Towards turmoil-free change

By Onghokham

JAKARTA (JP): The real issue in recent political developments might be "succession and change without turmoil", a luxury which this country has not had since 1942, when the Dutch colonial period ended.

When Indonesia's first president, Sukarno, became seriously ill in the 1960s, the political atmosphere became very hot. All sorts of new forces and new alliances emerged in preparation for the succession.

Rumors had it that Sukarno would die within months, however, he actually lived several years after losing office. Unlike the current situation, the succession crisis of that time emerged amid the signs of a disintegrating political system, such as high inflation, bad economic conditions, a major war without hope of a solution and others.

It was a situation which would eventually lead to the civil struggle of the late months of 1965 and early 1966 which cost lots of lives and suffering.

Nowadays, in a much more stable situation than in 1965, people are again preparing for succession due to the advanced age of their leader. However, this succession will also be that of a generation -- the current president is one of the last of the Generation of 1945.

The succeeding generation cannot lay the same claims to revolutionary legality as the present one. The first sounding of the gong in this succession game was heard with the formation of Association of Indonesian Moslem Intellectuals, followed by the establishment of other intellectual groups, including the Hindu, Buddhist, Catholic and Protestant intellectuals' associations. Within the same framework we see the formation of the neo-Masjumi (modernist urban Moslem) group and the neo-PNI (Nationalist) movement. Others will probably follow soon.

The sociopolitical scene of today is seeing what appears to be a revival of the old ideological streams within Indonesian society, which were so dynamic in the past.

In 1926, the young Sukarno, who had just graduated from the prestigious Engineering Faculty of Bandung (now the Bandung Institute of Technology) was very well aware of the three main political streams: Nationalism, Religion and Marxism.

He tried to unify these three main ideological streams into an anti-colonialism front. Later, as president of an independent Indonesia, still carrying out his anti-colonialism or anti-neo colonialism drive, he based his policies on the unity alliance of NASAKOM (Nationalism, Religion and Communism).

At about the same time, the conservative advisor to Dutch private entrepreneurs in the Indies, Dr. W.M.F. Treub, analyzed the Indonesian nationalist movement as consisting of three streams which he called "tendencies": Nationalists, Islamists and Marxists.

Interestingly enough, Dutch analysis termed these streams "pillars". They said that colonial history indicated anger at the mother country, which in Indonesia's case was the Netherlands. However, in Dutch society itself, the "streams" were different from those in the colonies. In the Netherlands the "pillars" or "streams" were Protestantism, Catholicism, liberalism, secularism and others. The theory goes that if the Netherlands is still a well run country it is because the elite of the various streams can and do communicate with each other, forming one coalition cabinet after the other.

Sukarno's speeches and articles on NASAKOM were directed at the Indonesian political elite, not the people. Sukarno hoped that through establishing agreement among the elite of the various streams that societal unity could be achieved nationwide. One could also argue that Sukarno's final analysis of Indonesian society as being made up of a political elite and the masses, was traditional in origin. Java's society, if not Indonesian society as a whole, had always been split into these two categories.

Within the framework of the analyses of Javanese society, we have to think of the work of noted American anthropologist, Clifford Geertz. Based on observation of Kediri society, C. Geertz, noticed three streams within Javanese society, which he termed Priyayi, Abangan and Santri.

Another American anthropologist in the early 1950s, Robert Jay, saw rural politics feeling the impact of the massacres of ulemas during the reign of the early Mataram monarchs, especially during that of Amangkurat I (1643-1678). Until the Pax Neerlandica on Java in the 1830s, the rural conflicts, known as "village wars" were rampant.

Scholars increasingly believe that the traditional rural conflicts of pre-colonial times might still dominate contemporary Java, disguised with masks of modernism, which bear labels such as nationalism, religion, and Marxism. Or in terms of the politics of the 1990s: Moslem, Protestant, Catholic, Javanese Hindu, or Javanese Buddhist.

In the 1965 situation, this kind of division led to a civil struggle which inflicted suffering and death on millions. Stories coming out of Rwanda-Burundi, Sri Lanka and other nations nowadays could just as well have come out of Indonesia in 1965 or 1966.

However, we are now in 1996, not 1966. The governmental and political structure might appear similar because governmental establishments are usually conservative and static, although society itself changes. In economic terms, the New Order, the administration created after Sukarno, has been very successful. There is no doubt about that.

Global economic development, including that in Indonesia, has always meant new developments within society. This is especially true since the New Order's development policies have relied on private sector entrepreneurship. In short, a different social structure has been created during the last 20 to 30 years of economic development and political stability. A middle class is now in existence.

Everywhere in the world these new conditions have led to a democratization process, with the new middle class as the main pillar of politics. This middle class, of course, tries to gain influence and power in order to assure its position within society and its claim to a part of future developments. If this new class has not yet shown much of its presence politically, it may be because it is still too dependent on the government, too divided among itself and because it largely consists of politically weak minorities. There is, however, the possibility that the middle class will only show its force during the actual period of the succession crisis.

However, this confined political force of the middle class has finally emerged with the formation of the Independent Election Monitoring Committee (KIPP). There were several NGOs in all sorts of fields, such as human rights, ecology, and rural development, but until recently there were none relating to the polls, which occur every five years. Rather than actively doing something about elections, the attitude of some intellectuals has been a refusal to participate in the electoral process by resorting to not voting or by deliberately invalidating ballots. This practice is known as golongan putih, or golput.

The formation of the election committee is a significant new trend within Indonesia's modern history. For the first time, an elite group of intellectuals has expressed confidence in the electoral process. In other words, it is an expressed belief in the traditional democratic formula of vox populi, vox Dei. They have legitimized the electoral process.

Indonesia held its first, and some would say, only, honest general elections in 1955. However, without strong protest, its results were discarded and the system changed to what was called "Guided Democracy" not long afterwards. The rationale used was that the political changes were to smooth the path of the revolution. Ever since that, however, little more than lip service has been paid to the sovereignty of the people. The elections lost a great deal of legitimizing powers within society.

The election monitoring committee has a long way to go before it becomes effective. First it really has to believe in the people's sovereignty and not only give it lip service. It has to become a movement from the village level to the urban level in order to be effective. Theoretically, it must, of course, remain neutral and objective during the elections in order to pinpoint those who have traditionally played foul during the electoral process.

The committee also has to define what "fair elections" mean. What about the voting of civil servants at home and not in their respective offices? What about the patronage system? How about the indirect orders of village chiefs and others?

Why is the committee a middle class force in politics? First it is neutral, second it is meant to ensure fair and honest elections, and, third, it constitutes the expressed belief in the principle of the people's sovereignty.

Increasingly this principle has become universally accepted in the former communist countries in Europe, Latin America and South and East Asia. It is seen and accepted as a vehicle of change and succession without bloodshed which, alas, has been the usual tradition of most of the world. There are still some major exceptions though.

Indonesia itself has been subject to the old routine of succession through political or social upheaval and bloodshed. The succession in Indonesia during the second half of the 20th century has been what is called cyclical in nature throughout Asia. Such succession occurs in power vacuums and follows a definable cycle.

This means that the incumbent power disintegrates and a new power has to consolidate itself, which will reconstitute the structure and policies of the old power that it has succeeded.

Meanwhile, during the intervals between old and new powers there is sociopolitical chaos which becomes increasingly worse in nature each time the cycle occurs.

This has happened since 1942 and the fall of the Netherlands Indies with the advent of the Japanese occupation.

In the interval there was pillaging, robbery and other problems, but only for brief periods. In August 1945 there also arose a vacuum of power, with the Japanese surrendering to the Allies.

The Indonesian Revolution and the new republic needed some time to consolidate. In 1959, the transition from parliamentary to guided democracy resulted in eventual upheaval. Finally there was the disintegration of Sukarno government in 1965 and the birth of the New Order. This interval claimed the largest number of victims and caused the greatest disruption in society and the lives of the people.

If Indonesia must face turmoil once again, it will find itself back to zero when the smoke clears.

It is imperative, therefore, that a new source of legitimacy, rather than that of the 1945 Generation, be found for any new government. Honest and fair elections might be the answer for the need for a new source of legitimacy. Without such legitimacy, political power will merely constitute an occupation force, based on conquest and physical might.

The writer is a historian based in Jakarta.

Window A: In economic terms, the New Order, the administration created after Sukarno, has been very successful. There is no doubt about it.

Window B: Honest and fair elections might be the answer for the need for a new source of legitimacy. Without such legitimacy, political power will merely constitute an occupation force, based on conquest and physical might.