Learning from the poll results

Learning from the poll results

By J. Soedjati Djiwandono

JAKARTA (JP): Barely 48 hours after election day on May 29,
Golkar had received more than 74 percent, PPP almost 24 percent,
and PDI just slightly above 3 percent of the votes cast.

So far there has been no report on the exact voter turnout,
nor the number of invalid votes. The usual high turnout may have
less to do with the degree of political consciousness than with
the general pliability of Indonesians, many of whom regard their
right to vote as an obligation as a "good citizen".

Yet it seems unlikely that the final count is going to change
the ratio in any significant way. Thus, the present tentative
result may be regarded as representing a fairly accurate picture
of the present position of each of the three parties.

Although Golkar has won more votes than its original target of
a little over 70 percent, there is nothing spectacular about its
victory. It is to be expected. Any group with the resources at
Golkar's disposal could have done equally well: most favorable
treatment by the government; seemingly almost unlimited funds;
the backing of the entire bureaucracy, civilian as well as
military, from top to bottom; laws and regulations in its favor;
earlier campaigns, particularly the so-called "meetings with
cadres" across the nation; the government it supports supposed to
be beyond criticism; and monopoly over access to the computer
database recording the election results.

Yet, under the circumstances, PPP has done well. During the
campaign it showed more guts in asserting itself on important and
often controversial issues. But for the moment, it remains
anybody's guess as to where the additional votes for the party
have come from. It remains unclear whether its apparent pre-
election "alliance" with Megawati supporters had anything to do
with it, and how the three groups shared the votes of first-time
voters, and how many of them cast their votes. The prospect of it
becoming a major party with a chance of winning a single majority
in the future may depend primarily on its capability of changing
its image and identity from a sectarian to a truly non-sectarian
and nation-oriented party.

The most significant and most educational aspect of the
election was the PDI phenomenon. That PDI reached its lowest ebb,
not only compared with the other two contenders, but primarily
with its own past records, should be no surprise to anyone, and
no tears shed. This may have been the aim of the government's
intervention in the party's leadership crisis, to ensure a
"round" consensus, not an "oval" consensus in the (re)election of
the President, by unseating Megawati, the most likely obstacle.

PDI's miserable showing may represent the voters' disgust with
its sell out to the government and their protest of the latter's
blatant intervention. It is, in this way, a moral verdict rather
than a purely political choice.

It is a reason for optimism, that however pliant and
politically naive many Indonesians may seem, they have learned
the right lesson. One would hope this is true, particularly with
the young generation. The future of this nation is in their
hands, and the much needed political reform, not just any
change, will be their challenge. It will be their game.

Indeed, there is yet a lot to learn. But surely, time is on
their side unlike the older generation who only talk about
change, without a clear idea of what kind of change, in what
direction, and how to accomplish it.

The writer is a member of the board of directors at the Centre
for Strategic and International Studies, Jakarta.