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.