Sukarno legacy lives on 30 years after

Sukarno legacy lives on 30 years after

The centennial anniversary of the birth of founding father and
first president Sukarno falls on June 6, for which The Jakarta
Post is publishing a number of articles and interviews. The
following is an excerpt from an interview with John Legge, former
professor of history at Monash University and dean of the Faculty
of Arts, who spoke to contributor Dewi Anggraeni in Melbourne.
Legge wrote Sukarno, a Political Biography, published in 1972,
and a second edition was released in 1985.

Question: Interest in Sukarno seems to be on the rise,
following three decades of Soeharto's rule. Many here have been
surprised at Sukarno's strong legacy; what do you think?

Answer: I think that is true enough. Given the circumstances
of Soeharto's long presidency, towards the end of that period, it
was natural that Sukarno should have once again become a symbol
for those who were critical of Soeharto's presidency.

Especially when the notion of reformasi began to develop, many
younger people -- students and so on -- were concerned to raise
again the memory of the democratic period, the constitutional
period from 1949 to 1959.

Sukarno was associated with that period, which was greatly
discredited as a result of the instability of constitutional
rule. But in the later Soeharto period, that indeed became an
attractive memory.

The 1950s became more important for the critics of Soeharto.

You mean the disillusionment with Soeharto pushed Sukarno to
the surface again?

Yes. I think that is what happened.

What do you think are the strong points of Sukarno that pushed
this legacy to the surface?

One of the lasting legacies of Sukarno is the very notion of
Indonesian unity, the idea of Indonesian nationalism expressed in
the "from Sabang to Merauke" slogan.

While regional feeling was very strong, somehow Sukarno
developed very strongly too the idea of a nation of Indonesia.

The other lasting legacy is, not just the unity of the nation,
region by region, but the unity and cooperation of various
streams within the nation, such as Islam, nationalism and Marxism
-- quoting his articles in the 1920s -- suggesting that there
should be unity between these different currents of thought.

There have been suggestions that attribute the development of
Islam in Indonesia to Sukarno as well. What do you think of that?

It would not have been one of his strongest themes. The party
associated with him was of course the PNI, the Nationalist Party.
To some extent he found himself at odds with Islam in the 1950s.
So I don't think the Islamic parties were his strongest
supporters.

But he became a haji ...

That may have been more expediency on his part. Nevertheless,
the idea that Islam was part of the national consensus is
something that he could have claimed credit for.

When people talked of Sukarno, they would refer to his
charisma, and the way he communicated with people. Are there any
such personal traits you remember?

Yes, of course we know of his skills of oratory which would
draw and captivate crowds for hours. And there was some genuine
basis for the idea that he had his feet firmly on the ground,
that he was able to reach the people at the grass roots.

I recall one story from an Australian ambassador, who called
on Sukarno at Bogor one day. As he was leaving, he noticed that
one of the helicopters was on the lawn. Sukarno asked if he had
ever been in a helicopter. When he said no, Sukarno said, "Well,
come for a ride!"

So they went up in the helicopter and landed somewhere in
Sukabumi, unexpectedly. Crowds gathered, and in no time there was
Sukarno laughing and chatting with the people in a very ordinary
way, obviously renewing his contact with them. Eventually they
returned to Bogor.

The ambassador was very impressed at the ease with which
Sukarno established so quickly a rapport with ordinary people.

Was he able to influence people the way other leaders had
never been able to?

I never saw him in that kind of setting. But quite clearly he
did have a great ability to persuade those about himself.

Do you see any of Sukarno's strong personality in Megawati?

To me she doesn't seem, on the face of it, to have the same
kind of political skill and charisma as her father, though she is
charismatic as far as her own party is concerned, as appeared
during the conflict about the chairmanship of the party several
years ago.

I can't quite see how she would handle difficult situations if
she were to become the president of Indonesia.

Perhaps the best solution would be the one that has been
proposed, that she should play an executive role, leaving the
ceremonial role to Gus Dur (President Abdurrahman Wahid). That
was what her father did in the early 1960s, by appointing Djuanda
as Chief Minister. So you could say that what has been recently
proposed is the Djuanda solution.

However, I am puzzled by the suggestion that this might not be
constitutional. It seems to me perfectly constitutional. Within
the 1945 Constitution the powers of the president are extensive,
and it is within those powers that the president can appoint a
chief minister, and of course Sukarno did just that.

He operated not as executive head of government, but as
ceremonial head of state, Djuanda being the head of government.
Maybe the fact that Megawati is a Vice President to start off
with, may make a difference.

Maybe Megawati would like to be the ceremonial head of state
and someone else to be the executive head, not the other way
round?

That is possible.

Do you think Sukarnoism is still applicable to today's
Indonesia?

I'm not sure I accept the term Sukarnoism. He was a president,
and he did have ideas, and to some extent he was a symbol of what
many people wanted, but I wouldn't have thought he was an "ism".

He played a very skillful political game in a very unstable
situation in the 1960s, but I think, it wasn't his ideas that
mattered so much, so much as his ability to balance opposing
forces and their rather unstable relationships with each other.

Do you see the same strength in people's conviction for
national unity?

In some people, certainly. But the problem of Aceh seems a
very difficult one for anybody to resolve, and so are the
aspirations of West Papuans. They are provinces that are
reluctant to belong to the unified state, and to that extent, I
could imagine them withdrawing from the unified state, though it
is not known when that could be.

Three decades is a whole generation. It is amazing that the
collective memory of Sukarno is still strong, as it apparently
became the groundswell that generated support for Megawati.

Perhaps he has been remembered more as a symbol than a leader
of a particular program. At a time of uncertainty, he has been
remembered just for that. You may remember that he lost much
support during the 1960s.

If the current government were to adopt the Djuanda solution,
do you think it might be able to break the political stalemate?

I think it might hold the situation for a time. The situation
is very volatile, and no one seems certain how the President is
going to survive it.