The virtue of democracy indispensable
The virtue of democracy indispensable
A number of friendly countries have suggested solutions to
Indonesia's problems. Kusnanto Anggoro, a senior researcher at
the Centre for Strategic and International Studies and a lecturer
in the postgraduate studies program at the University of
Indonesia in Jakarta discusses these proposals.
JAKARTA (JP): President Abdurrahman Wahid is struggling for
survival, with the shadow of the old regime posing serious
challenges for him. The popular view is that former president
Soeharto's cronies and some rouge elements in the military are
behind the bomb blast at the Jakarta Stock Exchange building, the
assassination of a leading gubernatorial candidate in Aceh and
the death of three United Nations relief workers in Atambua, West
Timor.
Many people have offered solutions to the country's problems.
Prime Minister Mahathir Mohammad of Malaysia suggested that
Abdurrahman take a more autocratic approach, as liberal democracy
"cannot and should not be applied to every country".
The former premier of Singapore, Lee Kuan Yew, called the
trial of Soeharto a "mistake", saying Indonesia's "peace and
stability require more than just an ideal outcome from the
trial".
These suggestions emphasize the need for stability, order and
cultural relativism that come from a common misapprehension that
democracies lack the power to oppress and the authority to
govern.
They are fundamentally wide off the mark. Democracies require
their governments be limited, not that they be weak and
ineffective. Viewed over the long course of history, democracies
do indeed appear fragile and by no means have been immune to the
tides of history.
The trial of Soeharto is necessary to show commitment to
democracy; that everybody is equal before the law. Bringing the
military under civilian rule is important not for the
implementation of the western norm of democracy, but to
professionalize the military itself.
Meanwhile, the United States and other western countries are
calling for liberal democracy and the trial of former political
leaders. They are worried whether President Abdurrahman does in
fact have control over the military, and will hold accountable
those who have committed abuses in East Timor.
To them, Atambua and the bomb blast challenge the virtue of
democracy and betray the principle of nonviolence. In
democracies, power and authority should not perch easily on the
narrow ledge of an unelected apparatus, oligarch or military
force.
Concerned over values, however, the West may overlook the
urgency of a number of other priorities. Atambua and exerting
authority over the military are critical to Abdurrahman. However,
he also has to deal with the problem of Aceh, where more than 60
people have been killed in fighting in the past fortnight alone,
and in the islands of Maluku, where there have been no meaningful
steps toward reaching a permanent end to the 21-month conflict.
It is hard to gauge which is the most serious crisis facing
President Abdurrahman.
Indonesia cannot go back to its autocratic past; neither can
it ensure stability under the current system. Yet democracies
have demonstrated remarkable resiliency over time.
Regrettably, nearly four decades of autocratic rule have
strengthened the tendency of antiexecutive politics. The passing
months have shown that the legislature has failed to become an
effective working body, instead interpreting its powers as the
ability to torpedo the government rather than trying to work in
partnership with it.
One should not assume democracies are efficient in their
deliberations. Decision-making in a large, complex society can be
a messy, grueling and time-consuming process. In a perilous
transition, democracy may collapse from political failure or
succumb to internal division.
What we do need is a professional approach to statecraft,
dividing power and responsibility, and doing away with
irresponsibility and dabbling in politics.
To Abdurrahman, the trial of Soeharto could well be a final
"apocalyptic struggle" between the forces of good and evil. It is
not just about the trial of graft, but also whether Indonesia is
willing to come to terms with its history.
By acting responsibly to resolve this issue now, President
Abdurrahman can demonstrate his commitment to the virtue of
democracy. He would lose enormous political support if he caved
in to terror and violence.
True democrats should not vacillate about the virtue of
democracy. President Abdurrahman deserves the support of the
people. Maximillien Robespierre (1758-1794), in On the Moral and
Political Principles of Domestic Policy, wrote that "when the
government lacks virtue, there remains a resource in the people's
virtue; but when people themselves are corrupted, liberty is
already lost".
No one should harbor a death wish for democracy.
A number of friendly countries have suggested solutions to
Indonesia's problems. Kusnanto Anggoro, a senior researcher at
the Centre for Strategic and International Studies and a lecturer
in the postgraduate studies program at the University of
Indonesia in Jakarta discusses these proposals.
JAKARTA (JP): President Abdurrahman Wahid is struggling for
survival, with the shadow of the old regime posing serious
challenges for him. The popular view is that former president
Soeharto's cronies and some rouge elements in the military are
behind the bomb blast at the Jakarta Stock Exchange building, the
assassination of a leading gubernatorial candidate in Aceh and
the death of three United Nations relief workers in Atambua, West
Timor.
Many people have offered solutions to the country's problems.
Prime Minister Mahathir Mohammad of Malaysia suggested that
Abdurrahman take a more autocratic approach, as liberal democracy
"cannot and should not be applied to every country".
The former premier of Singapore, Lee Kuan Yew, called the
trial of Soeharto a "mistake", saying Indonesia's "peace and
stability require more than just an ideal outcome from the
trial".
These suggestions emphasize the need for stability, order and
cultural relativism that come from a common misapprehension that
democracies lack the power to oppress and the authority to
govern.
They are fundamentally wide off the mark. Democracies require
their governments be limited, not that they be weak and
ineffective. Viewed over the long course of history, democracies
do indeed appear fragile and by no means have been immune to the
tides of history.
The trial of Soeharto is necessary to show commitment to
democracy; that everybody is equal before the law. Bringing the
military under civilian rule is important not for the
implementation of the western norm of democracy, but to
professionalize the military itself.
Meanwhile, the United States and other western countries are
calling for liberal democracy and the trial of former political
leaders. They are worried whether President Abdurrahman does in
fact have control over the military, and will hold accountable
those who have committed abuses in East Timor.
To them, Atambua and the bomb blast challenge the virtue of
democracy and betray the principle of nonviolence. In
democracies, power and authority should not perch easily on the
narrow ledge of an unelected apparatus, oligarch or military
force.
Concerned over values, however, the West may overlook the
urgency of a number of other priorities. Atambua and exerting
authority over the military are critical to Abdurrahman. However,
he also has to deal with the problem of Aceh, where more than 60
people have been killed in fighting in the past fortnight alone,
and in the islands of Maluku, where there have been no meaningful
steps toward reaching a permanent end to the 21-month conflict.
It is hard to gauge which is the most serious crisis facing
President Abdurrahman.
Indonesia cannot go back to its autocratic past; neither can
it ensure stability under the current system. Yet democracies
have demonstrated remarkable resiliency over time.
Regrettably, nearly four decades of autocratic rule have
strengthened the tendency of antiexecutive politics. The passing
months have shown that the legislature has failed to become an
effective working body, instead interpreting its powers as the
ability to torpedo the government rather than trying to work in
partnership with it.
One should not assume democracies are efficient in their
deliberations. Decision-making in a large, complex society can be
a messy, grueling and time-consuming process. In a perilous
transition, democracy may collapse from political failure or
succumb to internal division.
What we do need is a professional approach to statecraft,
dividing power and responsibility, and doing away with
irresponsibility and dabbling in politics.
To Abdurrahman, the trial of Soeharto could well be a final
"apocalyptic struggle" between the forces of good and evil. It is
not just about the trial of graft, but also whether Indonesia is
willing to come to terms with its history.
By acting responsibly to resolve this issue now, President
Abdurrahman can demonstrate his commitment to the virtue of
democracy. He would lose enormous political support if he caved
in to terror and violence.
True democrats should not vacillate about the virtue of
democracy. President Abdurrahman deserves the support of the
people. Maximillien Robespierre (1758-1794), in On the Moral and
Political Principles of Domestic Policy, wrote that "when the
government lacks virtue, there remains a resource in the people's
virtue; but when people themselves are corrupted, liberty is
already lost".
No one should harbor a death wish for democracy.