The issue of leadership in Indonesian democracy

The issue of leadership in Indonesian democracy

Satish Mishra, Jakarta

During its Second Wave of Reform Indonesia must complete three
inter-related tasks in record time: Abandon dictatorship in
favor of a more open and representative political system,
establish competitive and fair market systems, and, while this
great transformation is attempted, reduce pressures for social
divisions and violence.

It is a task beyond the competence of text books and clever
state officials. It will involve the mobilization of the
collective national mind and the discipline and patience to turn
ideas into results. Such a mobilization of public energy requires
a serious political agenda. Where do we begin?

Perhaps we should begin with that complicated and never ending
question of national leadership. A new political agenda based on
public support rather than civic control requires the emergence
of a new kind of political leadership, one driven by vision and
direction, a leadership not rooted in family lineage or personal
wealth but in public trust and following.

It does not take much reflection to realize that strong
leadership is not after all only a prerogative of generals and
bureaucrats. The world's greatest social and political movements,
its great scientific and institutional innovations as well as its
economic revolutions have hardly ever been linked to the man on
horseback.

The point is not that generals never make great leaders but
that they do so through a whole set of qualities and attributes
quite independent from their military training and background.
Different tasks require different kinds of skills.

One of the great leveling virtues of democratic government is
that it provides opportunities for people from all walks of life;
from a general such as Eisenhower to an actor such as Reagan,
from a poet such as Havel to a pilot such as Rajiv Gandhi, from a
dockworker such as Walesa to a former prisoner such as Mandela,
to emerge as national leaders.

It is not the military background which counts. It is the
talent for compromise and negotiation, of building coalitions and
partnerships and of painstakingly building public constituency
and support.

If today's leaders are not to become tomorrow's dictators, new
leadership must be situated in the elaborate structure of checks
and balances common in modern democracies. In the Indonesia of
the future, the temptations of power must be tempered by the
counter balancing of different institutions founded on a core
belief in some basic, universal set of rights of human, civil and
social rights.

Both state and civil society are necessary for such a system
to function. Building the new, more balanced, democratic
political system is a national enterprise. It is not a monopoly
of state institutions. All of this requires a great change in
mind set. It also demands great humility.

A central reason for building strong civil society and
improving its interaction with the state is the contribution that
this makes to political stability in democratic systems.

The importance of such stability has been understood rather
late in the day in Indonesia largely through the expressed
concerns of would be investors who cited legal and political
uncertainty as reasons for preferring other destinations for
their much needed capital.

An interesting implication of this view is that economic
recovery in the present Indonesian context depends more on the
reform of governing institutions than on traditional economic
indicators such as inflation, exchange rates or the magnitude of
current account or budget deficits. The crucial issue then is to
understand the factors which promote the political stability that
potential investors seek.

Some people feel that political stability can be guaranteed
only by a single ruler. This is not a very sensible conclusion.
As we have seen, even long standing dictatorships can collapse
suddenly, reversing most of the economic gains made in earlier
times.

The experience of consolidated democracies over the last two
hundred years shows that real political stability comes from
stable institutions guided by creative leaders, not just by
individuals who possess special powers or insights.

Effective and lasting political institutions not only help to
groom better leaders but also prevent breakdowns in times of poor
leadership. Without stable and efficient political institutions,
individual leadership will achieve only temporary successes. This
is not an excuse for bad leadership.

Clearly therefore, we need to take a number of very important
steps to bring certainty and stability to Indonesia of the
future.

First, we must create a democratic political structure based
on an effective separation and balance of powers. This will
prevent the rise of another dictator. By itself, however, it will
not create effective, well functioning institutions.

For that we will have to take the second key step in political
reform, to ensure that each part of the political system:
Executive, parliament, judiciary, and civil society are strong
enough to generate an overall capacity for making timely and firm
decisions on major issues affecting our society.

No institution works in a cultural or social vacuum.
Organizations alone however well established cannot create
institutional stability. For that we need the trust created by
social capital. This is especially important in democratic
political systems since their legitimacy is founded on the will
of the majority as expressed by free and fair elections.

State institutions can work best if supported by appropriate
forms of social capital which create a collective trust in the
legitimacy of the democratic state.

For this to happen we need to take the third important step
in the consolidation of democracy: The creation of an enabling
environment for the rebuilding of social capital and trust
weakened under long years of controlled political life.

Civil society organizations, from doctors' professional
associations to charities and educations foundations to football
clubs and political parties, are all ways of empowering the
citizen to play an active part in the organization of social and
political life.

Far from being a threat to the democratic state, civil society
is part of the safety valve that makes democratic political
systems resilient to unexpected shocks. It is this property which
lies at the source of the economic progress of mature democracies
in the world today. The point is not that these countries have
not had their share of shocks, but they are able to face them
without a breakdown of their entire political and social fabric.

Democratic societies are not unregulated societies.

The fourth critical step in the stabilization of Indonesian
political life therefore is the defining and enforcing of a set
of rights and responsibilities of the ordinary citizen. These
core values of democracy constitute the social glue on which the
governing edifice of democracy must actually rest.

The writer is Head/Chief Adviser of UNSFIR (a joint project of
Government of Indonesia and UNDP). The views expressed here are
strictly personal.