Towards turmoil-free change

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.