More is less

Last week was certainly not an ordinary week. Two new political parties were established and publicly declared. The first is the Bung Karno Nationalist Party (PNBK) led by Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle (PDI Perjuangan) dissident Eros Djarot, and the other is the Unity, Democracy and Nationhood Party (PPDK) led by former state minister of regional autonomy Ryaas Rasyid. Another new party, under the leadership of noted economist Sjahrir, is scheduled to be declared in the next few weeks, bringing the number of existing political parties to more than 180.

Welcome to democracy. Five years ago nobody would believe such things could happen in this country. Our democracy is surely moving. But, on the other side, as our democracy blossoms -- as demonstrated by the mushrooming number of political parties -- problems and the shortcomings of our political party system are also revealed.

First, more is less. The growing number of political parties turn out to be insufficient to accommodate public aspirations. The fact that new parties continue to be formed is proof that the existing ones don't fulfill people's expectations. It is sad to say that some of the new parties are nothing but political ventures by fly-with-the-wind adventurer politicians, established for personal gain, or are products of politicians with too much self-confidence and believe they have, or will get, support from the masses.

They should learn from the 1999 elections. More than 40 political parties participated in the 1999 elections and more than two thirds could not get enough votes to claim their very existence. The 1999 elections also revealed that it was the greedy small parties, which dominated the Election Committee that created problems. Some of them have folded, but like zombies many of them are awake again possibly to try another adventure.

Second, the current system only allows a single entry to the road to power, and that is through political parties. They have to vie in the general elections to win seats in the legislature. Thus, independent candidates have to join existing parties in order to become a legislator. Since we have yet to apply a full district electoral system, the party executive board still has the power to control the lineup of the candidates. Hence, many believe current legislators are not representative of the people but of the parties.

The disgruntled public are also upset by the current performance of political parties, which are colored by scandals and money politics. Disillusioned aspiring politicians have, therefore, no other way except to form their own party, regardless of its grassroots support.

Third, with regard to ideology, there is no substantial change in the Indonesian political landscape. Three ideologies remain dominant: Islam, Nationalism and Socialism, with a number of variants of the three. On the extreme left is the small but militant People's Democratic Party (PRD), with the Crescent Star Party (PBB) on the far right. While sitting in the middle with different degrees of leaning, either to the right or to the left, are the rest of the parties. PDI Perjuangan and the Golkar Party share the same ideology of secular nationalism and are right in the middle.

The 1999 elections revealed that political Islam, which gained only about 15 percent of the votes, is less appealing to the majority. Although in the last several years we have seen a blossoming of cultural Islam, coupled with a surge of radicalism among young Muslims, we believe it will not drastically change the future election results.

In this context, one can understand why most newly established political parties will try to win PDI Perjuangan and Golkar votes, which are riddled with internal conflicts and are prone to incursions. The PNBK will try to steal votes from dissatisfied PDI Perjuangan, while the PPDK (which will rely on Ryaas Rasyid's Institute for Governmental Studies networks) will offer a safe haven for Golkar members who want to distance themselves from their old past.

Yet, we still believe that these new parties are unlikely to accommodate public aspirations. Looking around, one can see that there are still many of Indonesia's brightest and best who prefer to stay out of politics, and given the poor quality of existing parties, their choice is probably right.

In democracy, we need checks and balances. Those who prefer to stay out of politics are able to join the media, non-governmental organizations or become academics to counter the power of government and political parties. That way the empowered public can help balance the powers that be. And as our democratization process matures, we can always improve our political party system to meet future challenges.