Topple Gus Dur and tear Indonesia apart, or else...

Topple Gus Dur and tear Indonesia apart, or else...

Get rid of Gus Dur and plunge the country into chaos or retain
him but save the country. To choose the lesser evil between the
two has intrigued political observer Soedjati Djiwandono .

JAKARTA (JP): Since the election of Abdurrahman 'Gus Dur'
Wahid as President, supposedly the most democratic the nation has
ever had, violence has not subsided, if not even escalating; the
nation is in greater danger of disintegrating, and thus national
unity ever more remote; bickering among politicians have
continued unabated, and so has the tug of war between the
presidency and the legislature. For the common people, life is
harder, more uncertain, more frustrating and frightening.

In the mean time, the President has continued to make one
controversial statement after another, which would further
confuse the people and intensify political bickering among the
political elite. Does he then, under the circumstances, deserve
continued support of the nation, especially in the light of
incessant assaults on him by his political opponents in the
legislative body, many of whom have elected him President?

It is increasingly clear that such assaults are directed at
the President -- through such cases as the so-called Buloggate
and Bruneigate, in which he is suspected of embezzlement -- with
the single-minded aim of unseating him, as yet not even half-way
his term of office. The basic choice, of course, is between
letting the President continue to carry on until the end of his
term or forcing him out of office.

Indeed, the President himself has publicly acknowledged that
the people have lost confidence in his government. Yet, short of
interference by Providence, which is beyond rational analysis, to
expect him to resign at his own free will seems to be out of the
question.

There is then only one possibility, namely, to force him out
of office. One way would be to unseat him through impeachment by
a special session of the People's Consultative Assembly (MPR).
This, constitutionally, would take some lengthy process and need
really compelling constitutional reasons. The other way, as has
been aired by certain apparently unthinking and definitely
frustrated individuals -- aren't we all -- would be through some
kind of a "revolution", be it the form of "people's power" or the
redundant formula of a "people's revolution."

That, however, would be a wrong lesson the nation learns from
the experience of President Soeharto's fall in May 1998. One
should not miss the irony of such an idea. After all, so much in
contrast to Soeharto, Abdurrahman Wahid has been democratically
elected, albeit, as I have mentioned on various occasions, by
Indonesian standards, that is on the basis of a fundamentally
defective Constitution of 1945.

Either way by which President Wahid is ousted of office, by
impeachment or by "revolution", it would be disastrous for the
nation. Far worse than social conflicts, a civil war -- heaven
forbid -- would ensue that might well destroy Indonesia as a
nation and a nation-state. Being an infant as a nation, a toddler
experimenting and muddling through a long and tortuous process of
democratization, Indonesians are yet to learn -- the hard way --
how to accept defeat, no matter how constitutional and democratic
the process may be.

There is only one alternative left, not the best, but the
lesser evil. Politics is often described as the art of the
possible. This is it. We should let President Wahid carry on with
the job to the end of his term.

For that he would need the support of all the people, the
whole nation. Included in such a full support would be for all
the people to maintain a critical yet constructive view and
attitude, not in order to trip him up but to help him improve his
performance and that of his entire government. This would be a
very costly and risky exercise, but the future of this nation
would be worth it.

The deep and prolonged multidimensional crisis of this nation
is beyond the capability of any single government during a single
term of office to overcome. The current government under
President Wahid should be given its chance at least to prepare
the ground and pave the way for further process towards genuine
reform, supremacy of law, promotion of justice, democratization,
all of which serve the foundation for the new Indonesia.

However, the further process should be left to the next
governments (in the plural!) of the next decades. For President
Wahid to strive for a second term would be sheer arrogance. For
the people to entertain such an expectation would be total
ignorance. On the part of both, it would be simply unrealistic,
unreasonable, and insensible. Under a new president for the
following five years after Wahid's term, the nation would need a
fresh generation of better qualified politicians that should be
groomed from right now.

Certainly, President Wahid has his own weaknesses and
shortcomings. One may rightly argue that he is not the best in
the ideal sense. But if he deserves our full support, it is
primarily because he is at the moment the lesser evil in the
long-term interest of the whole nation.

The rest of the top politicians of the day seem to be out of
question by way of the top national leadership. Vice President
Megawati seems to be of doubtful capability and uncertain
capacity to learn. MPR Speaker Amien Rais does not prove credible
and untrustworthy as many people thought he was. House speaker
Akbar Tandjung, while probably the most seasoned politician,
would rightly be seen -- especially by young and the poor -- as a
comeback of the New Order, which includes the military. What
could be worse than a moment, when a great nation of over two
hundred million people cannot think of having an alternative
leader?