The myth of the first 100 days and Susilo's real challenges

James Van Zorge and Dennis Heffernan, Jakarta

As he steps into the palace, Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono must address the unrealistic expectation that he should show substantial achievements within his first 100 days in office. Local analysts are already talking about the mythical 100 days that, in fact, has been long recognized by more thoughtful political pundits as an unfair and fallacious way of grading a new president.

The history of modern American presidencies shows that they have had weak if not unsuccessful starts, and survived them. Presidents have been judged largely on their later achievements. Those with successful starts were rare and, often benefited from special circumstances -- usually a crisis. Most presidents who tried to force results out of the first 100 days found that such valiant efforts often failed, and frequently backfired.

In fact, the origin of "100 days" goes back to 1933, when a severe depression was gripping the United States. The Great Depression was the gravest crisis in American history since the Civil War. The mood in Washington was one of deep despair and there was a pervasive sense of great urgency. Then came Franklin Roosevelt: When he took office, he immediately got to work, sending bill after bill after bill to Congress.

According to historians, many Congressmen passed FDR's proposed bills without even bothering to read them. After Roosevelt's whirlwind of legislating, the notion of 100 days was popularized, much to the chagrin of those following in his footsteps.

Doris Kearns Goodwin, a famous American historian, notes that every president since Roosevelt wishes that the term "100 days" could be exorcised from the language. In a recent television interview, Goodwin made the interesting point that "in fact, a story is told about a speech written for John Kennedy in which he said all these promises I have made will be accomplished in the next 100 days. JFK angrily slashed out the 100 days and made it 1,000 days instead, not wanting to be compared to Roosevelt, at which point of course that 1,000 days would end with his own life, which he could never have predicted at that time."

It is natural that Indonesians would like to see their new president produce fast results. Despite the country's great achievements over the past six years, there is the recognition that much remains to be done. Indonesians are hoping for a cleaner, more effective government, as well as a higher standard of living.

Investors are hoping that Susilo and his economics cabinet can improve the business climate and therefore trigger higher growth. The international community is worried about Jakarta's war against terrorism, and they will be looking for signs that the president and his security apparatus can prove more effective than his predecessors in cracking down against Jamaah Islamiyah.

Of course, making progress on these fronts will be a long campaign. Eradicating corruption has never proven to be a simple exercise in any country, and it should be seen as a long-term project, bound to be fraught with frustration and political minefields. Tackling terrorism will also be a daunting challenge; although there might be some short-term victories, dismantling Indonesia's extensive terrorist network could take many years to achieve, and there are bound to be more innocent victims along the way.

Realizing higher levels of capital investment is, practically speaking, the least difficult of the major challenges that lie ahead. Still, even if the new government does all the right things, it will take at least one year before capital starts flowing back.

Perhaps Susilo's greatest liability is not that he comes from a small, minority party. Rather, when stepping into office, he will find a lack of any sense of urgency, and a failure to recognize that the entire government must work together with the president to solve the nation's ills. Now, even before the keys to the palace have yet to be turned over, Akbar Tandjung has declared that his Golkar party and PDI-P will serve as a "loyal" opposition.

More likely, regardless of what Susilo proposes, Akbar Tandjung will spend his days trying to undermine the presidency. This assumes, of course, that Akbar will survive serious challenges to his chairmanship of Golkar.

If Susilo is to overcome the challenges that lie ahead, then first and foremost he must change the frame of the debate about the president's performance. Because he enjoys a tremendous mandate from the public, he could use it by painting a compelling picture of the larger challenges facing the nation, and how it will require the cooperation of the parliament -- not just a good president -- to be successful.

He should also draw a reformist roadmap and share it with the executive, judiciary, parliament and the public. By doing so, he will provide everybody with a sense of direction and enable the electorate to hold the entire government accountable for their performance.

Finally, he should explain that it will take much more than 100 days to make substantial progress: For sure, it will take 1,000 days, or even more, to rid the country of its terrorists, put more people back to work, and bring about a cleaner government.

The writers are Jakarta based consultants and can be reached at jvzorge@rad.net.id.