Is Indonesia loosing its Moorings?

S.P. Seth, Sydney

Now that Indonesia's Constitutional Court has rejected the challenge to last month's presidential election result from Gen. Wiranto, a presidential candidate, the two-horse race between Gen. Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono and President Megawati Soekarnoputri can proceed in earnest. Susilo obviously has a clear edge with his 34 percent votes against 26 percent polled by Megawati. The candidates identified with political Islam, Hamzah Haz and Amien Rais, failed to make popular impact. The Golkar Party candidate, Wiranto, polled impressively with 22 percent votes.

What does this mean for the September poll? Obviously, the 22 percent polled by Wiranto will be crucial to determining the winning candidate. In other words, both Susilo and Megawati will be competing to do political deals with the Golkar Party.

The Golkar, though, will not be able to deliver bloc votes to their preferred candidate. Indonesia's electoral politics doesn't work like that. People will be affected by electoral bribes, image politics, regional and religious factors. Still Wiranto's personality and Golkar's institutional machine will be an important factor in swaying votes.

However, political horse-trading will greatly damage the nascent institution of democracy. Soeharto fell because his system was rotten to the core. When people went after him, they wanted something better to replace it. This is how democracy came to Indonesia in its new garb. Since then, the new system hasn't acquitted too well.

True, there are now elections and there is some accountability due to electoral politics. But there is no new star on the horizon. New politics is a game of musical chairs with the same old faces rotating and subverting the system.

But the system is still evolving and there is some hope about its future. For instance, the election showed that Indonesia still remains a largely eclectic society eschewing fanaticism. The Jamaah Islamiyah and other facets of political Islam do not represent its core but only its periphery.

This is not to suggest that they are not important and dangerously divisive. A tightly knit and ideologically driven group (s) can cause damage disproportionate to their numbers. Nevertheless, their pretensions to represent Indonesian society and culture are not borne out by popular support.

Another important aspect of Indonesia's evolving democracy is the dispersal of power. There are now multiple layers of political power and patronage embedded in regional and local institutions. The democratic process is still skewed and political patronage is corrupting, but it now has a local content. The power doesn't always now flow from the top end of the town as under Soeharto. There is a local and regional flavor to it.

But unless Indonesia's new democracy delivers economically and socially at the grassroots level, it will be lacking in popular legitimacy. Even though the social base of the ruling oligarchy has expanded a bit (to include elements of a new middle class) from Soeharto's political clan, it is still an oligarchy of sorts. Unless people can see some hope for their future democracy will not have much meaning or relevance for them. In that case, they are easy tools for extremism of all sorts.

The rise of political Islam (or its offshoot, terrorism) in the world has its roots in such popular frustration turned into anger. Take Middle East, for instance. There is a deep rooted sense in these countries that the United States (and the West in general) has thwarted their political and economic aspirations by aligning with Israel and regional Arab despots. The United States is seen simply as interested in their oil wealth and propping up Israel as their regional gendarme.

This sense of injustice has now spread to non-Arab Muslim countries, following the global campaign against terrorism- regarded as a code word for Muslims all over the world. And this is having its effects in Indonesia as well. As one Indonesian radio journalist reportedly said, "America is destroying the world. It is trying to divide us and create conflict here in Indonesia by creating these terrorist groups."

Many people in Indonesia would seem to share this perception of America's role, even though they wouldn't want it translated into the country's electoral politics. They are still wary of political Islam, but do not like their government being a hand- maiden of US interests and dictates. Popular perceptions are not always right but they become popular reality. One way to turn around such perceptions is for people to have a stake in their country's growth and prosperity. That sadly is lacking, and the country's democracy doesn't seem to be making much headway in that direction.

Another form of extremism in Indonesia might take the shape of a relapse into the familiar rule of the generals. One detects a certain nostalgia for the 'good old days of iron discipline' when everybody knew his/her place in social order decreed by the mighty General Soeharto.

Its seeds are pretty much there in the fact that of the top three presidential candidates in July election, the first and third were military generals from the Soeharto era. Indeed, their combined votes of 56 percent seemed to have decided the election in their favor in their new civilian garb. Only time will tell if the generals have been co-opted into the new evolving system or democracy is their new tool. People certainly will have the old familiar system to fall back upon, if the transition to democracy is not working to improve their existence.

There is another, harsher, explanation for Indonesia's predicament. In a recent article in an Australian newspaper, its writer John van Tiggelen quoted the celebrated Indonesian author Pramoedya Ananta Toer to say that he only saw Indonesia heading towards destruction. Because: "Indonesia has no character as a nation...Indonesians have a very low mentality. That's why I urge young people to try and create their own culture...It's the youth who made Indonesia independent, who overthrew Soeharto. And it's the youth who must finish the revolution."

Toer's is a Maoist recipe of starting all over anew. And we know that the Cultural Revolution was disastrous for China. But he has a valid point that without the mobilization of Indonesia's youth, the country's appears to be losing its moorings.

The author, freelance writer, can be reached at SushilPSeth@aol.com