Clinton or Dole?

One of the most frequently asked questions these days is "who will be the next United States president?" Will it be Democratic incumbent Bill Clinton, or the seasoned Republican Bob Dole?

All the major opinion polls in the U.S. suggest it will be Clinton. He holds a huge lead which has apparently widened in recent weeks. The two debates with his Republican challenger, including the one in San Diego on Wednesday, have not yet halted his march towards a second term in the White House, so the polls say.

But opinion polls have often been wrong, and one would be stupid to dismiss Dole's chances on Nov. 5 solely on the basis of these polls.

Anything could happen between now and election day, and Senator Dole could still spring a surprise.

The one thing the polls will do is spur on the Republican to an even fiercer campaign. In Wednesday's debate, he tried to raise the issue of character, something he has avoided till now, in spite of pressure from fellow Republicans.

Focusing on personal integrity is practically irresistible to anyone challenging President Clinton, but whether it will wash with American voters is another thing. Looking back, Clinton's so-called questionable character did not stop him winning the 1992 election.

Allegations about Clinton's integrity have dogged him throughout his term in the White House. The latest are claims that he accepted campaign donations from foreigners. Indonesian billionaire James Riady has been frequently cited in the American media.

This connection with Indonesia is unfortunate, although some people here might comment sardonically that it helps to enlighten Americans about Indonesia.

Republican accusations that Clinton's "Indonesian connection", as the American media call it, has affected his foreign policy could harm relations between our two countries.

Where does Indonesia stand on the U.S. election? And who among the two candidates will be more likely to maintain and expand bilateral relations with Indonesia?

Fortunately, when it comes to foreign policy, more specifically the Asia-Pacific, there appears to be little difference between Clinton and Dole. Rather, instead of taking sides Indonesia can take the role of interested and impartial observer.

Indonesia's relations with the U.S. have strengthened in recent years due to a growing acknowledgement of mutual interests in regional security, and increasing trade and economic ties. Clinton's personal endorsement for greater American economic commitment in the Asia-Pacific has helped strengthen relations, as have his meetings with President Soeharto over the last four years.

But Indonesia should be equally at ease with Dole in the White House. It was a Republican-controlled congress that pushed for the resumption of military training programs for senior Indonesian officers, which Washington had suspended in 1992 after pressure from the Democrats. There is no reason to expect that a Dole-controlled White House would not continue good relations with Indonesia.

Indonesia should feel comfortable with either candidate moving into the White House next January. With Clinton, there is the advantage of familiarity and therefore a greater degree of certainty. With Dole, the generation gap as in meetings between Clinton and Soeharto, will be absent, and perhaps a greater understanding could be reached between the two leaders.