History repeating itself in RI political behavior

Berni K. Moestafa, The Jakarta Post, Jakarta

When Indonesia held its first general election in 1955, the political parties were polarized along the lines of nationalist, Islamic and communist groupings.

Forty four years later, with the exception of the Communists, the 1999 election presented a similar picture, and experts forecast more of the same for the 2004 election.

What it shows, they say, is the absence of political education.

"If we draw a line from 1955 to now, nothing has changed," historian Anhar Gonggong said on Tuesday.

Recent party maneuvers suggest that they are drifting into loose coalitions defined by their nationalist or Islamic traits.

Nationalist-leaning Golkar is seen making overtures to the equally nationalist Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle (PDI- Perjuangan). The two have between them the biggest share of the vote in the country.

Small Islamic parties like the Crescent Star Party and the Justice Party recently met in what some suspected was a move to explore the likelihood of a coalition.

But such maneuvers appear to echo those of parties in the early fifties, a time when Indonesia was still a federal republic.

In the political landscape of that time, the Indonesian National Party (PNI), occupied the position where the nationalistic-leaning PDI Perjuangan and Golkar are now.

Elsewhere, a cluster of Islamic oriented parties such as Masyumi and Nahdlatul Ulama (NU) were viable competitors to the PNI.

But the joker in the pack was the Communists, who took the nation aback when the Indonesian Communist Party (PKI) gained fourth position. Communism has since been discredited, but Marxism itself remains an attractive ideology, traces of which can be found in today's Democratic People's Party (PRD).

Anhar said that voters in the fifties and today went for the parties they felt closest to. Thus, traditional-minded Muslims went for Islamic parties, nationalists for the PNI or today's Golkar and the PDI Perjuangan.

Party manifestos and programs had nothing to do with winning an election, he said. "Today campaigning is about getting a crowd together, and people come because of the fun."

Consequently, he said, parties had failed to develop a sense of accountability to their constituents.

This would help explain the frequent complaints about the parties jostling for power while neglecting the voters' interests.

A public outcry ensued earlier this month after legislators scuttled a political probe into Golkar chairman and House Speaker Akbar Tandjung -- the suspect in a corruption case.

The parties' past promises to fight corruption have been shown to be empty, and critics say that new pledges are now regarded as mere rhetoric.

The ongoing process of amending the 1945 Constitution, with minimum public participation, has also drawn fire as the parties haggle to promote their political interests. Critics say it comes as no surprise that one of the most contentious issues revolves around direct presidential elections.

Anhar said a political party's life began with inspiration from the public. The party then fought for seats in the government and the legislature so as to give flesh to the inspiration through policies.

"People now join a political party because of power. They join for all the wrong reasons."

He said this attitude separated the parties from their constituents.

"Compared to 1955, the parties now are more pragmatic. In fact, so pragmatic that they are totally oblivious to the interests of the nation," said political observer Fachry Ali.

He said that in the fifties the parties campaigned based upon ideology. Now it was more about securing power through backdoor deals and compromises. Ideology, he said, had become expendable.

Another sign of decay was the importance of voter affection for the figures who led or were affiliated to parties. Fachry explained that this factor had helped the PDI-Perjuangan come first in the 1999 election. The party had a major advantage in the fact that its chairwoman Megawati Soekarnoputri was the daughter of Indonesia's first President Sukarno.

Fachry said that in 1955 ideology was more the determining factor, although around that time political analyst Herbert Feith identified a number of traits that voters sought in party leaders. These were not so different from the public's preferences today.

Fachry, however, expected people to be more rational in the 2004 election given that most parties had failed their constituents.

But the responsibility for educating the public about politics rested with the government, the parties and the press, he said.