Revolution or war?

Two extraordinary reports appeared in this newspaper, on its National page last week. The first contained a strong warning coming from respected Muslim scholar Nurcholish Madjid that only war and revolution to restore the reform movement could rescue Indonesia from bankruptcy. The second concerned the House of Representatives, which during the entire August and September period was able to deal with only two of 30 draft bills tabled for deliberation.

It has become somewhat commonplace for many Indonesians to hear warnings that their country is close to becoming a failed state -- so common that they no longer take them seriously. However, when respected personalities such as Nurcholish Madjid, Muhammadiyah chairman Syafii Maarif and Catholic priest Franz Magnis-Suseno alert the nation, as they did during a seminar in Yogyakarta last week that the country's extinction was only a matter of time, we had better take notice.

In Nurcholish' words, only war and revolution to restore the reform movement could rescue the nation from bankruptcy. It is not difficult to follow his reasoning. The country is at the top of the list of the world's most corrupt nations, while acts of violence and terrorism are on the rise.

Undeniably, the legislature is most energetic in criticizing the government, which of course is one of its most important missions. But it often seems to be overdoing this criticism in carrying out its legislative duties. Take, for example, the case of the purchase of the Russian Sukhoi jet fighters. Legislators that were initially so noisy in blaming President Megawati Soekarnoputri for the deal have suddenly pretended to have forgotten their own threats to investigate the matter in the first place. The question that many people are asking is, why?

There is a growing perception among the public that corruption and abuse of power among legislators, both at a national and regional level, is probably no less rampant than what is allegedly committed within the executive branch. At least, in the public's view, our legislators show their enthusiasm only in passing "lucrative" bills because of the big incentives that they allegedly stand to receive. Worse, the House is led by Akbar Tandjung, who has a court conviction hanging over his head for corruption. With such poor credibility, what can we expect from the House?

The major political parties, which are busy accumulating the assets they need to finance next year's general election campaigns, have no time to think about acceleration of the reform process.

In the meantime, Megawati is busy complaining that the public does not appreciate the hard work she is doing, apparently forgetting that her achievement in creating political stability is due more to her inability to eradicate corruption, terminate abuses of human rights and let corruptors continue to have a free hand, rather than her own initiative. Despite Soeharto's downfall five years ago, the system that he created during his 32-year rule effectively remains intact, while corruption has worsened.

It is difficult, therefore, to escape the conclusion that the pessimistic views of the scholars mentioned above are based on factual observation. But what can we do? We cannot wait for miracles to occur. The nation must act quickly if it wants to improve its standing among the civilized nations of the world.

When we look back on the process of Soeharto's downfall in 1998, we can see that the driving force behind the people's desire to oust the five-star general at the time was not the people who are now in top political positions. It was university students and academics who risked their lives to fight for the country's democracy.

Before Soeharto's downfall, many of us may have been upset at students' noisy street demonstrations. At that time, it was unthinkable to many that Soeharto could lose his grip on power merely because of some student movements. When Soeharto finally did quit, the role of the students was often belittled by those who thought their role much greater than that of the young activists.

We truly appreciate the initiative taken by Gadjah Mada University to hold a seminar in Yogyakarta last week. Within that context we hope that the university can and will revive the University Rectors Forum, which was also instrumental in ending Soeharto's rule. We need the voice of the campuses to restore the reform movement because of its high moral integrity. As things are at present, the reform movement is effectively dead, both in economic and political terms.

The people have abandoned trust and hope in the major political parties and their leaders. Still, our expectations from the university campuses and from those who have the capability to save the nation from yet another disaster, remain high. We are confident that our society is ready to contribute to efforts to restore the reform movement.