Foreigners questionable agenda

By Sayidiman Suryohadiprojo

JAKARTA (JP): It is difficult for ordinary Indonesian people to understand concern shown among foreign circles over the choice of Indonesia's next vice president, to be elected during the General Session of the People's Consultative Assembly (MPR) in March.

The interest began about one month ago, when a large part of the Western media suggested that Indonesia should refrain from electing Dr. B.J. Habibie as the next vice president. He is viewed as a big spender and a danger for foreign investment. Even parochial local newspapers in the U.S., which rarely print news on Indonesia, took part in the character assassination.

Then came a statement made by former Singapore prime minister Lee Kuan Yew, who suggested the same without mentioning Habibie by name. A former U.S. ambassador to Indonesia, Paul Wolfowitz, also jumped on the bandwagon, airing criticisms in an interview with The Jakarta Post.

It is difficult to believe that all these statements are made independent of some political agenda. They are allied to a political interest that is opposed, not to Habibie personally, but to what he represents.

Had Habibie joined a political group which wanted to recruit him in the 1970s, he would never have fallen victim to all this negative propaganda.

In fact, while Habibie finds himself the immediate target, the main objective is President Soeharto himself. Again, the grudge is borne not against Soeharto in person, but against the domestic political paradigm over which he has presided in the 1990s.

Soeharto became unpopular within certain circles in Indonesia and abroad, especially in the U.S., when in 1990 he endorsed the establishment of the Association of Indonesian Moslem Intellectuals (ICMI) with B.J. Habibie as its chairman. He was accused of initiating an institution that would enable Moslems to gain broader influence in Indonesian society.

Prior to that, the Indonesian New Order government had always minimized the role of Islam. Especially when the late Ali Moertopo and his OPSUS group, assisted by a well known think tank, still held influence with the President.

We can assume that groups in Indonesia which oppose the new paradigm in domestic politics have been successful in influencing foreign public opinion. Or, foreign political interests that disagree with the new line of thinking in Indonesia has called upon allies in Indonesia to do something about it.

Since 1993 there have been a number of attempts to topple Soeharto. Public opinion has also been manipulated to create an impression that the Indonesian people were in favor of Soeharto stepping down.

But it is doubtful whether the people who want to topple Soeharto would continue to declare opposition to him if Soeharto still followed their desire to minimize the influence of Islam in civic society. If this were the case, they would want to see Soeharto remain in power for as long as possible.

All efforts to topple Soeharto failed until the monetary crisis struck. For the opposition, the crisis provided a timely opportunity to try once again, in the run up to the General Session of the MPR which begins in March.

Why is there so much opposition to broad Moslem participation in Indonesia? That Moslems are in the majority in Indonesian society cannot be denied. An advanced and prosperous Indonesia without advancement for the Moslems cannot be envisaged. Indonesia can only become prosperous if the majority of its people progress materially and educationally.

Furthermore, a well educated Moslem community will give rise to more Moslem moderates, which in turn will advance the cause of democracy in Indonesia because the Moslem community, particularly moderate Moslem intellectuals, are in favor of democracy.

A moderate and educated Moslem community will show greater tolerance toward other religious groups and the outside world in general. Many positive consequences will result, including the disappearance of latent anti-Chinese sentiment.

An Indonesia with an advanced Moslem community will be more stable and therefore become a better partner in political, economic and security issues. It is therefore difficult to understand why people like Lee Kuan Yew and Wolfowitz do not favor advancement for the Moslem ummah in Indonesia, although they have not explicitly said as much.

If Moslem participation is kept to a minimum, as it was in colonial times, extremists will take center stage among the Moslem community and fundamentalism will rise. Tolerance will be replaced by extremism and hostility toward other religious groups, especially those favored by the government.

Resent of the Chinese minority will remain strong, especially if the gap between rich and poor remains large. These are not the conditions in which democracy can develop, but are fertile beds for violence and social disturbance. Is that what people like Lee Kuan Yew and Wolfowitz want for Indonesia?

A more advanced Indonesia will be a more favorable country for foreign companies to invest in than a socially troubled Indonesia. International trade, including the import of Western products, will grow steadily in a stable and prosperous Indonesia. That will favor the U.S. economy given the huge potential market that lies dormant in Indonesia.

But of course, a stronger Indonesia, with the majority of its people united, will be more independent and less likely to succumb easily to foreign pressures. Is such an Indonesia unacceptable for the U.S. and Singapore?

If that is the case then we have to agree with the late president Sukarno who believed that Indonesia did not face "peaceful co-existence and mutual respect" among nations, but instead met "neo-colonialism and neo-imperialism" at every turn.

The writer is a retired general and a former Governor of the National Resilience Institute. He is now an Ambassador at Large to the Non-Aligned Movement.