Bugaboos of the reform movement

Bugaboos of the reform movement

By Usadi Wiryatnaya

JAKARTA (JP): To the idealist, a genuine democratic system of
government means unyielding commitment to the empowerment of the
people, law enforcement and human rights implementation. Void of
this basic commitment, it deserves neither regard nor
recognition.

The far-flung cry of reform, voiced by intellectuals and pro-
democratic politicians enjoying substantial support from the
students, physical as well as moral, has successfully toppled the
New Order government only a couple of months after Soeharto's
highly ceremonial reinstallation of his seventh presidential
office.

This historic event has dumbfounded many, as the then ruling
elite's feat of strength was propped up by a powerful triumvirate
of ABG (Armed Forces, Bureaucrats, and Group of Functionaries),
designed to create an unchallenged Single Majority on which the
development task and goals were construed to stake.

Before the reform movement, only a small number of people were
able to predict the impending fate of the corrupt regime: The
arrogant power-based and KKN-supported regime was soon to
crumble! (KKN is an acronym for Korupsi, kolusi dan nepotisme,
corruption, collusion and nepotism). In this case, Arief Budiman
seems to be an exception. A month or so before his departure to
Australia for his new academic appointment, Arief divulged his
prediction on the approaching crucial change of great momentum
which was to take place in this country. He convincingly asserted
that "kondisi politik kita sudah mencapai tahap hamil tua"
meaning "our political condition has reached the advanced stage
of pregnancy".

At present, it is a broadly-known fact that the reformist
aspirations and perspiration have not come to nought.
Administrative transparency, counter-KKN measures, a number of
long-yearned for freedoms (political, academic, association,
stating criticism in public, art performances, etc.), are
testimony to the reformist dream which has come true.

Nevertheless, do these all go to prove that the reform has
achieved all of its goals completely and spotlessly? If you take
the whole as a starting point, then you have to answer
negatively. Never does reform beget pure blessings only.
Irritants always appear, either as unexpected accompanying
symptoms, or as resurgence of old, latent cultural residuals.

The first notice of this disheartening fact is disclosed by
Kwik Kian Gie, a noted, critical-minded economist, who has
struggled hand in hand with the female political figure Megawati.
His deep concern for the worsening state of affairs, which leads
to political instability and economic doom, has rendered him
cynical if not pessimistic. To him, the newly celebrated
democratic atmosphere is not a blessing in all respects. "A
democracy is good for mature people, but even our intellectuals
are not mature -- they are opportunists" (Newsweek, June 8,
1998). Kwik is likely hinting at the mass rampage, responsible
for the vast plundering and devastation of department stores,
banking structures and public service buildings.

The next worrisome fact is detected by Syamsuddin Harris, a
research hand for the Indonesian Institute of Sciences. The
actual predicament, threatening the political foundation and
mechanism, is the fact that collectively the nation is in a
quandary and therefore stops at each crossroads. Even the present
transitional government is suffering from the same symptoms: lack
of confidence and inconsistency with regard to programming and
planning (Detektif & Romantika, June 13, 1998).

The third matter is highlighted by Bintang Pamungkas' remarks
on the East Timor's status. As always, this plucky, outspoken
figure, launches his controversial issues quite unexpectedly. In
his opinion, which is undoubtedly based on the idealist view of
democracy, East Timor does not belong to the Republic. He seems
to state that the rights of ethnic minorities -- including the
right to self-rule -- should be protected. Of course, this idea
does not find broad social acceptance among the majority of the
population who are at the same time also pro-integration.
Pamungkas will possibly say that the political will agreed to and
entered into by the then existing parties, excepting Fretilin,
which resulted in the integration is morally and legally
untenable. Such a political decision of paramount importance and
far-reaching consequence should not have been taken by means of a
joint declaration of the allegedly pro-integration parties, but
instead should have proceed the way of referendum under the
United Nation's monitoring apparatuses. Of course, this issue is
a special irritation for the stiff-necked pro-integrationists.

Usadi Wiryatnaya, an observer of sociopolitical affairs,
living in Denpasar, Bali.