'Satay Cabinet': The cost of imposed unity

'Satay Cabinet': The cost of imposed unity

Sjahrir, Economist, New Indonesia Alliance (PIB), Jakarta

One of our founding fathers, Bung Hatta, once said that we
should be able to distinguish between the words persatuan (unity)
and persatean (like skewered meat, dissension). Perhaps he meant
to say that we must not consider unity as something so absolute
that eventually all elements in the groups wishing to unite are
sacrificed. If unity is achieved by force, what we have will be
persatean, every piece of meat will be put into the skewer,
devoid of significance in the context of the unity aspired for.

This analogy may be apt to illustrate today's Gotong Royong
(Mutual Help) Cabinet, which may also be construed as the Cabinet
of Unity. We can show a long list of examples that illustrate the
lack of coordination, the misunderstanding of stipulations or
regulations and the absence of policy comprehension, resulting in
unwise policies.

Examples include the privatization of Indosat, the
relationship with the International Monetary Fund, the extension
of the shareholders' settlement agreement, the implementation of
the Malino I and II treaties and the follow-up to economic
recovery, particularly related to the performance of and policies
of the Indonesian Bank Restructuring Agency (IBRA) and state-
owned enterprises. Such examples show that the Cabinet is like a
bundle of skewered meat in which the skewer is President Megawati
Soekarnoputri while the pieces of meat may be Cabinet members
Bambang Kesowo, Dorodjatun Kuntjoro-Jakti, Kwik Kian Gie or
Laksamana Sukardi.

Perhaps it is worthwhile to talk about the latest issue,
namely the relationship between the government and the IMF.

I attended a meeting of political figures at the residence of
State Minister of Small and Medium Enterprises and Cooperatives,
Ali Marwan Hanan on June 10. Kwik Kian Gie took the floor and
instead of talking about the people's economy as scheduled, he
kept talking about his attitude toward business tycoons and the
IMF.

Regarding the IMF, he said staff members of the World Bank and
the Board had prepared his draft address for the talks ahead of
the Consultative Group on Indonesia (for June 12). He said firmly
that he would let them prepare the address but the manuscript
would be dumped in a dustbin and he would read the address he had
prepared himself. True to his words, the prepared manuscript was
made an appendix of sorts (not dumped into the wastebasket),
while his own address touched on the points that we have all
heard about.

In essence, he believed the renewal of the relationship
between the IMF would last only until November 2002 and therefore
he would like this relationship to be terminated. It must be
explained here that there are two categories of countries ending
their relationship with the IMF.

There are countries which have "graduated" so that they no
longer need the assistance of the IMF. Their economic recovery
has been achieved; a prominent example is South Korea. Then there
are countries who have severed their relationship with the IMF
but have been embroiled in problems afterwards. Indonesia is now
in a situation in which public opinion would like this
termination to take place. The difference is that in South Korea,
the son of the president can be brought to the court while the
spouse of an incumbent president/minister in Indonesia, cannot be
subjected to any legal action because power politics is stronger
than law enforcement.

Now to return to the Cabinet of dissension; even if many
quarters agree to Kwik's attitude, perhaps it is now time to
introduce governance ethics, which seems to be erroneously taken
as the problem of democratization.

A staff member of the Coordinating Minister of Economic
Affairs has said that differences of opinion between government
officials are natural in a democracy. The same thing has also
been said by people like Laksamana Sukardi and Rini Soewandi. In
fact, they are quite wrong in their understanding of
democratization, and this is also coupled with their lack of
comprehension of what is called good governance.

Of course Cabinet ministers may differ in opinion but these
differences must be restricted within the internal affairs of the
Cabinet. The wider public cannot and may not be involved in their
dissension, especially if this is protracted. If a Cabinet
minister knows the ethics of governing, not only Kwik Kian Gie
but also many other ministers should ask to resign. In fact,
either because of differences of opinion or because of their
impotence in implementing policies, they emerge as controversial
and unsuccessful figures (Laksamana, for instance, takes
privatization to mean the sale of shares from a state firm bought
by another state-owned firm).

We therefore see how the public, through the media, are
brought into disputes between ministers or ministers blaming
their failures on private circles (Laksamana pointed a finger at
insider trading even though he himself has violated the law of
privatization). So, what have we got from the "reform"
administration of Megawati?

First, it is very obvious that price controls are yet to be
exercised; therefore the rate of inflation will remain high.

Second, figures of foreign and domestic investments from the
Investment Coordinating Agency in the first quarter of 2002 shows
a sharp decline, which was in line with the drop in export and
import figures recorded in the first month of 2002.

Third, following the leadership change at IBRA, no money has
been deposited in the state's coffers, while the divestment of
Bank Niaga is yet to start and has been postponed, so it is said,
until September.

Given the above, do we share a rosy feeling about the
"stability of the rupiah" and the rise in the Composite Share
Price Index -- two factors which appear to have encouraged the
President to say that we have begun to experience a recovery?

The answer must be negative. The satay skewer (Megawati) will
arrange "the meat pieces" in her own Cabinet, no matter how great
the differences in policies and the mediocrity of members.

Indonesians must be convinced that it this nation alone that
can help itself out of the crisis -- without being able to pin
hopes on the "satay" Cabinet of President Megawati.