Forget about understanding Gus Dur

By Wimar Witoelar

JAKARTA (JP): Enough has been said about Gus Dur's travails and predicament, but what is the solution in the national interest? Articles, talk shows and seminars have been going for the theme of the month, "Understanding Gus Dur."

The humor and wit of his first months in office have been replaced by dark clouds of misconduct, arrogance and alleged corruption. Whether the accusing fingers are pointed at the President or his people, the principle of guilt puts Gus Dur, or President Abdurrahman Wahid, in the same uneasy position as Richard Nixon during Watergate and ex-president B.J. Habibie in relation to the Bank Bali affair.

If you knew of a crime and did not stop it, you are guilty if you had the power to stop it. The President is in a tough spot, which means the entire nation is in trouble.

Is anybody properly helping him to help the nation? He was the symbol of hope as we traveled through the tunnel of violence, corruption and deceit constructed by the Soeharto system.

Even now Gus Dur is extremely credible as a man of wit, sophistication and good intentions. But the government shows no hope in economic management and is weak in applying standards of good governance.

Gus Dur has to turn outward, beyond the political elite, to restructure the government. And he deserves our support, if we can make him support democracy, which is more important than a symbol of hope.

In his present condition, his chances of political survival are unclear. There are at least five groups plotting and scheming to save -- or exploit -- the situation.

Two categories of scenarios await us: Gus Dur remains President, or Vice President Megawati Soekarnoputri succeeds him. Megawati herself does not want to ascend to the presidency in this fashion, but she would have to if Gus Dur were to be successfully impeached or to resign. Other possibilities are too frightening to discuss.

All political combinations, Akbar Tandjung-Megawati, Akbar- Amien Rais-Muslim-oriented axis force, or even Akbar-Megawati- axis force, are keeping their options open.

If push came to shove they would support a Megawati presidency. Of course they will demand, and be given, at least an equal part of the power they are enjoying now.

What will happen to Gus Dur in this scenario? Nobody can be quite sure. But more importantly, these formulae all miss the point of the reform. As I said earlier in Newsweek magazine just after Gus Dur and Megawati were elected last October:

"Upon their election, my eldest brother sent a joyous e-mail to me in capital letters: 'I HAVE REGAINED MY PRIDE TO BE INDONESIAN.' Who can help being proud? As a people, we have gone against a harsh regime and elected the first-ever pair of Indonesian leaders without the customary props of military power, bureaucratic support and financial clout." For us, it was the people who won.

We have to do our best to retain the people's victory, by exacting from the President the political will to make the government work.

The essence of the problem is not only that Gus Dur is hard to understand, but that the political elite have not addressed the government's nonperformance in a proper manner.

It is a matter of matching structure to tasks, staff quality to expectations. This is a fairly common exercise in corporate restructuring, and we should apply at least equally stringent measures to the governance of a serious country.

We need to stop bemoaning Gus Dur's unreliability and sincerely enforce our belief that we want a strong national management system. Gus Dur has not played his role properly.

Now we need to provide him with a new role in a restructured government, and enlist Megawati's support to enable the process.

Gus Dur's recommended new role is not new in our history. It requires delegation of detail to a competent Cabinet. In areas where he has little interest and experience, such as economic management and planning, leave it to a strong unified team.

In areas where he has core competence, such as human rights and social policy, he can be more involved.

First president Sukarno played it -- the role of national leader who delegates most domestic matters to his government. Richard Nixon performed as a good president prior to the scandals which ultimately drove him out of office. His strength was foreign policy. He played the role of foreign policy president, impressing the world with his mentor and operator Henry Kissinger.

Domestic policy was run by the cabinet and coordinated by White House staff. We can build a control mechanism to prevent the buildup of a Haldeman-Ehrlichman machine (the Nixon aides in the Watergate cover-up -- Ed), and rules and regulations can be formulated to create an effective first ministry which runs the day-to-day management of the government.

One positive aspect of Gus Dur is that he is not trying too hard to cover up the Bulog scandal. He has no capability of doing so anyway, in this time of a free press and critical public. When all is said and done, there will be few public credibility debts to pay off, and little political capital left.

All the energy will have been spent and Gus Dur would recapitalize politically by making use of the sympathy backlash. This requires effective communications and public communications. Gus Dur would be excellent as a foreign policy president.

He is the only man in a generation with the qualities to present Indonesia to the world, being an enlightened pluralist, liberator of the human mind and preacher of religious tolerance.

He would be the most effective spokesman of Islam in the modern world, demonstrating the remarkable social resilience and tolerance that his Nahdlatul Ulama organization shows when it is at its best. His moral leadership will return if he is not embroiled in petty scandals.

His lack of effectiveness in the economic issues and domestic policy arena should be complemented by a highly capable and professional Cabinet. The Cabinet must be trimmed down to less than 20 ministries.

Political party patronage should be abandoned in favor of recruiting the most qualified persons, particularly in the economic sector. Megawati would be a powerful factor in this restructuring, as she would have to lend her stamp of approval to her party's legislators -- the largest single group in the House of Representatives -- to orchestrate the prices. They would inherit the nation as a better functioning system.

And Gus Dur? He would be given an immutable warning from the people of Indonesia that affection for a cultural icon is not a mandate to evade rules of good governance. To avoid further degeneration, his government must stop the real destroyers of the nation who are still creating trouble.

Only when Soeharto and his cronies are put to justice and when clandestine operations to destabilize society are publicly announced will the public will breathe easier and the markets will rebound. We must forget about understanding Gus Dur and ask him to join us in practicing good governance.

The writer is a strategy consultant and political commentator. He can be reached at wimar@perspektif.net.