Demystifying Abdurrahman

Demystifying Abdurrahman

By Michael Vatikiotis

HONG KONG (JP): Of the many stories floating around Jakarta
about Gus Dur, one of them is a telling indicator of his
qualities as a politician.

Back in 1990 Gus Dur was one of a number of Jakarta
intellectuals who formed a new dissident grouping known as Forum
Demokrasi. After several meetings it was decided to search for a
leader for the group. As one of the founding members, Gus Dur's
name was mentioned.

But wait, said one member of the group. Shouldn't the leader
of an organization dedicated to the pursuit of democracy be
democratically elected?

Gus Dur said nothing. Then, another member quickly opposed the
move. His argument was that since the group was facing an
authoritarian foe -- namely the military -- it should dispense
with democratic niceties in order to avoid divisive squabbling
and focus on the struggle for democracy. Gus Dur again said
nothing, and was duly appointed leader of Forum Demokrasi without
an election.

Most observers consider that Gus Dur stands for ideals --
specifically democracy and religious tolerance. So when he was
elected president by the People's Consultative Assembly (MPR) on
Oct. 20, 1999, the country and its friends breathed a sigh of
relief. Some of those who know him well held their breath in a
moment of apprehension, however.

It wasn't just that the man has suffered two strokes and is
clearly unable to do much with his failing eyesight. Neither was
it his mercurial and humorous personality. It was more than
anything his nature as a politician that was some cause for
worry.

Good politicians do not make committed idealists. Political
survival requires flexibility and, above all, the skillful
manipulation of ideas.

Those who know him suspected that Gus Dur won the presidency
because of skillful manipulation and a degree of deceit. Perhaps
a measure of luck was also involved. Other candidates either
lacked ability or appeal. But otherwise, given the odds, a lot of
it was clever politicking. Gus Dur simply outfoxed everybody else
-- much as he had predicted he would in the weeks before the
election. Some time before the MPR Special Session, Gus Dur
approached a senior newspaper editor to ask him to release a
member of staff -- so that she could work for him "when I'm in
the palace".

So if he is not an idealist, what kind of leader is Gus Dur,
and where is he taking the country and its vulnerable fledgling
democracy?

Indonesian politics lacks institutional checks and balances
and is therefore a treacherous arena. Loyalty is fickle;
personality is paramount, and patronage rules.

Gus Dur has known the way things work ever since he sat at the
feet of his eminent grandfather who served in Sukarno's Cabinet.

In fact, he has spent his entire career in the political
arena. He managed to steer the country's largest Muslim
organization, Nahdlatul Ulama, through a period of anti-Islamic
feeling. He helped launch a dissident group in the 1990s that
managed to escape persecution. He championed the cause of
democracy while at the same time lending support to its most
ardent enemy, president Soeharto.

Gus Dur rose to prominence, not because of his idealism, but
because he knew how to make and break political deals. No
Indonesian politician has managed to threaten the government one
year with a mob -- and support it's sham election campaign the
next.

There is another seldom-mentioned aspect of Gus Dur that
disturbs some people. As much as he speaks foreign languages and
likes Beethoven, Gus Dur is also a thoroughly traditional figure.
He plays well to the grass roots with his manipulation of
traditional symbols of power -- jocularity, spiritualism and
unpredictability.

Like his predecessor, Soeharto, Gus Dur makes sudden twists
and turns on the political stage and plays divide and rule. He
likes it to be known in a subtle way that he consults the spirits
of ancient kings -- seeking inner strength from the whole panoply
of Javanese icons from Muslim saints to the sultan's of Mataram
and Majapahit -- and even the grave of founding father Sukarno.

Above all he is the quintessential dalang (puppeteer)
politician -- which is all about looking as if you control
everything around you rather than actually doing so.

All this is to say that Gus Dur is not one-dimensional -- not
simply an idealist. He is more accurately a political animal with
keen instincts, which means we can't take his ideals for granted.

For all his support for democracy there is precious little
evidence in the first eight months of his leadership that the
institutions of democracy so badly needed in Indonesia have been
reinforced.

In fact, as political foes circled him, he lashed out and
threatened the mass arrest of his opponents. For all his passion
for tolerance, he was unable to stop the Laskar Jihad from
reaching North Maluku -- and he insists on saying that warring
local communities should sort out their own problems.

Supporters and sympathizers like to pin the blame for Gus
Dur's problems on his enemies. Losers from the old regime are
seen as taking advantage of Gus Dur and his family to destabilize
the government.

Although hard to prove, that is undoubtedly so, in some
instances -- but not all. Corruption has crept back into the
palace because Gus Dur badly needs money to build his own support
base and kick-start a political machine. His National Awakening
Party (PKB) party came third in the June 1999 elections and other
parties are coalescing in opposition to him.

Gus Dur admitted recently to discussing the use of state funds
for political ends. This is a problem that plagues all reformist
governments in their early stages: You need a slush fund to buy
the tools needed to clear out the drains.

Of course, realpolitik dictates that idealism becomes the
first victim of strong leadership. Gus Dur promised in the early
weeks of his presidency to help former Malaysian deputy prime
minister Anwar Ibrahim, who is languishing in jail. Just three
months later he had embraced Anwar's persecutor, Prime Minister
Mahathir Mohamad, and struck a deal for cheap rice. So much for
ideals.

Successful consolidation should give Gus Dur the chance to
execute some of his ideas and implement his ideals. But
consolidation has proved difficult because of severe economic
problems and a disgruntled elite that cannot bury differences and
work for the good of the country.

So he has turned instead to close family members and trusted
friends. They, it seems, do their best to keep the bad news from
reaching him -- perhaps out of consideration for his frail
health. Trusted economic advisors and Cabinet colleagues are left
to guess how the President has arrived at his decisions --
because he certainly has not been listening to them. A real worry
for the future is that Gus Dur may be unaware of what is wrong.

That's what happened to Soeharto in his final years. The
culture of power in Indonesia insulates the leader from criticism
by clothing him in warm praise. Sycophancy plagues the
presidential office.

A senior Cabinet minister from the old regime once
demonstrated that he could get his secretary to agree that the
sun was shining even if it was dark and wet outside.

Gus Dur has also been convinced of his rectitude by the
plaudits he received from overseas in the first months of his
presidency. Foreign support is now waning in the absence of
results. Predictably Gus Dur has resorted to making nationalist
threats.

But let's make no mistake about Gus Dur; he isn't one to rely
on anybody. He has a long track record of distaste for alignment.
On his visit to Cuba, Fidel Castro actually came to visit Gus Dur
in his hotel.

But perhaps the saddest prospect is that Gus Dur will start
losing perspective because of his physical ailments. Two
successive strokes have made him moody and intolerant. He gets
angry with close family members and often looks confused in
public situations.

On several occasions he has appeared insensitive -- like going
ahead with a recent overseas trip instead of visiting victims of
the Bengkulu earthquake. His tendency to crack jokes in public
gatherings is said to be a psychological byproduct of blindness
-- a need to hear other people present and be assured of their
approval.

For all these reasons it is hard to take refuge in the idea
that Gus Dur is an idealist. This in turn reduces him in stature
and strips him of any kind of defense on moral grounds. Policy is
drifting and the very same popular forces that drove Soeharto out
of office are mustering again. Gus Dur remains the best of a bad
bunch for young radicals who experienced the power of the mob in
1998. His political opponents are clearly concerned that his
premature removal would not necessarily win public support.

But if the economy does not improve and the whiff of scandal
is not dispelled from the palace, the students will be back. A
pity, though. Indonesia does not need another change of political
course.

It took a good two decades for the rot to accumulate and
foreign and local support to abandon Soeharto. Sadly there is
already an air of decay hanging over Merdeka Palace and many
foreign governments are mulling over alternatives. But expect the
Gus Dur presidency to cling to power. Rather like the short-lived
reigns of later Ottoman sultans when the empire was in decline,
everyone can see the need for change, but worries what their
future will be once the music stops.

The writer is managing editor of the Far Eastern Economic
Review. This article was taken from Questioning Gus Dur, a book
newly published by The Jakarta Post.