Gus Dur and pace of reform

It is indeed "a puzzlement" that the same population that tolerated repression, oppression, corruption and official violence for 32 years will not allow the new government even six months to rebuild the rotting institutions they inherited -- particularly the banking, legal and judicial systems. Instead there are demands for resignations and special sessions of the House of Representatives (DPR), and even talk of impeachment.

Is this fair or productive? It is a healthy development that in the New Indonesia public criticism of high officials whose performance is substandard is permitted and actually encouraged by President Abdurrahman Wahid (Gus Dur). But when the criticism is motivated by personal or partisan political ambition, which some of the current criticism seems to be, it is not only dishonest but also life-threatening to the new government and the nation.

In the face of extreme national tension in the critical days immediately following the election, Gus Dur inspired a confidence that kept rival political groups calmed and supportive of the ideal of national unity. He succeeded in moving the military branch of government to where it belongs, to a position subordinate to civil authority. He has even handled some problems effectively by seeming not to handle them. Some of the President's missteps might be characterized as serious; e.g. his rash promises to community groups, made without consultation with the DPR. Such mistakes should be challenged. But there is a big difference between a serious mistake, or even multiple serious mistakes, and culpable failure. It seems beyond all proportion to charge the President at this point with failing in his responsibilities.

No president or economic affairs minister or attorney general could solve Indonesia's problems, as deeply entrenched and far- reaching as they are, in a few months. Decisive and honest action, not instant results, may be a better test of their performance. Arief Budiman identified a key weakness in the President's inventory of skills, his lack of a modern approach to management. However, Gus Dur's key strengths, his personal integrity and credible devotion to the people of Indonesia, more than compensate for his lesser vices. Is there anyone better equipped to accomplish what the country needs to accomplish during the first stage of becoming a real democracy, than this President?

DONNA K. WOODWARD

Medan, North Sumatra