A new political education

If you are a leader of a political party and aspire to be president, but you refuse to take part in an open debate, or even discuss your party's policies in public, you should rather dissolve your organization and stay at home waiting until the roof falls, because you have not the slightest idea about what a general election is all about. And forget that in June this nation will hold the first democratic general election since 1955.

Fortunately, almost all political leaders here have welcomed the idea of an open debate, which has been enthusiastically urged by the public. Some of presidential hopefuls took part in the historic and inspiring public debate on Tuesday evening sponsored by the Salemba Forum of the University of Indonesia. The organizing committee really deserves commendation, as the debate has inspired much discussion in the last few days.

The debate, the first of its kind this country has ever witnessed, was attended by more than 2,000 people, mostly curious students. The participants consisted of Amien Rais of the National Mandate Party (PAN), Yusril Ihza Mahendra of the Crescent Star Party (PBB), Sri Bintang Pamungkas of the Indonesia Democratic Union Party (PUDI) and Didin Hafiduddin of the Justice Party (PK).

The organizer said Akbar Tandjung, presidential hopeful from Golkar and minister/state secretary, did not show up because he was accompanying President B.J. Habibie on his Bali visit. Megawati Soekarnoputri, leader of the Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle (PDI Perjuangan), refused her invitation on the grounds that "the program was not part of oriental culture".

Megawati's logic has provoked questions from the public, because neither are elections or political parties products of oriental culture. And almost everyone agrees that, since the age of Montesquieu there has been no more effective way to run a modern country than by the rule of political parties.

Back to the spellbinding debate. The presidential aspirants were asked to explain why they believed they were the most qualified person to rule this country. Speaking about their parties' programs, Yusril of PBB and Bintang of PUDI stressed the importance of a constitutional amendment to block the return of a dictatorship.

Didin Hafiduddin of the Justice Party said the crises had hit this country because religious morals had been neglected. His would use a religious approach to address the problem. He also said this nation should put an end to the omnipresent military involvement in politics.

Many questions, most of them from students, channeled by moderators, were stimulating, and some of them provocative. Amien Rais, the American educated PAN leader, seemed to be the favorite target for grilling. Questions aimed at him included whether he had the inclination to an authoritarian style of leadership, which he answered in the negative. "But if I happen to show the tendency one day let's combat it together."

Amien was also asked why he fought against the aristocratic manner of president Soeharto, but had turned a blind eye to that of the sultan of Yogyakarta, the city where Amien lives. Asked by a female moderator his opinion on the existence of a minister for women affair's in the current and previous Cabinets, Amien said it was proof that women are still treated as sub-human who need special care.

However, the politician who has severely criticized military commander Gen. Wiranto was careful not to speculate on who his minister of defense and military commander would be, if he won the election, because "he did not want to hurt the feelings of generals".

The debate proved to be an effective way to appraise the contesting parties and their leaders. As shown in more politically advanced countries, such debates can play an effective role in helping voters make their choices.

This kind of political education has a big plus in crisis-hit Indonesia, which is still predominantly a paternalistic society. People pay little attention to parties' programs and most voters do not understand the consequences of their decisions.

It seems most people here do not care whether the politicians they support continue to live like reactionary aristocrats, as long as their fathers had charisma.