Answering the Gus Dur question

By Ignas Kleden

JAKARTA (JP): The horizon of Indonesian politics is apparently static. The entire political focus is now narrowed down to one single question: the resignation of President Abdurrahman Wahid (Gus Dur), yes or no?

The unofficial gathering of some 200 members of the House of Representatives and People's Consultative Assembly which was organized by Kwik Kian Gie recently was unable to advance the political thinking any further. Most of the participants who came on personal invitation were preoccupied with the desire for the President to resign.

How did it reach the point where the many political problems and economic problems suddenly became "out of sight and out of mind" for the Indonesian political elite?

Why do people believe that the progress and the misery of the country depend on one person, namely the President? Under the New Order, we were led to believe that many problems originated from the action or inaction of former president Soeharto. Therefore, if we rid of him, most of the problems would automatically disappear.

Now we are in danger of falling back into this "bad logic".

Firstly, many political and economic problems would have arisen regardless of the person at the helm. One cannot place the responsibility for the economic crisis on Soeharto's doorstep alone. In the same vein, one cannot place the blame for rampant corruption on Gus Dur alone.

Certainly it is regrettable that Abdurrahman has failed to pay serious attention to the corruption problem as the public expected. However, it is also a big illusion to assume that the problem will diminish if we get a new president.

Secondly, given the nature of the problem, it is very unlikely that it could be solved by a "better" president than Gus Dur. No president can fight corruption effectively without the support of a solid political system.

The question that will linger for many years to come is whether or not an elected president is aware of the necessity to build a solid political system, one that would help him rule effectively and protect him from unnecessary mistakes, while eliminating most of the opportunities for him to abuse his power.

Another related question is whether or not people can make their president aware of this task, remind him when he appears to ignore or forget it, and compel him to carry out this responsibility, if he becomes reluctant.

One should not expect a miracle, either by keeping Gus Dur in his present position or by removing him from office.

The crisis is too complex and has been unwittingly prolonged by the obvious indecisiveness of both government and legislature so that now there is hardly any possibility to improve the situation through one single political action.

The main objection to Gus Dur remaining in office to the end of his term is belief that his governance would lead to a total collapse of the national economy because of unbridled corruption and failure to carry out policies that have been decided.

Conversely, we will be running an unprecedented political risk if we force him out of office. His traditional supporters, comprising a huge number of the population, would certainly make it even harder for a successor. Political conflicts that have been peaceful, so far, could become uncontrolled again, and no one would know when or where they would stop.

Political institutions would likely collapse, destroying any opportunities for economic development. The people would, at the end of the day, suffer from an equally bad outcome.

The only viable choice is to let the President complete his term, while trying to ignore most of his statements and actions. This, however, is only possible if political forces can marshal a concerted effort to overcome economic crisis, to find conflict resolution, and to establish direction, goals and workable solutions to achieve those goals.

By so doing, we benefit by the easing of the economic crisis because of the synergy of many people's efforts to finding solutions and the prevention of yet another political crisis triggered by Gus Dur's ardent supporters.

We do not need to ask whether or not this can be done, but whether there is a political will to bring this idea to reality.

The writer is a sociologist and director of the Go-East Institute (Institute for East-Indonesian Affairs), Jakarta.