Vote for change

What was yesterday's election all about if the winner was already widely predicted beforehand? The prospect of another landslide victory for Golkar gave the impression that there will be no change in government or its policies. Signals are that there will be no change in national leadership either when the People's Consultative Assembly elects a president in March. One could be forgiven for seeing this year's election, with all its rigid and restrictive rules, as a mere formality to give legitimacy to the present government. In short, the election could be seen as a vote to preserve the status quo.

It was heartening to hear President Soeharto on the eve of polling day on Wednesday promoting the election as a vehicle for change. "Through the election, we can plan changes in state policies and national development in an orderly fashion, without any upheaval," the President said in his televised speech.

In the preceding campaign period, the United Development Party (PPP) managed to project itself as the party for change, as a reformist party. The massive outpouring of PPP supporters onto streets, and the restlessness in some parts of the country seen during the campaign, further attested to the growing demand for change. Golkar also campaigned for change, but because of its ties to the establishment, the message did not come across too convincingly. Still, as Golkar chairman Harmoko has stated, the political group is seeking changes that are gradual, peaceful and orderly. Golkar already has a blue print, the "Vision 2018" envisaging Indonesia's path for the next 20 years or so.

At least we know now that there is a consensus among the nation's political elite that Indonesia must progress, and that progress means undertaking some changes. There will probably be differences in how fast and what kinds of changes Indonesia must go through, but these could, and should, be resolved through democratic and nonviolent means. As long as everyone keeps this perspective in mind, there is no reason to fear change and its consequences. Even the shortcomings of the current political system, including the way elections are held, can be changed if it is for the betterment of the nation.

President Soeharto in his speech acknowledged the need to further improve the political system because the present one is far from ideal. He described the election as a manifestation of democracy, and that democracy itself is part of a chain in the long process of nation building. This is all the more reason why the nation must work even harder to strengthen democracy.

For what it's worth, this year's election is still the best means available for anyone hoping to see or affect change in this country. It may not be as effective as one would like to see, because of the rigid political system and all its restrictions, but at the very least, it is not destructive.

Ultimately, however, the chief initiative for change in the next five years must come from politicians elected to the House of Representatives. It is somewhat discouraging to recall the way candidates for this general election were selected and screened by the three political groups and the authorities, a process fraught with flaws.

There is no sense in going back now. With all the shortcomings of the election system, the people, or at least a large majority of them, have voted. The nation must now give the elected politicians the benefit of the doubt to fight and struggle for, as well as defend, people's interests for the next five years. One can only hope that these representatives, from whichever political faction, will heed the demand for change that was so apparent during the campaign. Then, and only then, can we look back and say that the election was worth it.