The choice ahead

As 1994 is coming to an end, the question being most widely asked is which is the proper option: to be a prosperous nation that is lacking in freedom, or to be free but lacking in welfare? An equally as pressing a query is whether it is possible for a developing country as heterogeneous and diverse as Indonesia to pursue and achieve both prosperity and political freedom at the same time.

Of late, following the events that have taken place in the past year, these two questions undoubtedly have taken solid root in the backs of our minds. And at this year's end, when we look back on the passing year of 1994 and try to grasp what the year 1995 will bring, it seems appropriate to ponder them ever more seriously.

From any viewpoint, one would surely agree that 1994 has left deep tracks on this nation's road towards democracy. The government's brief experiment with openness, which started in 1993, appeared to many to have ended disastrously with the closure, or constriction, of the corridor of openness with the shutting down of three magazines, Tempo, Editor and DeTik in June. Although the government insists that this move in no way means a slowing down of the democratization process, one could generally see that somehow the process did slacken.

Still, that does not necessarily mean that we are now back to square one. Maybe, after the June setback, the trail towards democracy has become a little less brightly lighted and we will have to find our way a bit more cautiously.

And in finding our way, we believe it is a mistake to think that pursuing prosperity and disregarding political freedom should now be at the top of our agenda. It is an illusion to think that political freedom follows economic development as a matter of course.

Those who advocate that Singapore, with its good deal of prosperity but little freedom, should be the model for our development process in order to avoid India's example of "chaotic" freedom and democracy should remember that there is no single design for development. Each country has its own characteristics and its own nature.

Moreover, the old belief that economic development cannot go hand-in-hand with political freedom has lately been questioned, following India's economic successes. This country recorded a sound five percent annual growth after it liberalized its economy two years ago. The Philippines' economy has also shown a strong recovery this year and brought the promise of an even better performance in the coming years.

The point is that we are now living in a very different world from the one we had been living in for the last three decades. The very success of our national development efforts has produced not only a new generation of Indonesians, but also a new set of values, a new way of thinking, a new awareness and new and different aspirations.

There can be little doubt that in the coming years this country's dealings with the world outside will become more and more intense as scientific and technological advances continue to proceed. All of these things, we believe, indicate a growing need for a more participatory socio-political system even as we strive to maintain the essential requirements of order and stability.

Therefore, as 1995 looms with the promise of higher economic growth, we suggest that we start easing the political controls, although with care and wisdom. We are quite confident that by now the Indonesian people fully understand the dangers that underlie our heterogeneous society.

Thus, while the preservation of our national security, order and unity should always be our top priority, we should not use this as an excuse to hold up our rendezvous with history, which, as our Constitution so explicitly stipulates, is the history of a prosperous, just and free society.