Is Indonesia loosing its Moorings?

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