Fallacies in the thinking of the political elites

Fallacies in the thinking of the political elites

Muhammad Qodari, Jakarta

Except for Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono, or SBY as he is popularly
known, who has confirmed Jusuf Kalla (JSK) as his running mate,
other presidential hopefuls are still shopping around to find
their most compatible vice presidential (VP) candidates.

Last week, one of the Indonesian Democratic Party of
Struggle's (PDI-P) top officials, Roy B Janis, said the party had
chosen Hamzah Haz, leader of the Islamist United Development
Party (PPP) and Megawati's current VP as her running mate.

Hamzah was picked because he represented the Islamic part of
Indonesian society, he said.

However, this choice is not a certainty. It is said the PDI-P
is now considering another prominent figure from the Muslim
community, Hasyim Muzadi, the leader of Nahdlatul Ulama, the
biggest and most moderate Muslim organization in the country. Of
course the PPP was disappointed and threatened to nominate Hamzah
as its presidential candidate despite the fact Hamzah had never
declared his intention to run for the presidency.

I've been watching the "courting period" by presidential and
VP aspirants with great uneasiness. It appears to me political
elites from all sides have used a Yin-Yang formula when trying to
form a coalition. They believe the best pairing to win the
presidential election will be one that combines the dichotomies
in Indonesian politics: Civilian-Military, nationalist-Islamist
and Java-outside Java.

That is why the PDI-P is considering a pairing of Megawati
(Java and nationalist) with Hamzah Haz (outside Java and
Islamist). That is why since last year Amien Rais of the National
Mandate Party (PAN) has declared his VP should be a figure from
the Military. Amien considers himself a civilian candidate with
Islamic credentials and is looking for a former army general
whose nationalist ideology is assured. The reason Amien is now
inviting Siswono Yudohusodo, a nationalist figure, to become his
running mate is because no general has yet agreed to his offer.

Wiranto, the presidential candidate from the Golkar Party,
also believes that as a military-cum-nationalist figure he has to
pick a civilian-cum-Islamic figure as his running mate. Wiranto
reportedly has approached the NU-backed National Awakening Party
(PKB) for a possible VP position.

Since Abdurrahman Wahid, the most powerful person in the PKB,
has had a strained relationship with Hasyim Muzadi, Wiranto has
also approached Hasyim separately. As the presidential aspirants
from Golkar and the PDI-P, the two biggest political parties of
this year, are from nationalist camps, candidates nominated by
the PKB and/or NU are now in hot demand.

As I said earlier, I have been watching this whole process of
searching for running mates with great uneasiness. Why? Because I
think the notion among political elites that a good presidential
pairing should represent dichotomies in politics is flawed -- and
even dangerous.

Recent national surveys by the Indonesian Survey Institute
(LSI) in August and November and March in April all showed the
reasons voters chose particular candidates had nothing to do with
whether they were from the military or were civilians, came from
Islamic or nationalist camps, or had Javanese blood or not.

It was personal qualities, not backgrounds, that were deemed
most important by the majority of voters -- the candidates'
perceived competency in solving economic crises, security
problems and corruption in the country. Also considered important
were candidates' physical appearance and personal traits: The
qualities of authoritativeness and honesty, in particular came
out strongly. While there were indeed voters who chose candidates
because they were Islamic leaders or military figures, or came
from the same ethnic background as they did, this group was a
minority.

This explains, for example, why Susilo is much more popular
than Wiranto. In the LSI survey from March 18 to March 24,
Susilo's was the most popular candidate with 21 percent of the
vote while Wiranto only polled 4.8 percent. In our April 8 to
April 15 survey, the popularity of Susilo snowballed and reached
40.6 percent compared to 5.8 percent for Wiranto.

Both candidates are retired four-star generals but many more
respondents support Susilo because he is perceived as being more
able to solve problems and people like his physical appearance
and personal image. Being in Cabinet for the past four years has
given voters more opportunities to evaluate Susilo in terms of
his capabilities and appearance than Wiranto, who has been absent
from public life until his recent return as a contestant at the
Golkar convention.

I believe, if the elites had realized one's background was not
as influential as they had thought, they would have searched for
a candidate who was the most competent and had the most positive
image. In a political campaign, Susilo, if he understands the
real reasons why voters pick a certain candidate, will highlight
Jusuf Kalla's proven track record in the economy and his positive
image instead of his background as a prominent figure from
eastern Indonesia.

Too much emphasis on a candidate's background is also
dangerous -- because it sends out the wrong message to Indonesian
voters. In an infant democracy, citizens must always be taught
that what is important in choosing a leader is their competency
and personal integrity.

Discourses on political coalitions and presidential pairings
that focus too much on candidates' sociological backgrounds, be
they regional, ideological, civilian or military, are not
conducive to the development of a culture of meritocracy among
Indonesian politicians.

In order to win the hearts and minds of the country's voters
and develop meritocracy in this young democracy, the elites
should change their rhetoric when searching for presidential
pairings. Criteria that should be promoted are candidates'
competency and integrity. The candidates should go even further
-- and look for running mates whose political visions have been
transformed into workable programs.

It would be great for Indonesian voters and democracy in this
country if all candidates in the presidential election made a
deal. This deal would have nothing to do with their backgrounds
or the allocation of seats in Cabinet. It would be a deal to
create the best policies for the betterment of the country.

The writer (qodari@lsi.or.id) is Director of Research at the
Indonesian Survey Institute (LSI).