Understanding Gus Dur?
Understanding Gus Dur?
From Neraca
The people must understand Gus Dur. Is it not the other way
around? That is my question arising from the title of the recent
seminar organized by The Jakarta Post. Arief Budiman and Mochtar
Pabottingi were among the speakers on the occasion.
Do we, the public, always have to understand Abdurrahman
Wahid's actions (Gus Dur) as President? Is it correct for him to
act capriciously, saying "why make a fuss of minor matters"
without understanding the market? According to fund manager and
legislator Theo F. Toemion, the market has now punished Gus Dur
(Suara Pembaruan, April 26).
How is it? Is the market willing to follow Gus Dur? Certainly
the market and the people do not follow the actions of Gus Dur as
the top executive of this country. They only react to his
actions. And their reactions are a reflection of the government's
performance.
Now the value of the rupiah has declined, breaking the
psychological barrier of Rp 8,000 against the U.S. dollar. The
country's foreign exchange reserves have also diminished compared
to last month. Observers say it was all due to Gus Dur's sacking
of two Cabinet ministers.
Is it true? Everything remains vague. Perhaps there is a
political reason behind it or an economic and political reason
regarding the distribution of state-owned resources.
Soon, the coordinating minister for politics and security and
the minister of home affairs will be replaced. Then the
implementation of regional autonomy will be launched (Media
Indonesia, April 26). Thus, possibly the changes in the Cabinet
have a far-sighted objective. But for whom? Let's hope it is for
the nation and the state, not for certain political parties and
mass organizations, so-called "Gus Dur and friends".
Some people say Gus Dur's leadership is in the pesantren
(Islamic boarding school) style. In my opinion whatever style Gus
Dur uses is his right. Only, whatever style he uses, it is
essential for Gus Dur as President to understand the will of the
people and the market. Gus Dur's drastic actions are now
sufficient to change the pattern of thinking in the style of the
New Order regime.
Especially since Gus Dur's grand strategy in the political and
legal field are now palpable. However, we remain in the dark in
the economic field. We are continuously affected by the IMF's
Letter of Intent.
ABDILLAH KAMIL
Jakarta