Reform movement is at a standstill

Reform movement is at a standstill

Recent events have threatened to bring the reform movement to
a halt. Mochtar Mas'oed, lecturer in political science at Gadjah
Mada University in Yogyakarta, proposes a way out to put its
progression back on track.

Question: Many analysts believe that political reform has
slowed down -- what is the problem?

Mochtar: The problem seems to have appeared at the very
beginning of the student movement. At the level of idea
formation, for example, university students, in an effort to look
for a term acceptable to the government and the Armed Forces
(ABRI), didn't want to use a word stronger than "reform", such as
"revolution", even though what they wanted was actually more than
reform.

When they were looking for support from other members of
society, they also failed to form an organization that could be
used as a vehicle to convey the idea.

The word reform, which was not clearly defined at the
beginning, therefore could be easily misinterpreted by various
parties, particularly the power holder. The government's appeal
to put a high priority on providing an adequate supply of
foodstuffs is quite distracting. In rural areas, reform is even
misinterpreted as disobedience toward the authorities.

Thus, the word reform has become meaningless in line with the
changes in the political situations, while proreform activists,
who were united by the common issue of leadership succession,
have disintegrated following the downfall of Soeharto on May 21.
It is very difficult now to unite them because each of their
factions has its own agenda and priorities.

Q: Is there a chance the reform will gain more speed?

M: I think, first, we have to redefine the political reform that
we all want and set the priority of jobs. Because the major
problem during the New Order government was the disempowerment of
the people -- the political reform must lead to the empowerment
of the people and the accountability of the government, including
the president.

Some parties, for example, are suggesting that to make the
government more accountable, the president should be elected
directly by the people and must not be allowed to have
discretionary power in the state's funds. All expenditures of the
government must be well described as its budget plans and the
Supreme Audit Agency must be empowered. The House of
Representatives (DPR) must also be given authority to check the
president.

ABRI's tasks must also be redefined. It must end its dual-
function (as both a military and civilian authority) because its
main task is to defend the integrity of Indonesian territory and
protect the country from external attacks.

ABRI is now very weak and has no adequate military equipment
to protect the country. If China, for example, attacked Indonesia
from the South China Sea, ABRI would never be able to defend its
territories. ABRI also has no adequate power to protect
Indonesian waters from poaching by foreign fishing ships.

Ludicrously, ABRI has too many business activities throughout
the country. ABRI, for instance, has a big interest in
plantations and each of its branches -- the Army, Navy, Air Force
and Police -- has cooperatives operating in various business
sectors. As a result, the Indonesian Cooperatives Council is
dominated by representatives from ABRI-related cooperatives.

Instead of improving professionalism and sophistication in
defense equipment, military personnel are more interested in the
trading of sugar, rice and other commodities, so that they feel
it necessary to expand their presence throughout the country.

All these factors have caused difficulties in the management
of military institutions. The abduction of political activists by
military personnel, the shooting of demonstrators and other human
rights violations indicate that ABRI is poorly coordinated.

Q: What is the fate of the reform movement if this situation
prevails?

M: We have seen from the results of the recent extraordinary
congress of the ruling Golkar party that the party will continue
to be under the influence of the government and ABRI is not
distancing itself from it.

If there is no correction in such a phenomenon, ABRI will have
no constitutional incentive to change itself. Incentives are
needed for the change of ABRI, the People's Consultative Assembly
(MPR), the DPR, presidency and other related institutions.

Q: How could we have a guarantee that the current amendment of
political laws will lead to democratization?

M: There are actually many DPR and MPR members who want to see a
political change but they are doubtful about their own fate if
they take the initiative in that direction. They, therefore, must
be assured that they will be supported by many circles if they
change regulations that used to cause the disempowerment of the
people.

However, I am sure that the ball of demand for democratization
has been rolling, and preventing the ball from rolling will need
substantial cost and power.

But if anarchic actions, like rioting and arson, continue
happening and mass organizations like Nahdlatul Ulama (NU) and
Muhammadiyah fail to stop them, the military and the government
would use such developments as a pretext to sustain their power.
(riz)