Golkar's hostile stance?

Golkar's hostile stance?

Is President Megawati Soekarnoputri losing her biggest
coalition supporter in the House of Representatives? That
question arises after leaders of the second largest party in the
legislature, Golkar, came out last week with harsh criticisms of
various policies of President Megawati Soekarnoputri's
government.

The question is not, however, prompted by the criticisms
themselves. After all, as the second largest faction in the
House, Golkar has the right, and even the obligation, to exercise
effective control over the government. But it is rather
heightened by the timing of the attack, the ammunition used to
shoot at the government and the sudden turnaround in Golkar's
stance as regards some policies the party had previously
supported.

That the lambasting took place only a few days after Golkar
chairman Akbar Tandjung was declared a suspect in the Bulog
corruption scandal by the Attorney General implied that the
criticisms were not made in good faith as part of an effort to
suggest better, alternative policies.

The party slammed the government's policies on rice, fuel,
telecommunications, education and the privatization of state
companies.

One cannot help but feel that the attack reflects more than
disillusionment on the part of Golkar leaders over what they see
as a lack of support from President Megawati in preventing Akbar
from being charged as a suspect.

Take for example Golkar's outright opposition to the sale of
state-controlled PT Semen Gresik to Mexico's Cemex and to the
asset swap between PT Telkom and PT Indosat, both state
telecommunications companies.

The arguments Golkar adduces to support its point of view do
not make any sense at all. Claiming that selling off Semen Gresik
is against the policy of the People's Consultative Assembly, the
country's top legislative body, as no law has yet been passed on
privatization is entirely irrational.

The privatization program has been repeatedly mandated in MPR
decrees, and has consistently been embodied in state budget laws
over the past decade and in the government reform program agreed
on with the International Monetary Fund since 1997. That the
implementation of the program has suffered many delays is
entirely true, but that does not render it in violation of the
law.

Why, then, is Golkar now suddenly taking up arms against the
Telkom-Indosat asset swap that was concluded in February, 2001,
as part of the reform of the two state companies in anticipation
of the end of their monopolies in 2003?

Despite all the questions, it is too early to conclude that
the adversarial stance expressed by Golkar leaders will become
its permanent political posture, meaning that it would
indiscriminately oppose any reform policy to be proposed by the
government to the House. Perhaps the attack is simply a tactic by
Golkar to warn President Megawati of what would likely be the
cost to her government of Akbar's prosecution.

Yet, we still find it difficult to believe that all Golkar
leaders could be so insensible, irrational and narrow-minded as
to put the interests of their party, or those of their chairman,
above the national interest and, by so doing, destroy the future
of their party.

Whichever the case may be, President Megawati should stand
firm and allow the due process of law to run its course. Any sign
of compromise on the part of Megawati as regards the legal
process against Akbar would damage her credibility and would
destroy the public's confidence in her government's commitment to
combating corruption, collusion and nepotism.

Political harassment by the Golkar faction in the House could
make things more difficult for the government, which is now
racing against time to simultaneously pursue various policy
reforms as part of a concerted effort to speed up the economic
recovery. Losing Golkar's support would be especially detrimental
now when the government badly needs that support for the smooth
implementation of a series of painful measures to be taken this
month, such as the raising of fuel prices, and electricity and
telecommunications charges. A hostile Golkar party could also
produce negative reverberations in provincial and district
legislatures and administrations where the party plays a dominant
role.

But if the price of Golkar support is backtracking on the
reform movement, notably the fight against corruption, such an
alliance is not worthwhile at all. What is the value of support
from a party that prefers its own interests, and those of its
chairman, to the nation's aspirations?

We believe President Megawati's steadfast resistance to Golkar
pressure will earn her government the support of the other
factions in the House and the full confidence of the people. Even
if Golkar was able to canvas the support of some other House
factions, Megawati could still appeal directly to the people to
back her fight in keeping the reform movement on the right track.