The great navel battle in the war of righteousness

Patrick Guntensperger, Jakarta

Last week a minor controversy erupted when President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono deplored the depravity of television and cited by way of example the flagrant exposure of female navels.

Of course, the usual reactions were immediately dusted off and deployed. Many traditional costumes in Indonesia fail to cover the offensive region of the female body, and are perfectly moral and respectable, cry some pundits with an anthropological bent.

To see immorality in the female navel is to treat her as a sexual object, object some feminists. To expose her navel is to treat her as a sexual object, pipe up the rest of those who claim to speak for women. What about the rampant depictions of violence, surely that is more eroding on the moral fabric of the audience, contribute those with different priorities.

Once again, we were treated to the same old arguments about television's poor quality, low morals, lack of creativity and pervasive influence. It all came with the yawn inducing feeling that a re-run brings on.

On a more serious level, journalists have raised their antennae to a possible threat to freedom of expression. That type of comment all too often presages a movement in the direction of more governmental control over published or broadcast material and increasing pressures on press freedom. In Indonesia, at this time, it is wise that those antennae be very finely tuned.

There has been much discussion in the press, on the streets and in courtrooms recently about the limits of government authority over published and broadcast material. We have also recently seen the first direct democratic election of an Indonesian President. The issue of freedom of expression is both highly sensitive and highly charged.

Susilo is still new at the game of national leadership. He is a man not unused to authority and power, but his recent mandate has put him at a whole new level. Every word he utters publicly becomes a matter of record and will unquestionably come back to haunt him if it wasn't wisely chosen. A casual remark carries enormous weight when you are the leader of one of the world's largest countries.

For that reason, the President would do well to consider carefully what he says in relation to the subject of censorship. The can of worms that was opened as the result of his comments is evidence of how attuned people are to suspected assaults on their freedoms. Susilo will learn that any casual remark he makes can be interpreted as a policy statement.

The Palace and the halls of government bureaucracy are populated with those who would immediately take measures to see that the President's personal tastes are enforced, legally or extra-legally, out of respect for his position or as an attempt to ingratiate themselves.

In a mature democracy, both the national leader and the people would be clear about the fact that the leader may express a personal opinion that has nothing whatever to do with the manner in which his government manages the country. A president might deplore the sight of the female navel, but nonetheless would fight to protect the freedom of the people to see one and artists to show one.

The people would be confident in their leader's commitment to democracy to the extent that they would find his personal tastes mildly interesting but not terribly relevant to any government action on the subject. That however, is not yet the case in Indonesia.

Until very recently, the leader's wish was literally a command. The country was run according to the desires and even whims of the one in the seat of power. The habit of deference to absolute power is one that dies hard, and it still lives in Indonesia.

While Susilo has every right to have an opinion on any matter whatsoever, his personal opinion is nothing more than that. We have the right to expect that if he sees something in the press or on television, he will tolerate it, even if he doesn't like it. We have the right to assume that, like the rest of us, his television came with a remote control, which he can use to change channels if he sees a belly button, just as normal people do when they come across a talent search show.

However, until Indonesia has become comfortable and content with the idea of democracy, it would be wise if the President thought carefully before making remarks that can only have a chilling effect on the country. Susilo's comments made true democrats nervous, offered support to hard-line moralists and intimidated many moderates. They raised for many people the spectre of censorship, just at a time when visions of freedom were dancing in their heads.

But since Susilo has already demonstrated that he has a clear perception of the truly pressing problems this country faces, we have to conclude that he's not about to get bogged down in a Quixotic and pointless war on the titillating. Such a campaign would be doomed to failure, would be utterly divisive and would dissipate energy and resources better employed dealing with genuine threats to the people of this country. Indonesia's endemic corruption comes irresistibly to mind, both as a priority more suited to a man of his talents and as an authentic threat to the people.

The writer, social and political commentator, can be reached at ttpguntensperger@hotmail.com