High-minded rhetoric on IMF unhelpful
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.