High-minded rhetoric on IMF unhelpful

Political scientist J. Soedjati Djiwandono wrestles with the emerging issues of nationalism and liberalism amid reports of a delay in loan installments from the International Monetary Fund (IMF).

JAKARTA (JP): The majority of reactions to a reported delay in IMF loan installments to Indonesia have been impulsive, excessive and may very well have been counterproductive.

Indonesia is not in a position to act in such a manner toward the IMF. The IMF has the backing of the major world economic powers and has much less to lose, if it can lose at all, than Indonesia, which is in a desperate situation.

Opportunities to claim "independence" and "self-sufficiency" are becoming increasingly scarce in the interdependent modern world.

To say that the IMF package violates the 1945 Constitution reflects a lack of prudence on the part of the Indonesian government when they agreed to the deal.

Even worse, it was the President himself who signed the agreement. Soeharto is renowned for his zealous interpretation of the letter, if not the spirit, of the Constitution.

Furthermore, to argue that the IMF package would result in a liberal economic system is hypocritical because in fact we have been trying to develop just such a system ourselves, although not with great consistency.

Liberalization and a liberal system are part and parcel of the changes brought by globalization, an unavoidable reality for all countries of the world. In this light, must we reject all forms of outside interference?

Political terms are elastic. Roles played by external powers tend to be referred to as help, aid, assistance or cooperation, if gladly received. However, when outside attention becomes unwelcome terms such as external interference and intervention in our domestic affairs are bandied around.

The IMF represents a body of nation states. In the world of international relations the behavior of nation-states is governed by how to best represent selfish national interests at any given time. Altruism is never a factor in foreign policy.

Therefore, the notion of aid without strings is a myth. The term is diplomatic jargon and should be understood as such. However, a small degree of hypocrisy can help human relationships, and at the final analysis, relations between states are relations between individual human beings acting on behalf of national interests.

On a guarded note, one should be cautious in drawing upon references to the pride and dignity of the nation. The pride and dignity of the nation stems from the pride and dignity of the individuals who are its constituent parts.

Under monetary, financial, and economic pressures, more and more people are losing their jobs. To ordinary people, a job cements a lifestyle and is a recognition of human dignity. Thus to lose a job, except of one's own free will, is to lose dignity and self-respect.

It is easy for the affluent and powerful to be glib about nationalism, national pride and national dignity. But for the common people, the poor and downtrodden, the jobless and the needy, the daily struggle to get enough to eat is a more pertinent question.

Their stomachs cannot wait, and they cannot stomach high rhetoric. But they understand human dignity and self-respect.