Leadership change not a utopia

Leadership change not a utopia

By Ikrar Nusa Bhakti

JAKARTA (JP): Political hope may become a political reality
even though political reality and hope are different from each
other.

Hermawan Sulistyo is right in his article "No room for
political utopia" in the Jan. 8 edition of The Jakarta Post,
saying that there is a clear difference between political reality
and political hope and that political analysis is based on
political reality, not political hope. .

However, there are still many possibilities for political hope
to become political reality.

Independence, for example, was a political hope for many
Indonesians during the colonial period and it has become a
reality since Aug. 17, 1945. During the 1950s and 1960s, there
was also political hope that one day most of the Indonesian
people would be free from communist threat and this became a
reality at the end of 1965.

Nowadays, there is still political hope among most Indonesians
that their political system of Pancasila democracy will be able
to conduct political succession peacefully. Such a hope is
expected to become reality, and based on the current political
reality, this idealistic argument is not a utopia.

Indeed, any theorist builds a theory or model based on reality
or phenomena in society. Political theory is, therefore, a
simplification and an abstract construction of the complex
political reality or political phenomenon.

Based on their perspectives, political theorists are generally
divided into idealists, realists, structuralists,
institutionalists, reductionists and so forth. Thomas Hobbes and
Machiavelli, for example, who were political theorists who
focused their observation and analyses on the power relationship
between the dominant power, the ruler or the prince, and the
people and society, for example, were regarded as realists.

But Emmanual Kant, who focused his theory on ordinary people
or human beings and recommended that any political and economic
powers or any political regimes or international agreements
should be based on the people's interests and that people must
become a subject and not an object in the political arena, was
regarded as an idealist.

The basis of Hermawan's statement and arguments in his article
are partly similar, namely political reality in Indonesia and its
neighboring countries. The difference is that Hermawan based his
argument on the realist perspective and this article on the
idealist perspective.

In analyzing political reality in Indonesia, particularly the
leadership change, this article uses not only a domestic
political theory but international relations theory as well.

Hermawan's two succession scenarios are questionable because
based on political reality, President Soeharto has been in power
for more than 30 years. If he is willing to reduce his power and
transfer the day-to-day decision-making process to the vice
president, why did not he do it in the previous five-year term or
the term before?

In addition to that, during this 30-year period, particularly
in the last 10 years, he has not prepared any vice president or
minister to become his successor. Does the country have to wait
for political succession until he is too old and too ill to
govern this country? Does he have to transfer his power to the
vice president or the new president when the country is at the
peak of political and economic crisis?

There is also no guarantee that the next vice president, who
might be regarded as the "crown prince," will be elected by the
People's Consultative Assembly (MPR) as the new president in
March 2003 because he/she will have to face many political
challenges. So why should Indonesians wait for another five years
to take political succession peacefully? Do they have to wait for
another political and economic crisis such as that which happened
in 1965?

What Indonesians need now is a new "pilot", even though he or
she is not fully capable yet. The most important thing is that he
or she is willing to learn how to govern this huge country with
all its complexity. He or she should be accepted as "first among
equals" by the people and by the political elite.

The country needs a new leader who can be accepted
domestically and internationally. It does not need an experienced
"pilot" who is already too old and not trusted by the
"passengers" anymore. If it still uses an old pilot, even though
he is very well experienced, it may go bankrupt. Much polling
undertaken by university students in Yogyakarta, Bogor and
Bandung shows that most of them do not agree with the
renomination of Soeharto.

Another example is the currency crisis in Indonesia. It is
true that a currency crisis is also hitting other Asian
countries, but not as badly as Indonesia. The rupiah plunged to a
record low of Rp 8,450 against the dollar in the morning trading
on Jan. 7 as financial markets gave a cool response to the
1998/1999 state budget. It means that the people no longer trust
the government under Soeharto's leadership and that most of
Indonesian people, except the 1,000 members of the People's
Consultative Assembly (MPR), will not trust Soeharto after March
1998.

Soeharto was capable of handling political and economic crises
over the last 30-year period because he, as a "pilot", could use
"auto pilot".

He could use "auto pilot" because he was accepted as a hero by
Indonesians; he governed in the Cold War period between 1967 and
1991 when it was easy for the government to generate foreign aid
from Western countries and international institutions; he, until
1991, could use the Armed Forces as a guard to maintain political
stability without any sharp criticism from domestic and
international human rights activists; he could use Golkar as a
political vehicle to maintain political legitimacy; industrial
relocation from the United States, Japan, Europe, South Korea,
Taiwan and Hong Kong helped boost the Indonesian economy;
economic growth in Australia and Asian countries had a positive
impact on the Indonesian economy and the country still earned a
lot of money from oil and gas exports.

Since July 1997, the Indonesian leader can no longer use the
"automatic devices" anymore but has to rely on manual ones. To be
a good "pilot", he/she must be very healthy, fit, confident,
intelligent and credible.

The next president should not only be able to direct the
"airplane" (Indonesia) for economic takeoff but also to maneuver
it manually through air turbulence (economic and political
crisis) and to bring the passengers on board (the Indonesian
people) to their destination safely. He/she should know that
economic crises in other Asian and Western countries will have a
negative impact on the Indonesian economy. And during a difficult
period, Indonesia cannot get foreign aid as easily as before.

Indonesians do not want to have the economic and political
crisis prolonged or to see "people power" topple President
Soeharto in a situation such as that of the Philippines in 1986.

Today's economic crisis has reached its peak and might be
followed by a political crisis.

Unless Soeharto makes a statement that he does not want to be
renominated for the seventh consecutive term, Indonesia's
political history of the post-communist coup attempt in 1965
could be repeated.

The writer is a researcher at the Center for Political and
Regional Studies at the Indonesian Institute of Sciences.

Window: What Indonesians need now is a new "pilot", even though he
or she is not fully capable yet. The most important thing is that
he or she is willing to learn how to govern this huge country with
all its complexity.