Megawati, Susilo and people's choice
Suko Sudarso, Jakarta
The presidential election on Sept. 20, is likely to become a battle of symbols -- the popular-change symbol of Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono challenging the authority-stability symbol of Megawati Soekarnoputri.
Any political competition should not result in a one-sided critical judgment of one of the candidates, in this case, Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono. The article entitled Weighing pluses and minuses of candidates (The Jakarta Post, Sept. 8, 2004) is misleading. In my view, the article will lead to misperceptions about Susilo. The writer has tried to find good points about the Megawati regime, but has included inconsistencies and misleading information about Susilo.
It is therefore a must to fairly and objectively scrutinize this writer's biased political evaluation and highlight the subjectivity that colors his article.
Susilo, in fact, was not centrally involved in military operations including the attack on the Indonesian Democratic party (PDI) headquarters, the killing of students at the Trisakti campus, and the Semanggi tragedy during the New Order era. Being a military officer and a constitutionalist, Susilo has always reaffirmed he is ready to take responsibility for any incidents and to face due legal process should accusations about him be brought to court.
It seems that the writer also tends to put aside Susilo's role during his tenure as political and security coordinating minister. Megawati's administration owes much of its political stability to Susilo. Susilo's political role was crucial in her last term. Although we cannot say he was too determinant, without Susilo, Megawati would not have been able to promote political stability in the country and would likely have failed to overcome regional conflicts in war-torn Aceh, Ambon, Poso and Papua.
In terms of political stability, Susilo, on the contrary, realizes more work needs to be done in this critical transitional period. In detail, Susilo sees three areas -- the pillars of the state -- which need more work: first, national consensus, values and personal identity; second, national integration, encompassing territorial integrity, the state philosophy Pancasila and social cohesion; and thirdly, dealing with the increasing level of sectarian conflict.
Whoever is elected president should put these three concerns on the national agenda.
The three years of Megawati's administration have not resulted in the institution of the reform mandate she came to power on. Susilo, the challenger, is the presidential aspirant who has the fewest influences from the New Order regime, while Megawati, the incumbent, is the presidential candidate who now represents the "euphoria of the New Order".
Indonesia will have the same leadership style if she is re- elected president -- the status quo of a weak and crooked national leadership will continue. In the long term, it will result in collusion among elites in the executive, legislative and judicative institutions and this in turn will negatively impact the Indonesian people. Of course, it will also hamper the recovery of the economic sector, social development, good governance and law enforcement.
We also should have taken a lesson from Megawati's administration after the 1999 general election.
Charisma without good technical ability can only generate weak and crooked administrations in central and regional governments. Megawati's party coalition is riven with internal disputes and does not communicate efficiently or effectively. This coalition will worsen the country's existing problems and will only bring about more distrust of political parties and of democracy itself.
The coalition of numerous ruling parties will result in a coalition of interests; a weak central government will be associated with dirty deals and ineffective and dysfunctional systems. People will lose their civil power and become the victims of this short-term self interest.
The longer this weak and crooked government rules, the more it will create a dangerous and unstable political situation in the country.
This uncertainty eventually will hamper the country's transition to democracy and could even halt it.
As to anxieties as to whether Susilo would be able to overcome a desire to suppress human rights, freedom of the press and put the military under civilian control, Susilo realizes these three issues are crucial to the future of the country and has pledged to maintain the freedom of the press and put the military under civilian control.
What the article says about Jusuf Kalla is also groundless. Susilo and Kalla have reaffirmed in their campaign that they will build a fair, secure and prosperous country by involving all the country's racial groups without discriminating between native and Chinese Indonesians.
Megawati, on the contrary, has not been able to eradicate corruption or increase jobs in the country. Kwik Kian Gie, the head of Bappenas (the National Development Planning Board) and also the state minister of development, once noted Indonesia has experienced swelling domestic and foreign debts under Megawati's administration. Megawati also refuses to start talks with overseas creditors.
On servicing the government's domestic debt, under Megawati's cabinet banks' obligations to the government have been sold to private foreign-owned firms at prices far lower than the cost of the debts.
Susilo, currently the people's choice in these elections, has a professional military background and a commitment to the military pledge Sapta Marga. Surely the people are not 100 percent wrong in their conviction Susilo would be the best leader for the country who could bring them a better life.
Morality and logic will play vital roles in the selection of either Susilo -- the transformation icon, or Megawati -- the status quo icon.
The intellectual Jusuf Wanandi should not ignore the evidence.
The writer is an executive member of Susilo-Kalla campaign Team and the head of the YKPK (Nationhood, Brotherhood Foundation), a former activist of GMNI-ITB and the former of the deputy head of PDI-P's Research and Development office.