A tragic year under Abdurrahman Wahid's rule

A tragic year under Abdurrahman Wahid's rule

Political analyst J. Soedjati Djiwandono was one of those who
rejoiced at the new presidential leadership last October, but who
now feels compelled to give a brutally honest review of the
presidency.

JAKARTA (JP): President Sukarno began to lose his credibility
and authority in the eyes of his people after 20 years of his
presidency, primarily because of his stubborn defense of the
Indonesian Communist Party (PKI).

President Soeharto had to resign for basically failing to
understand the mood and aspirations of his people after more than
three decades of his rule.

Those were tragic moments for the nation, when a change of
leadership was accompanied by a sudden burst of violence, before
or after, at the cost of unaccountable loss of human lives. One
might have thought then that the experience of the nation could
never be worse.

I have begun to wonder, however, if this is not the most
tragic phase of the life of this nation called Indonesia, if even
the identity of the nation itself, the name "Indonesia", is
questionable. A young man once asked me a question I have never
been able, or had the courage, to answer: "Is it possible, that
'Indonesia' could soon be just a great name in history, just as
we remember -- or so we have been told -- the great empires of
Majapahit and Sriwijaya in centuries past?"

I shudder at the thought that the question may get a proper
answer in the not too distant future. The thought that the name
"Indonesia " is in real danger of just fading away has daunted
and haunted the first year of Abdurrahman Wahid's presidency.

Indeed, as a nation, Indonesia has been through dark days for
longer than I can remember. This time around, however, there does
not seem to be even a dim light at the end of the tunnel. What
could be worse than a moment, when a great nation cannot even
think of having a leader?

That's the tragedy of this nation, ironically, just over a
year of the reign of allegedly the most democratically elected
president and vice president -- that is, at least by Indonesian
standards set by a fundamentally defective and undemocratic
constitution. And that is also the tragedy of President
Abdurrahman "Gus Dur" Wahid.

I remember hailing the election of Gus Dur and Megawati
Soekarnoputri as the best the nation could ever be blessed with
in moral terms; the best for national unity; the best to avert
further violence and to avoid what then looked like the imminent
threat of a civil war.

What tragic contradictions we are witnessing now, however,
just over the short span of a year: violence has not subsided, if
not escalated; the nation is in greater danger of disintegrating,
and thus national unity is ever more remote; bickering among
politicians has continued unabated, and so has the tug-of-war
between the presidency and the legislatures, consisting of
supposedly representatives of the people; corruption and money
politics have seemingly taken on an unashamedly crude and less
sophisticated form, no longer in the more subtle deals under the
table but in the style of cash and carry. And for the common
people? Life is harder, more painful, ever more uncertain, and
more scary.

The President's loss of sight did not seem to matter much at
the beginning. "He may be blind, but he sees more than many," one
writer said about President Gus Dur. Now it seems to be his main
handicap. How does he judge people, their characters and their
performance? After all, he cannot always rely on those he knows
or used to know well.

Indeed, his presence, remarks and statements among minority
groups -- be it in racial, ethnic or religious terms -- still
create a cool, refreshing and assuring atmosphere. But his
remarks and statements on some other no less important aspects
are often shockingly contradictory, confusing, inconsistent and
frighteningly enigmatic.

The most tragic of all, what used to be the main strength of
the President, his moral integrity, and thus the basis of his
credibility and authority, seems to have deteriorated. His
strength has turned into his vulnerability.

He also seems to be increasingly obstinate, self-opinionated
and over-confident. One can only wonder, who has the ears of the
blind President?

This is the tragedy the nation is now facing: We have no
alternative. But can we continue to support him, not only because
of his deterioration -- the President is perhaps seriously sick,
quite apart from his blindness with all its implications --
particularly in the light of the continued and single-minded
attacks by his political opponents with the single aim: to unseat
him.

If the President is genuinely concerned with the interests of
the nation as a whole rather than over his possible reelection
for a second term, and if he should honestly feel unable or
incapable of completing his term, he should resign at his own
free will. He would be a proven grand statesman.

Otherwise, he is likely to be increasingly vulnerable to
efforts to ease him out of office, while it seems doubtful if his
staunch and blind supporters would be ready to accept such a
defeat. What would ensue would be a foregone conclusion: further
social conflicts, or even a civil war.

Indeed, given Gus Dur's resignation, we would still be faced
with a no less complex question. I would not dare to attempt to
answer the question right now, whether or not Vice President
Megawati would be ready and well equipped to take over. That
would require a separate and probably lengthy analysis or
speculation. It would be no less complicated.

This review may sound brutal. But truth is often bitter. As
such, it hurts, and it hurts mercilessly. Whatever the case may
be, the cost would be the continued suffering of the majority of
the people. Would the President and the rest of the politicians
ever think of that?