The choice ahead
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.