists that theorizing and
\ndebating is definitely very good and important for the economic
\nscience. But realities require action that produce results and
\nimprovement.<\/p>",
"url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/what-we-need-is-leadership-bfor-mondays-editionb-1447899208",
"image": ""
},
"sponsor": "Okusi Associates",
"sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com"
}