Recollections of Sukarno: Images of a national hero

The following is the second of two articles on Sukarno by Mochtar Buchori, an educator and also a legislator of the Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle (PDI Perjuangan).

JAKARTA (JP): I began to understand the difficult position imposed upon Bung Karno and Bung Hatta; that Bung Karno could not possibly tell the people the realities and the possibilities open to the nation, as he knew it. I began to admire his skill in maneuvering between the Japanese authorities and his political supporters who advocated independence.

It really hurt to hear later that some nationalists accused Bung Karno of being a collaborator with the Japanese regime, and therefore a war criminal. I was still very immature politically, but I was convinced that such an accusation could come only from political rivals who were very envious of Bung Karno's huge popularity.

After independence was proclaimed on Aug. 17, 1945, I had more opportunity to listen to Bung Karno's speeches. His speeches during the physical revolution (1945-1948) were more appealing and sounded more genuine than those during the Japanese occupation. I felt that his speeches then truly reflected our burning desire for a national existence with dignity. I felt very proud to be Indonesian and to have Bung Karno as our leader.

I could not yet grasp the political rivalries between Bung Karno and other national leaders, but I always sided with Bung Karno. I did not care whether my stance was justified or not. I was simply a fanatical follower.

During the 1948 communist rebellion I felt very strongly Bung Karno's steadfastness in defending the basic principles of the young republic and I increasingly admired him. And when the danger of Dutch invasion into Indonesian territory became more and more imminent, I was still able to restore confidence in the future simply by listening intently to Bung Karno's speeches. His promise to lead the guerrilla warfare against the Dutch colonial army himself was a very powerful influence in restoring my sagging confidence in our ability to defend ourselves against the Dutch.

Thus, for the second time, I was deeply disappointed with Bung Karno, when he decided to surrender to the Dutch. There was no other choice except to join my friends to do whatever we could to resist the return of a Dutch colonial regime. But there were moments during those difficult months when I asked myself whether it was really wrong of Bung Karno to surrender to the invading Dutch military, amid the impression that he managed to get the international world involved in the political chess game in Indonesia.

I remember feeling proud of Bung Karno when I saw a photo of him being escorted by a Dutch colonel to leave the presidential palace in Yogyakarta. He looked so proud and dignified as a political prisoner, showing not the slightest sign of fear and inferiority. I saw in him a model of a new Indonesian.

After international opinion and guerrilla warfare finally ended the battle between us and the Dutch military, and when Bung Karno and Bung Hatta returned to Yogyakarta from their exile in Bangka, I felt very relieved, and quickly joined friends to prepare festivities to welcome their return.

The political developments after that were too rapid beyond comprehension. I was too absorbed in studies in Bandung. My political ideology was very simple: political independence and nationalism. I welcomed any political ideology that could accept these two premises. I just wanted the suffering during the Japanese occupation to end so that we could start rebuilding society.

I was impatient with the political bickering in Jakarta, and sympathized with any idea to end political infighting, which in my simple mind looked very selfish.

When the Army surrounded the presidential palace in October 1952 and requested that president Sukarno dissolve the parliament, I was very disappointed that Bung Karno suppressed this movement. I had not realized yet the significance of preserving political freedom to build democracy.

I was disappointed yet again in Bung Karno when in 1959 he decided to dissolve the constitutional assembly and the parliament. I felt this decision would kill democracy.

From the onset of the Guided Democracy era in 1959 I was critical of every speech Bung Karno made. His neglect of building a clean and competent democracy and of building a renewed Indonesian economic system meant a growing distance between him and his close aides from the grass roots.

His slogans about the rise of New Emerging Forces (Nefos) destined to defeat Old Established Forces (Oldefos) sounded too far-fetched. He was drifting closer and closer toward an authoritarian style of government.

Between 1961 to 1965, every time I heard him speak, I became angry and frustrated. I asked myself, when will all this political craziness come to an end?

The abortive coup of Sept. 30 was a great shock. By that time my anti-communist political stance was already known. There were communist-minded young people among my students. But I also had ties with the military in Bandung following my participation in academic exercises at the Army's Staff and Command School in Bandung.

Like so many friends of mine, I was disappointed in Bung Karno's hesitant attitude toward the attempted coup. I wanted to see him take firm action to crush the coup attempt. This disappointment and doubt continued until the day he was barred by the military leadership from making public appearances and put under virtual house arrest.

When I heard this news I felt very sad. Bung Karno must have been suffering immensely. He, whose main activity had been to communicate with his people, was suddenly gagged and silenced in a forcible way. It was a very cruel act: an act of slowly strangling him until he finally died in 1970.

The entire official ceremony of honoring him in grand style during his funeral could not wash away the blood and traces of a great national sin from the hands of the New Order characters.

On the day of his death I could only say Innalillaahi wa roji'un (from God thou cometh, and to God thou shalt return). My dislike and even hatred of his behavior during the last episode of his leadership suddenly vanished. And I began to see him not as a politician, but as a statesman.

My earlier pledge not to lower the national flag to half-mast on the day he died, also vanished. Slowly my love and my admiration for him returned. I was no longer haunted by political anger. I began to live in political peace and foster new political hope. I learned to be productive.

Now that we are in such great disarray, I feel again how much we miss Bung Karno. But again, it might not be realistic to hope for the arrival of a national leader of his equal.

We should look once again at his teachings and make a resolution to sort out our very complex problem and search for the wisest solution. What our political leaders must show immediately is a willingness to learn to become statesmen and women, who refuse to be trapped in a myopic political deadlock which will only drag this nation into disaster.