So much for reform talks
The nation's reform agenda appears to have been put on the back burner as virtually all of the country's political elite are locked in a stiff power struggle. The whole nation watches in awe as these political leaders, many of whom we had assumed were on opposing sides of the reform divide, meet and negotiate to forge coalitions or strategic alliances, all with their sights trained on the November presidential election.
The reform agenda -- the very reason the entire election process was held this year instead of in 2002 -- is rarely mentioned while these leaders engage in horse trading to build their strength. The agenda turned out to be nothing but a campaign platform, or a sales gimmick, to win gullible voters.
Although the presidential election is looking more and more like a two-horse race between incumbent B.J. Habibie of the Golkar Party and Megawati Soekarnoputri of the Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle (PDI Perjuangan), other figures are promoting themselves as alternative candidates. It is clear that neither Habibie nor Megawati are willing to back down. Megawati feels the presidency is rightfully hers now that it looks like her party will emerge the winner in Indonesia's first real democratic election in decades. Habibie, whose Golkar is set to come second, feels he still has a chance thanks to an election procedure that affords the incumbent the luxury of appointing some of the 700 members of the People's Consultative Assembly (MPR).
The nation appears to be heading toward a very close, and probably bitter, battle for the presidency between Habibie and Megawati. So close are their positions that the issue will likely be left to the few small political factions to determine who the winner will be. The Armed Forces has 38 unelected representatives. The National Awakening Party (PKB), the United Development Party (PPP) and the National Mandate Party (PAN) will have significant representatives to be able to influence the outcome of the race. Leaders of these factions, having lost the general election, are more than eager to play the role of king/queen-makers, and will try to get something out of this for themselves.
This is when the uglier side of politics rears its head. Many of these political leaders appear to have abandoned their principles and are going back on their preelection words that they would never coalesce with the status quo forces, which everyone agreed refer to Habibie and Golkar. Time will tell how far they are willing to compromise their principles, and in the case of the military, its promise of neutrality, if and when the issue is to be settled by a vote at the MPR.
With the presidential race so close, one can almost discard the much-abused Indonesian political system of consensus building which in the past gave seven successive presidential election victories to Soeharto. A vote is not only almost certain, but it is also imperative in a democracy.
There is already a broad agreement among the major political factions to allow one vote for each of the 700 MPR members in electing a president. There are still disagreements on whether they should vote openly, or through a secret ballot.
An open vote would be in keeping with the spirit of democracy as it would allow the public a glimpse of how their representatives cast their ballots. But so what if the public knows? Most, if not all, the elected representatives in the MPR will still owe their allegiance more to party leaders who assigned them the seats, than to their designated constituency.
Party leaders still wield so much power over the representatives, and can replace them without even consulting the designated constituency. An MPR representative, whether representing a political party or the military faction, would most likely feel intimidated into following the party line when casting a vote in an open system. It is unlikely members will vote with a full conscience.
This crucial matter of choosing between transparency and an honest vote -- only in Indonesia can these two elements be in conflict -- will undoubtedly generate more discourse and more lively political talk shows in the coming days and weeks. This matter, together with ongoing haggling among the political elite, will keep us perplexed if not amused, and help draw our attention even further away from the reform agenda and from the crisis that is still engulfing the nation.