End of an era?

The removal of President Abdurrahman Wahid by Indonesia's highest policy-making body, the People's Consultative Assembly (MPR), in a Special Session on Monday has brought to a close one of the most extraordinary episodes in contemporary Indonesian history.

A highly respected moderate Muslim scholar known for his inclusive and democratic ideas, Abdurrahman "Gus Dur" Wahid rose to become Indonesia's fourth president in more than half a century on Oct. 20, 1999.

While it may be true that Gus Dur won the position through skillful maneuvering helped by -- or, as some analysts prefer to see it, by taking advantage of the sentiments of -- a coalition of Muslim legislators and a faction within the erstwhile ruling Golkar Party, it is equally true that Gus Dur seemed at that time the only presidential candidate acceptable to all.

His track record as a modern intellectual and a fighter for democracy was long and impressive. He rode the wave of popular demand for clean governance and democratic reform that swept the country at the end of the more than three decades of authoritarian rule under two of his predecessors, Indonesia's founding president Sukarno and Soeharto.

And although the democratic reform that he brought with him into his administration had already been introduced by his immediate predecessor, BJ Habibie, it was to Gus Dur whom the public looked for laying a firm groundwork on which a truly modern democratic society could be built.

Early in his administration it looked as if indeed the Gus Dur administration would mark the beginning of an era of democracy, and with it clean government, in Indonesia. To mention just a few examples, it was under Gus Dur's administration that the military first openly accepted civilian control and transformed itself from a tool of those in power to that of the nation and the state.

It was Gus Dur who, immediately after he settled into the presidential palace, began to purge it and the presidential offices of the air of regal grandeur under which they had existed for so many decades.

On a less serious note, the jesting, witty remarks that often interspersed his speeches dealing with even such serious subjects as Cabinet changes and matters of government policy brought a refreshing air of informality into the institutions of state.

He refused to be addressed as "Mr. President", choosing instead to be known simply as Gus Dur. And -- aside from whether or not such views could even be mentioned in the current political context -- who but Gus Dur would have the courage to propose the opening of relations with Israel and recognizing the basic right of communists in Indonesia to reorganize.

In a way, therefore, Gus Dur's departure from the Indonesian political stage is a regrettable reality that has been forced on the nation by subsequent developments. More and more in the later stages of his administration, Gus Dur displayed an alarming tendency to make erratic and arbitrary policy decisions and make statements that invited controversy.

All there is left to say at this point is that had Gus Dur listened to good advice and stepped down voluntarily as the situation demanded, the Indonesian nation would still have recognized in him the highly respected moral leader it so much needs at this crucial stage of its history.

We are sorry he didn't. Even so, the nation continues to owe it to itself to pay Abdurrahman Wahid the respect he deserves. Perhaps, if a lesson is to be drawn from Gus Dur's most current experience, it is to reflect on how power can alter even the most principled of individuals and that therefore, in any democratic society, constitutional controls are absolutely necessary.