Symptoms vs cause?

The kind of reactions to the small but growing calls for President Megawati Soekarnoputri and Vice President Hamzah Haz to step down in the wake of the increases in utility prices, is a classic example of people mistaking the symptoms for the cause of the disease. Like poorly trained doctors, they are more likely to prescribe medicines to treat the symptoms, but not to cure the disease.

The government, as echoed by Coordinating Minister for Political Affairs Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono, viewed the demands for the president and vice president to resign as unconstitutional. He vowed harsh measures in response to anyone trying to topple the current administration. Susilo also warned political parties against piggy-backing on people who were protesting the price hikes for their own political goals.

The Indonesian Military (TNI), which remains a powerful institution in spite of its phased withdrawal from formal politics, has also cautioned against any unconstitutional moves to unseat the present leadership.

Chairman of the People's Consultative Assembly (MPR) Amien Rais, whose own National Mandate Party (PAN) is entertaining the idea of replacing the current government, stated that the 1945 Constitution no longer included a provision for the MPR, the highest state institution, to impeach the president following the latest series of amendments in August. Megawati, we may recall, became president after the MPR, under Amien, impeached then- president Abdurrahman Wahid in July 2001 for incompetence.

Under the constitution, only the House of Representatives (DPR) can impeach the president, but the move must be approved by the Constitutional Court, which has not been established to this day. So, both Megawati and Hamzah can take comfort in knowing that their positions are, at least constitutionally, safe.

Others have also made very compelling arguments that the last thing Indonesia needs is another change in government, whether the process is constitutional or not. An impeachment process would sow more instability and destroy what little confidence the domestic and international public still have in the ability of any government to manage the nation.

There are also fears that if there were to be a second impeachment, there would then be a third, thus turning Indonesia into a banana republic of the kind found in Latin America during the '70s. We would be lucky if we even get to the fourth impeachment, because in all likelihood, this nation would break up before such a thing happens: Indonesia as we know it today would no longer exist, replaced by smaller states instead.

If all these warnings have failed to stop the anti-government protests -- the protests are growing louder by the day -- it is because just about everyone has been looking at the demand for a change in government from the wrong angle: Susilo is viewing the demand from the perspective of his government's fate; Amien, of constitutionality; the military, of a possible threat to security; and outside observers, from the perspective of the national destruction that an impeachment might inflict.

No one has yet bothered to look at the main reason the demands for a change in government are growing louder. No one has taken the trouble to ask the demonstrators, the students and the workers who brave the scorching sun and the drenching rain, why their initial protests opposing the price hikes has increasingly turned into demands for a change in government.

As harsh as the latest round of simultaneous price hikes may seem, this nation has gone through much worse in the past. The increases, in themselves, would not have been enough to cause such a public outrage. Coming after a series of controversial decisions that have been deemed unfair and unjust, it is easy to see why the protests against prices hikes have, in many cases now, turned into outright protests against government. The present state of the economy, with jobs being lost and no new ones being created, has further fueled this public anger.

The street demonstrations that we have seen in many parts of the country these last two weeks were expressions of a discontented people. They reflect the disillusionment prevalent among the people about the poor performance, or lack thereof, of the government -- both the executive and legislative branches -- in defending and protecting their interests. They reflect a nation that is feeling restless at the unfairness and injustices that they find today under the present government.

How else can we explain the odd alliance between workers and employers in some of the demonstrations, and the gathering of workers, students and housewives in others? If these groups have decided to take to the streets, this can only mean that the current political mechanisms, including the means of political communications in this country, have failed them.

How do we deal with this situation? Clearly, not by treating the symptoms, but by curing the real disease; that is, by showing greater wisdom and by creating policies that are fair and just, not those that only benefit a single group of society.

The government can still salvage the situation because deep down, most people in this country also agree that the last thing they want or need is to go through another period of political instability and economic crisis.

But the government better hurry before the disease turns cancerous. If this happened, then we would definitely need a major surgical operation to remove the cancer, and would suffer the severe pain that comes with it, as with the subsequent recovery period.