Indonesia needs transformational leaders

By Aleksius Jemadu

BANDUNG (JP): Democracy will be reduced to being its own worst enemy if politicians continue to treat it as merely a matter of power politics. As we move closer to the annual session of the People's Consultative Assembly (MPR) in August, political elite are increasingly preoccupied with a political drama the plot of which is simply -- to quote Harold Lasswell's definition of politics -- "who gets what, when and how".

The leaders tend to alienate themselves from the very source of their legitimacy, the people. Rarely, if ever, have they focused their attention on the discussion of how to develop an overall strategy to solve the nation's ills.

It is no wonder that until now Indonesia has not yet developed any clear strategy other than succumbing to those imposed by the International Monetary Fund (IMF).

While the cumulative amount of foreign debt increases, nobody knows how and when the nation can pay it back.

The detention of Bank Indonesia Governor Sjahril Sabirin, by the Attorney General's Office is a case in point. Sabirin was named a suspect in the politically charged Bank Bali scandal. The actions and statements of some political leaders following Sabirin's detention have led many to conclude that this is not a legal matter but rather a political one.

Amien Rais, the Assembly Speaker, for instance, in apparent criticism of President Abdurrahman Wahid argued that Sabirin's detention amounted to political intervention by the government in the affairs of the central bank.

The politicization of Sabirin's detention illustrates a yawning gap between two kinds of logic. The first is that of the political elite who tend to confound the legal process with their political maneuvers, losing sight of the supremacy of law in the process. The second is the logic of the common people yearning for genuine respect for the law.

Instead of facilitating a badly needed stable democracy, the political elite have turned out to be a serious obstacle to the realization of that goal.

To make things worse, there seems to be a positive correlation between enmity among them and the escalation of conflicts based upon religious and ethnic affiliation in areas like Maluku, Aceh and Papua.

Another serious constraint in this regard is a perilous lack of sincerity and honesty. The politicians who strongly supported the election of Abdurrahman Wahid last year have turned out to be his most dangerous protagonists, especially in the lead up to the MPR annual session.

Indonesia can never hope to create a a stable democracy if its political elite continue to concentrate on their partisan short- term interests at the expense of national long-term goals.

A glance at the United States reveals a sharp conflict of ideas and policies as between Republicans and Democrats. However, it seems that American political leaders always manage to achieve a high level of consensus on certain core political values such as liberalism, egalitarianism and the rule of law.

If Indonesians aspire to develop a stable democracy, their political leaders should be able to provide transformational leadership both at the national and the institutional level. Transformational leadership may be defined as leadership which stresses the willingness and capability of a leader to induce change based not so much on his or her own values or interests, but those of his or her followers or constituencies.

The standard measurement of the success of this kind of leadership is whether a change benefits at least the majority, or just strengthens the position of a leader.

One writer, Richard L. Hughes, says: "Transformational leaders are not only good at appealing to followers' values, but they are also adept at reframing issues so that they are aligned with the leader's vision and followers' values, teaching followers how to become leaders in their own right, and inciting them to play active roles in the change movement."

It is no exaggeration to suggest that in Indonesia today there are more power-wielders than transformational leaders. The former is precisely the opposite of the latter.

Another writer, James Mac Gregor Burns, wrote that power- wielders are "those individuals who marshal resources and influence followers to behave in such a way as to accomplish their own personal goals or to satisfy personal needs". It is also said that power-wielders tend "to see followers as things or objects to be manipulated, rather than individuals".

We leave it to Abdurrahman, or Gus Dur, Amien Rais, Akbar Tandjung and other Indonesian politicians to make an honest judgment of just what kind of leaders they are.

The writer is a lecturer in the School of International Relations at the Parahyangan Catholic University in Bandung, West Java.