Eep sees new Indonesia needs hard work

By Stevie Emilia

JAKARTA (JP): The word "reform" was once very popular among people, being used to mark the fall of former president Soeharto after ruling the country for over 30 years. But now Indonesia baru, or new Indonesia, has become the new catchphrase.

This new trend has not been missed by political observer Eep Saefulloh Fatah.

An avid reader and a lecturer at the University of Indonesia's School of Social and Political Sciences, Eep attributed the trend to people's desire to reject any labels connected to the country's past governments, particularly Soeharto's New Order.

"This term might also have emerged to satisfy the people, who are now celebrating the new situation; it's something new, brought in by reform, while at the same time, they're trying to break away from the phobias established by the New Order," said the 32-year-old deputy director of the school's political lab.

Known for his composure and sharp analysis, this youthful looking host of the talk show Toward a New Indonesia, which is aired by five private television stations every Tuesday at 9 p.m., said the term "new Indonesia" had not yet become popular when his show began in August.

He said the emergence and rising popularity of the term was helped by the degradation of the word "reform".

"When 'reform' first emerged, the word seemed virtuous, full of meaning. But later on, mostly among ordinary people, those from the grass roots, there was a degradation of (the meaning of) reform," said Eep, who married Sarah Santi in 1992 when they were both students. The couple are the parents of Kalam Mahardika Saefulloh, who will turn five years old this December.

New Indonesia is now the preferred term to reflect the country's present situation.

"We're still heading toward a new Indonesia. If we use theories by noted political experts, we have just begun a real transition process. What happened between Soeharto stepping down and the formation of the new government under Gus Dur (President Abdurrahman Wahid), that's the very early stage of the transition process; the early stage of political liberalization," he explained.

"But with many officials beginning to use the term, I'm afraid the term will be degraded too, or simply become a cover, while people begin not to care what really happens or become easily satisfied with promises."

In his office at the university, Eep discussed his view of new Indonesia with The Jakarta Post on Friday. The following are excerpts from the interview:

Question: What is your definition of new Indonesia?

Answer: In a simplified form, building a society that is a negation of the New Order. In detail, new Indonesia should rely more on the community, its people, and change the social, political and economic systems. So, the social, political and economic systems that previously relied solely on the state and the power holders should be transferred to the people.

In a more general and fancy definition, new Indonesia is more democratic, just and transparent. Democracy, justice and transparency, in my opinion, are the three main characteristics of new Indonesia.

And the highest achievement of new Indonesia is to make our society, our state, a state that humanizes humans. When our rights and human values develop without barriers, that's what we call new Indonesia.

Is society ready to take over all of these duties?

First, there won't be any drastic, fast, direct or black-and- white changes. In my opinion, heading toward new Indonesia means imagining two huge tasks.

The first task is to prepare new hardware that meets the people's aspirations, not the state's aspirations. Hardware can be set up by changing the players; the replacement of unauthentic players with authentic players. Authentic players are those who can condemn corruption freely because they're not corruptors.

There's also the need to transform state institutions, create or reevaluate regulations either in their highest forms, such as the Constitution, or more detailed ones at the local level, and then change mechanisms, such as in electing leaders.

New Indonesia will only come true if in the coming five years there's serious work done on our hardware with real results.

If the hardware can be ready in five years, then it will ease the second task: to prepare the software, in this case, changing people's way of thinking, attitudes and culture. This will take time ....

When (former Philippine president) Corazon Aquino ruled between 1986 and 1991, she did a great job in preparing the hardware. A year after becoming president, she produced a new Constitution .... Nelson Mandela of South Africa even completed preparing (the hardware) in a shorter time, around four years.

My point is, some countries have proved they can set up the necessary hardware in a relatively short time.

Do you think we can do this in five years?

I think in the present situation, with Abdurrahman Wahid being elected President and Megawati Soekarnoputri elected Vice President, it can be done faster. They, theoretically, are not burdened with a need to preserve the past.

How long will it take to work on the software?

We can't imagine how long. But let's say, if within five years the present government, besides surviving, can get the hardware ready, at least 10 years more. But it needs consistency.

Is the present political situation conducive to lead us to the new Indonesia?

Partly yes and partly no. A supporting factor is, for instance, people want change, although their definition of change varies. In a recent survey the lab did in cooperation with Ohio State University in 26 provinces, it was discovered that people's definition of a better Indonesia varied. But the majority of them wished for better living, social and economic conditions. That's new Indonesia in their minds.

But there are counter-productive factors. The military, for instance, is still powerful and did not lose its political and economic infrastructure when Soeharto fell. They have been developing their economic infrastructure ever since the 1958 state take-over measure, which gave (the military) the legal power to control companies being taken over. So we've had economic players wearing uniforms since 1958. By the end of the 1980s, it had already become a conglomerate. The Army's Kartika Eka Paksi Foundation has more than 30 companies with more branches and offices ....

Meanwhile, our (political) parties do not have such infrastructure. And I heard, hopefully I'm mistaken, some parties have started to use Golkar's past practices. In (the government) departments, a certain percentage of contracts should be rendered to the parties. It's because they don't have the economic infrastructure and rely on donations.

Moreover, there's also horizontal conflicts, such as religious and ethnic conflicts, and vertical conflicts, such as between local governments and the central government. The worst example is in Aceh.

Another counter-productive factor is that, like it or not, a transition period is marked by strong compromise in the political process, which is feared could lead to a conservative government.

But in my opinion, the main obstacle, which is unseen from the surface, is changing the people's way of thinking, their attitudes and culture, all of which were institutionalized by the past authoritarian governments and have been nurtured for over 40 years. People were raised to favor centralization, worship the leader, never protest or refuse a political system that prioritized the elite and alienated them from politics and the government.

This way of thinking is inherited from the past. Soeharto fed people with his logistics politics without letting people get involved in politics .... I used to think if Soeharto had to fire all his ministers, he might only leave two; the head of the logistic bureau and the Army commander ....

Do you believe the present government will take us to the new Indonesia?

So far, the new government has only worked for more than a month so we simply can't judge them.

But I see that on the one hand, the present government, amid the contradictions, is relatively better than previous governments. And we can pin our hopes on them. On another hand, I see a desperate need to build control mechanisms, both formal and informal .... People can be informed about their rights as citizens and urged to be active to get and defend their rights. They might become a built-in opposition. So one day, we won't need this watchdog or that watchdog since every one can monitor (the government).

One more thing, there's no such thing as linear, straight history. Those who like to give speeches about new Indonesia should be told that it will not be easy, fast or cheap to reach it. New Indonesia will be difficult and costly (to reach), and it will take some time to come true.