Putin and Megawati: Trial by public support

Putin and Megawati: Trial by public support

Dmitri Kosyrev
Political Columnist
RIA Novosti
Moscow

"Political twins" -- that's how this writer have described the
Presidents of Indonesia and Russia in Jakarta's media some months
ago. It's not mystic fate that constantly brings Megawati
Soekarnoputri and Vladimir Putin to very similar situations --
it's the surprising likeness of our two countries, both passing
from the authoritarian regimes to some unknown bright future via
the trials of democracy.

Right now the oncoming presidential elections in both
countries show the same likeness. In both Indonesia and Russia we
are witnessing the complete breakdown of a predicted pattern "the
democrats defeat the old authoritaritarians". Rather, Indonesia
and Russia are both repeating the fate of the East European
countries, where the classic liberals, after initial victories,
are loosing to the more traditional powers, the offsprings of the
previous regimes.

The election of Vladimir Putin for the second term is to be in
March, while the test-run of the new political situation -- the
elections to Parliament -- already happened in December.
Indonesia will follow, holding parliamentary elections on April
5, and its first direct presidential election on July 5.

So there is yet another chance for Indonesia to look at the
similarities of our political landscape -- and learn. The
similarities are many, among them the fact that both contenders
are going to run against a woman, and most probably defeat that
woman easily. In the Russian case it's a liberal candidate --
Irina Khakamada, half-Japanese. In the Indonesian -- Siti
Hardijanti Rukmana

The similarities do not end here. Both presidents are enjoying
economic success after years of crisis, therefore both are
counting on voter's support. Russia leads. An unusual problem for
Vladimir Putin is too much of popularity, too much of public
support.

The Russian president is considered to win the election hands
down, and that may cause a peculiar problem: There will be no
voter's turnout, and hence -- no elections, or at least an
insufficient legitimacy of the president. Therefore the biggest
problem for Putin's electoral headquarters is how to make the
voters get out of their houses and head for the polls in March.

The voters may succumb to that. But can there be decent
elections without a decent opposition candidate at all? Putin
does not want to be unopposed. The problem is in the funding. At
least three formerly big and powerful Russian parties -- namely,
the Liberal Democrats, the Communists and the Alliance of the
Right -- are not likely to receive any funding for their
campaigns from any big Russian companies.

Nobody wants to waste money. Therefore some candidates with
relatively respectable results in the previous presidential
elections have announced their decision not even to try it this
time. Putin will be a very lonely candidate in March.

Should President Megawati contemplate the same trick in July?
It can be done, if what I read in the Post is true -- namely,
that President Megawati's PDI-P and Golkar, likely to occupy the
top positions in the April elections, will nominate a joint team
for the presidential elections: A presidential candidate from one
party, a vice-presidential from the other. A Megawati-Golkar team
would dominate the Indonesian political scene, and if the
economic growth goes on, that kind of team may try to rival
Putin's success.

It's interesting to see how it happened to Russia. The
December election resulted not only in the huge win for the
"Putin's party", called United Russia, now commanding about 2/3
of the seats. It has brought an expected defeat for the
Communists, now reduced to a minority parliamentary faction after
years of dominating the House. And -- significantly -- a complete
disaster for the power that was supposed to rule Russia after the
Communists, the Russian pro-Western, pro-Globalist liberals, now
called the Alliance of the Right.

In the eyes of many the "democratic process" in Russia meant
the transition of power from the "old regime' -- the Communists
-- to the liberals. But the Rightists have been thrown out of the
Parliament completely. The Putin centrists captured all the
stage.

The underlying reasons of all these changes is that the
Russian voter wants stability, not the party struggle, not the
debate. The voter makes the connection between the arrival of
Putin (around 2000), the economic growth that started around the
same time, and the ensuing reduction of all political struggle
and competition.

The greatest irony of it all was the pre-December reluctance
of the Liberals to oppose "Putin's party" in the campaign: The
Liberals knew very well that opposition to Putin promised no
votes. But, if so, if there is a complete public support for one
ideology -- ideology of stability and consent -- what are the
Liberals for? Thus spoke the voter and elected something akin to
a one-party Parliament.

The West -- whatever goes by that name -- have been grooming
the Russian Liberals for power for many years. The miserable
result of these efforts have been a profound shock for many
outside Russia (and inside America or Europe). You can hear the
effects of this shock in the rather feeble talk that Putin has
put an end to the Russian democracy.

But what can you do if the voters, not Putin did it? What can
you do if the Russian society itself has now a profound dislike
to one of the fundamentals of any democracy -- the political
competitiveness, associating it with chaos, economic crisis and
loss of national territory? Should you establish the dictatorship
of the liberals, maybe? The sorry state of the Alliance of the
Right gives a good answer to that.

At the end of last week they hold a party congress where they
learned that many local party cells are in favor of voting for
Putin in March and not for the very liberal Khakamada lady. Which
means that the Alliance is as good as dead.

So this is what may -- just may -- happen in Indonesia if the
country discovers that there is no basic difference between
Golkar and PDI-P, that there is a chance of their alliance, if
not merger. If the voter sees that this merger means stability
and economic growth, his support to the new alliance may be
overwhelming. Russia's experience shows it very well.

The current winner of the December elections, the United
Russia, had in fact been two parties only four years ago, and one
of it's halves even did not support Putin at the previous
elections. Only now Russia is witnessing the full impact of that
merger.

The last question is: Are the Putin critics right? Are we
witnessing the willing, democratic reversal of Russia to an old
authoritarian regime minus the Communism? If so, should -- and
could -- Indonesia revert to the old authoritarian ways if it
finally achieves the similar stability?

The answer to it is that nobody can return to the past, even
if the voter wants it. Stability and economic development does
not need to be authoritarian. In fact, the economy is the most
irreversible thing in the world.

If you look at the economic plans of Russia presented by the
Vice-Premier Alexey Kudrin at the Davos World Economic Forum
conference, you'll see that it's as liberal and future-oriented
as any liberal's dream. While the politics...if Vladimir Putin is
Russia's future disguised as it's past, and if the voter likes it
this way -- then why not elect him for the second term ? And why
not study his experience even in Indonesia?