Habibie's leadership so far so good: Liddle

JAKARTA (JP): It's been almost three month since B.J. Habibie assumed the presidency on May 21 but many still think the man who used to be known as Indonesia's hi-tech czar has yet to find his feet in his new position.

People began campaigning for his removal as soon as he assumed office. Others want him to be "more firm" and not yield meekly to pressure groups making their demands in the name of reform.

Some groups have condemned him for what is perceived as "old nepotism habits dying hard" because the President has appointed people close to him to positions such as ambassadors. But then even some of those comparatively close to him consider the man a weak leader.

R. William Liddle, a respected political science professor at Ohio State University and a long-time Indonesian observer, shared with The Jakarta Post yesterday his views on Habibie's leadership and a variety of other issues.

Question: What is your evaluation of President B.J. Habibie's leadership so far?

Answer: I think President Habibie's leadership has been very positive. Both in economic and political performance. And I think the two obviously go together, because if the economic reform is not successful and the economy gets worse, it will affect political reform as well.

And I agree with the 15 economists who are pushing Habibie to be clear about his support for the International Monetary Fund, not to be so populist and so forth. I think that's right. But as far as I am concerned, the main line of Habibie's economic policy has been pro-IMF.

With the support of (senior economist) Widjojo Nitisastro, the active participation of Ginandjar (Kartasasmita, the coordinating minister for economy, finance and industry) ...that's what he should be doing. So it's good that the economists are pressing him, but he's on the right path.

On the political side, I think that President Habibie took a very bold step, a very politically wise step in supporting free elections, and next May... the timetable is right. I think it takes that much time to begin to prepare for the elections properly... but it has to follow the right schedule.

That's to say there has to be a debate on the election law, which will happen next month I believe, or maybe sooner than that. That's good, (with) proposals from the government and from others, the DPR (House of Representatives) will create a new election law. It will be democratic I hope. That's, as far as I can see, President Habibie's intention to make it democratic.

So you have an election law, then you have a special session of the MPR (People's Consultative Assembly) to change the date of the elections (from 2002 as decided during former president Soeharto's regime to next year). And you have the elections next May, and you have free competition among political parties, so those general policies are right. We will see what the actual election law will look like.

Q: In short, so far so good?

A: Yes, so far so good is my short answer.

Q: What is likely to be the most likely pitfall on the way to democratization?

A: We see for example the election law. If it follows the 10 percent rule that says political parties that don't get 10 percent of the seats will not be able to compete in the next election... that's bad, that will be a big pitfall.

It will make too many enemies, political parties that fear they might get less than 10 percent, especially regional parties... so that's a very bad idea.

Q: The number of seats proposed for ABRI (Armed Forces) in the DPR and MPR is 55. What do you think?

A: Well, I don't know. But I think it's inevitable for the short term that there has to be ABRI representation. But in the long term, if President Habibie is committed to democracy, I think there is no place for ABRI in the DPR... maybe in the MPR, but not in the DPR.

Q: And do you think it should be clearly stated in the new laws?

A: No, I think (that would be) too early. It's a political matter and I think it will take some time (to decide).

Q: More than 50 parties have been set up over the past three months. What is the significance of this?

A: I am not worried. It doesn't matter. Every democratic transition (witnesses the emergence of) many political parties. The political parties that win in the elections are very few. There are many big egos... and we will see more big egos. But the people who get supported will be very few.

Q: Are there threats of disintegration because of the many political parties?

A: No. It's a reflection of a transition and it's a reflection of a long period of authoritarianism in which many people have been frustrated... politically.

Q: In which areas has President Habibie not done enough to restore market confidence in the rupiah?

A: You know I am a political scientist, so I don't know very much. But my impression is the foreign markets also see Habibie as a weak president. So they understand that he had chosen the right policies. But they don't believe he'll be in power long enough to enforce them.

Now my own personal opinion is that Habibie is stronger, and more likely to stay in power. My opinion is different from the foreign markets. But my sense is that the foreign markets see Habibie as a weak figure.

This year-end's special MPR session will help (when it approves his presidency), but the only real help will probably come in 1999 when we have a new president, which could be Habibie. (aan)