Indonesia's nation-building process at a crossroad

Indonesia's nation-building process at a crossroad

By Aleksius Jemadu

This is the first of two articles.

BANDUNG (JP): The recent riots in Situbondo, Tasikmalaya,
Sanggau Ledo and Rengasdengklok pose a critical question on the
prospect of Indonesian political development. We are particularly
concerned that the impressive economic performance of the nation
in the last few decades would be destroyed if the cohesiveness
and unity of our pluralistic society became fragile.

So, what is wrong with our political system? Indeed, the
relationship between economic and political development in
developing countries remains one of the most debated topics among
political scientists. The riots indicate that high economic
growth may not necessarily lead to the strengthening of the
nation-building process and state institutionalization. It is
therefore important to examine the relationship between the
apparent fragility of our national unity and the basic
characteristics of political development under the New Order
government.

Let us first consider how the concept of political
development is generally understood among political scientists.
It is commonly agreed that political development is mainly
concerned with the process of establishing democratic political
institutions through which citizens can influence the making and
implementation of government policies for the achievement of
common goals.

It is evident that during the New Order government the role of
the political elite in the creation of the legislative, political
parties, mass organizations and professional organizations has
been quite dominant to the effect that the grassroots are left
with little opportunity to articulate their interests. There is
also a lot of doubt regarding the independence of these
institutions.

The government has always attempted to integrate the
leadership of the institutions into the existing political
regime. Normally the government justifies its attitude through
ideology. There is also the rationalization that too much
political participation too early would jeopardize political
stability. As social and economic upward mobility takes place,
political cooperation and patronage become a problem rather than
a solution. Since the political system is not well equipped to
accommodate the rise of new expectations, interest articulation
from below is never effective or at best manipulated by the
political elite.

The use of corporatist strategy in dealing with interest
articulation from below is known to have been common practice
under the New Order government. Within the framework of
corporatist strategy, the government establishes patterns of
interest representation which link different segments in society
and the state.

There is a fundamental difference between corporatism and
pluralism as forms of interest intermediation. Corporatism relies
heavily on regularized and state-designed channels for political
representation which are differentiated on a functional basis.
Pluralism constitutes a less structured set of arrangements in
which societal groups are organized independently from the state
and there is a certain degree of competition among social groups
in pursuing their political interests.

Alfred Stepan defines corporatism as "a particular set of
policies and institutional arrangements for structuring interest
representation. Where such arrangements predominate, the state
often charters or even creates interest groups, attempts to
regulate their number, and give them the appearance of a quasi-
representational monopoly along with special prerogatives"
(1978).

Through the corporatist strategy, the government aims to avoid
spontaneous and independent activities which might destabilize
the political system. According to Malloy, the corporatist
strategy tries "...to eliminate spontaneous interest articulation
and establish a limited number of authoritatively recognized
groups that interact with the government apparatus in defined and
regularized ways.

"The recognized groups in this type of regime are organized in
vertical functional categories rather than horizontal class
categories and are obliged to interact with the state through the
designated leaders of authoritatively sanctioned interest
associations" (1977). Social groups who are coopted by the
government, in turn, enjoy the privilege of being the only
legitimized and acknowledged organizational representatives among
the same types or groups in society. The political
marginalization of society is increasingly aggravated by the fact
that national politics is characterized more by competition among
the elite scrambling for scarce positional and material rewards.

From the perspective of political sociology, pent up emotions
due to social frustrations and political powerlessness can be easily
transformed into radical violence. The target of this violence
can be the government itself or those political and economic
groups whose interests are associated with the ruling elite. The
alienation of the grassroots from the decision-making process
could nurture the seeds of political extremism and radicalism.

It should be admitted, however, that the problem is more
complicated than just a social envy. The fact that social unrest
usually also involves some religious antagonism makes an economic
reasoning less convincing. If it is true that the main problem is
the economic gap between the rich and the poor, why are there not
more riots in the cities? A comprehensive understanding of the
riots should be found not only in the nature of our political and
economic management but also in the perceptions of the different
ethnic and religious groups toward one another. Unfortunately,
both the government and the public tend to believe that these
conflicts are just normal political turbulence prior to the
general elections.

It is high time we honestly reassessed the direction of our
political development. What should be changed in our political
system so that more genuine political participation from below
can be channeled through the existing political institutions?
What should we do in order to make this nation fit to compete
with its neighbors as we enter the third millennium?

The writer is a lecturer in the Faculty of Social and
Political Science, at the Catholic University of Parahyangan in
Bandung.

Window: The use of corporatist strategy in dealing with interest
articulation from below is known to have been common practice
under the New Order government. Within the framework of corporatist
strategy, the government establishes patterns of interest representation
which link different segments in society and the state.