Is democratization in Indonesia plausible?

With the President already at an advanced age, succession of power has always loomed large in Indonesian politics. Arief Budiman examines the issue.

JAKARTA (JP): During my public talks, many people have asked me about succession in Indonesia. Would it be peaceful or violent? Evolutionary or revolutionary? Or a mixture of the two?

This concern is understandable, because the President is quite old now. He said in the early 1990s that if people think he is no longer capable to govern the country, he has to be replaced. He said jokingly that he was already "TOP" meaning tua, ompong dan pikun (old, toothless and senile), so somebody has to be prepared to replace him.

Although the Constitution stipulates how succession has to be conducted, everybody knows that important political decisions are often made by strong political figures or groups, sometimes against existing rules. The struggle of who will be the next president will not be decided in the MPR (People's Consultative Council), but outside it. The council will only formalize the decision already made somewhere else.

In his latest book, The Third Wave: Democratization in the Late Twentieth Century (1991), American political scientist Samuel Huntington highlighted four possible kinds of transition from authoritarianism to democracy. The first is transformation. In this case, the state liberalizes its political institutions and democratization comes from above. Taiwan is one example where democratization was initiated by the state.

The second possible kind of transition is replacement. In this case, the state is forced to democratize by the civil society. One example is the Philippines during the change of guard from Ferdinand Marcos to Cory Aquino.

Intervention is the third kind of transition which involves democratization from an external power. For instance, the case of Panama in which U.S. forces attacked and arrested the president of the military government. After that a democratic election was held in the country.

Transplacement is the final kind of transition which is a mixture between the process of "transformation" and "replacement". The state negotiates with the people to democratize the country. Poland is one example when Lech Walesa from the Solidarity Union emerged as the alternative leader of the country and began negotiations with the military. This resulted in a democratic general election held under the auspices of the military.

In my opinion, the most plausible option for Indonesia is "transplacement". There are at least two reasons for this.

First, the most organized and powerful political institution in this country is still the military. Although there are different opinions among top military leaders on how to run this country in the future, this institution is still relatively unified. It would be difficult for the process of democratization to come from Indonesian military leaders so that "transformation" would occur. The idea of democracy is still very remote in the minds of most military generals. For them democracy means chaos, a situation without effective leadership.

But the power of the civil society is increasing. People now fight back against military repression, especially after the July 27 riots. The military also has to be cautious in dealing with the Islamic community who have become more political. The way the military has handled the recent riots in Situbondo, Tasikmalaya, and Rengasdengklok is proof of this. The military is now learning that politics has to be solved through negotiation, not by military means. However, to hope that people power would grow strong enough to change the future government in the near future through the process of "replacement" is unrealistic.

Another significant pressure for Indonesia to democratize comes from the advanced industrial countries. Through the issues of East Timor, labor rights and other alleged human rights violations, it has become more difficult for Indonesian diplomats to defend their country in the international fora.

Thus, it seems "transplacement" is the most possible option, because intervention is very unlikely to happen.

Second, change is unavoidable because the strength of the military is being challenged by the growing power of civil society and pressured by powerful industrialized countries. The most likely course taken by this change would be "transplacement". If this happens, it would be supported by the business middle classes in Jakarta.

Is "transplacement" a visible option? I believe so, and Megawati's rise to power as chairperson of PDI in 1993-1994, is an example of this.

At the time, the government wanted somebody else to fill the PDI chair and therefore ousted Soerjadi in Medan. The party then held a congress in Surabaya, the continuation of the congress in Medan. However, the majority of PDI members nominated Megawati and were fanatical about her. The result was a clash of interest between the government and grassroot PDI supporters. The Surabaya meeting became an arena for this clash. It was closed without any clear idea on who was chairman of the party.

Later, after witnessing the determination of the majority of PDI members to support Megawati, the government changed its mind. Why not try Megawati? So far Megawati had been a quiet person in her role as legislator. Although PDI was a relatively "radical" party compared to the other parties, the government seemed to be convinced that under Megawati, it would not be more radical.

The result was a special meeting in Jakarta in which the process of "transplacement" took place. Megawati was officially elected as PDI chairperson after a meeting with the then Regional Military Commander of Jakarta Gen. Hendropriyono, and the daughter of the president, Mbak Tutut. The leadership of PDI was later installed, which some people suggested was a result of the military.

Now if this process of "transplacement" on a small scale has already happened, why wouldn't it happen again on a national scale? In my opinion, this is a plausible option because it would serve the interests of many existing sociopolitical and economic groups, although maybe not to their maximum satisfaction. But isn't politics the art of the possible?

The writer is a sociologist and researcher based in Salatiga.