Searching for new development alternatives

Searching for new development alternatives

By Aleksius Jemadu

BANDUNG (JP): The urgency of establishing a new development
model for crisis-stricken economies in Southeast Asia, especially
Indonesia, is self-evident. Whatever the final outcome of the
elections, the new government will have to formulate a new
development model to combine economic liberalization and
political democratization. As it has turned out, the past
combination of authoritarianism and economic growth has failed,
and therefore will be abandoned. What kind of political economy
should Indonesia have in the post-Soeharto era?

Unfortunately, during the campaign period major reform-
oriented political parties such as the Indonesian Democratic
Party of Struggle (PDI Perjuangan), the National Awakening Party
(PKB) and the National Mandate Party (PAN), which are seen as
likely to dominate the House of Representatives, failed to
convince the public that they have the capacity to propose new
development alternatives. Most of their campaign statements were
too conventional.

For instance, in one television advertisement, the leader of
PDI Perjuangan, Megawati Soekarnoputri, declared with a loud
voice the nation's big problems such as massive unemployment,
outrageous foreign debt and millions of school dropouts. And then
came her party's promise to solve all those problems. However, we
were not told how her party would go about overcoming these
problems.

Rarely, if ever, did reform-oriented party leaders explain
their new conception of development. Their popularity owes more
to the victimization of Soeharto than to their own brilliant
ideas. Reform-oriented political leaders do not deserve people's
support if they are only good at pinpointing Soeharto's mistakes
but poor at providing alternative solutions.

A few years before the economic crisis hit Indonesia, the
World Bank praised the Indonesian government for its success in
liberalizing the economy while sustaining economic growth.
However, it seemed to be indifferent, if not blind, to the
authoritarian and corrupt nature of the political regime which,
as it has turned out, only led to the impoverishment of millions
of people.

Today Indonesians can no longer accept the idea that human
rights and democratization can be dispensed with in the name of
economic development. The new government should be able to give a
proper response to people's demands for democracy and economic
growth.

It is argued that in the postcrisis era, Indonesia's major
development objectives remain essentially the same. They include
the generation of political stability and order as favorable
conditions to economic development and economic growth itself.
What then is the difference between the old development model and
the new one as far as the accomplishment of these objectives is
concerned?

First, under the old authoritarian political regime, the
government monopolized the interpretation of the meaning of their
policy objectives in such a way that it could manipulate them for
the benefit of a privileged few. Now the government is obliged to
convince the people that it has good political morality to
justify its policy objectives. Thus, the meaning of political
stability and economic development and the way these objectives
are achieved have to be morally and politically justified.

Second, in the old era centralization of power was used as the
main mechanism to generate political stability and order. In
today's era of reform, there is a need to emphasize the principle
of constitutionalism, the practice of which could lead to the
establishment of state institutions capable of providing order,
reliability and participation for various interests in society.
Constitutionalism refers to a strong commitment to apply
constitutional principles in organizing and implementing
political power through state institutions. For instance, the
legislative body should check the implementation of presidential
power so that it cannot violate the constitution.

Third, if in the past, open opposition to government policies
was prohibited, now the political parties that do not join the
ruling government coalition should be allowed to function as
opposition forces in the parliament to ensure effective control
to prevent the abuse of political power by the executive body.

Fourth, an excessive reliance on the mobilization of foreign
capital has led our economy into a debt trap. Isn't it high time
now to develop a better appreciation and utilization of our own
domestic resources? According to a report in the June 10 edition
of Far Eastern Economic Review, other crisis-hit economies like
South Korea and Thailand now tend to emphasize domestic economies
to stimulate new growth.

Given the abundance of Indonesia's natural resources and the
existence of a huge market for consumer goods, there is no reason
why we cannot try such strategy here.

With these new development alternatives, Indonesia still has a
chance to see a brighter day tomorrow.

The writer is a lecturer of the Department of International
Relations at the Parahyangan Catholic University in Bandung.