FAITH IN INDONESIA

FAITH IN INDONESIA
The shape of the world a generation from now will be influenced far more by how we communicate the values of our society to others than by military or diplomatic superiority. William Fulbright, 1964
Showing posts with label democracy in Indonesia. Show all posts
Showing posts with label democracy in Indonesia. Show all posts

Wednesday, October 07, 2020

THE ANSWERS ARE: YES, YES, YES

                             Oh dear, what will the neighbours say?

The erotemes in the titles reveal much about our nervousness when writing about Indonesia.  It’s an exit should the subject complain: ‘Relax. We’re not saying you’re doing this, we’re just pondering.’

Every few years a handful of Australians squint across the Arafura Sea though there’s no pressing urgency.  The lookers are usually salaried academics pitching to their peers rather than the public and published abroad.  Prophets not without honour except in their own country. But they are good at asking questions.

In 2015 it was former diplomat Ken Ward’s Condemned to Crisis? Three years later came Tim Lindsey and Dave McRae’s anthology Strangers Next Door?  

Now Tom Power and Eve Warburton’s collection of essays:  Democracy in Indonesia – from Stagnation to Regression?  

The answers are yes, yes and yes. After just two decades as the world’s third-largest democracy, the Indonesian version is going down the gurgler, according to the 21 contributors, including eight Indonesians. 

When economics professor Emil Salim, 90, – a minister under second president Soeharto - launched the book online he was astonishingly blunt: ‘Populist mobilization, growing intolerance, deepening sectarianism, increasingly dysfunctional electoral and representative institutions, and the deterioration of civil liberties.

‘A vibrant democracy requires a total shift of direction in economic development, which has contributed to the ever-increasing unequal distribution of land and other natural resources between a narrow wealthy elite and the mass lower-income class.

‘An effective democracy requires the cutting off of links among local candidates of elected officials by financially strong businesspeople. In brief, the contributors of the book argue for a complete separation from the political and corrupt business behaviours of past regimes if a clean democracy is to survive.’

Concerns are largely being ignored except by a few courageous journalists and civil society activists. They’re suffering failure fatigue as their one-time light on the hill, President Joko Widodo, reveals his pedestrian vision doesn’t lift higher than his obsession with infrastructure.

The situation so far is not as dysfunctional as the US.  There’s probably no black hand, just inattention.  Democracy evolves or stagnates. Like personal relationships it needs nurturing, not waiting for crises to trigger repairs.

Widodo’s lacklustre leadership – compounded by going soft on corruption and nuzzling up to the army - is opening space to big business, the military and faith fanatics with no interest in reform. This is worrying indeed and should be flashing alerts, particularly to Australia.

Instead we’re lulled by the cliché that Indonesia supports ‘moderate Islam’.  Superficially true, when compared with Saudi Arabia.  It’s convenient to forget Aceh provincial religious officials are allowed to publicly thrash adulterers and gays unconscious, blasphemy charges are used to purge dissidents, and Shi’a Muslims in Java get their houses torched.

The assurance also ignores the kingdom’s funding of new mosques across the Republic and promotion of the ultraconservative Wahhabism doctrine.  The founder of Tempo magazine Goenawan Mohamad has called this ‘the Arabisation of Indonesia.’  He should have been in this book.

If the Republic continues to drift back to the authoritarianism of last century, when Soeharto’s gun-backed 32-year rule was targeting  freedoms, those born this century will face repressions they’ve never experienced – unlike their parents.  

Almost 30 per cent of the population is aged under 24.  They know more about the outside world and choice.  They’re looking for a better deal. 

Now with social media they can speak out, though that’s getting dangerous. Dr Ken Setiawan’s chapter is on repression under Widodo and the use of defamation laws to close down critics and make insulting the president an offence.

She writes of ‘illiberal democracy’ ... where there are ‘serious limitations on civil liberties and the rule of law.’  She does so with authority.  Her father, the poet and intellectual Hersri Setiawan, spent seven brutal years as a political prisoner on Buru Island.  That was during Soeharto’s New Order when anyone leaning left was an imagined threat – a censored story still little known in Indonesia. 

Defining and measuring democracy is tricky everywhere.  The book has tables and charts but these sterile stats will only satisfy data digesters.  The Economist Intelligence Unit ranks Indonesia a ‘flawed democracy’ though embraced by voters – an 81 per cent non-compulsory turn-out at last year’s presidential contest. Compare this with the US 2016 election – 55.7 per cent.

After former general Prabowo Subianto lost, his supporters rioted, though probably not spontaneously.  Some interpreted this as nostalgics yearning for a dictator; political scientist Burhanuddin Muhtadi argues otherwise:  ‘Although they were likely to view democratic performance in negative terms, they still saw democracy as the only game in town’.

Whether electors are getting value for their vote is questionable. In the 2019 general election around 245,000 candidates contested more than 20,000 seats in national and local legislatures. No policies, just airbrushed photos including headgear to prove piety.

A subjective but accessible way is studying the media which Ross Tapsell has been doing for many years. However in 2019 along with McRae, he was denied entry in a reported ‘crackdown’ on foreign academics.

Suppression of independent inquiry thrives in all autocracies.  When last century’s  controls were lifted by Soeharto’s immediate successor BJ Habibie, and expanded by fourth president Abdurrahman (Gus Dur) Wahid, there was general approval.

The downside was the return from exile of the firebrand cleric Abu Bakar Ba'asyir who allegedly inspired his followers to bomb churches and the Bali nightclub.  Surprisingly the greybeard advocate for sharia law doesn’t get an index ref, though his infamy has done much to denigrate post-Soeharto reforms, including democracy.

The latest exploiter of this century’s freedoms is the leader of the Islamic Defenders’ Front, Rizieq Shihab who fronted the successful 2016 campaign to oust and jail the Protestant ethnic Chinese Jakarta Governor Basuki (Ahok) Tjahaja Purnama.  Shihab is apparently in exile in Saudi Arabia.

Tapsell argues ‘the coercion of media owners’ by the Joko Widodo government and the ‘failure of media oligarchs to provide independent critical coverage of Indonesia’s political elite’ contribute to democracy’s decline. 

Australians have no cause to sneer.  An American –Rupert Murdoch – dominates the Eastern States media.  In WA Kerry Stokes controls what most Sandgropers read, see and hear – including the billionaire’s views on dealing with China.

Widodo, for all his faults, comes from a civilian and small business background so has some understanding of how the poor suffer.  He still has time to remember their plight.

 He can’t stand for a third term which Prabowo may well recontest in 2024 (when he’ll be 72) as he believes he’s destined to lead.  If that event, Trump’s rule will look benign.

Soeharto’s former son-in-law was dishonourably discharged from the Army in 1998 for ‘misinterpreting orders’ in the alleged abduction of 23 pro-democracy activists. Thirteen remain missing.  He then fled to exile in Jordan but has now been appointed Defence Minister by Widodo, giving him a splendid platform to mount his ‘oligarchic populism’. 

Regional elections are scheduled for 9 December 2020. Voters will elect nine governors, 224 regents, and 37 mayors.   Prabowo’s features currently dominate street banners supporting his Gerindra (Great Indonesia Movement) Party candidates.

Endy Bayuni, a former editor of The Jakarta Post is a rarity in academic analyses – a writer of headlines, not footnotes.  The newsman objected to the book’s title:  ‘I cannot accept that this backsliding of democracy is irreversible ... the overall trajectory has always been to move forward.’

Maybe his optimism is a defence against foreigners initiating critiques which could have been done by locals.  The outsiders have certainly used their safe distance to muster some worrying trends.

If these come to pass the next book out of an ANU talkfest will be Farewell Democracy – and no eroteme.

First published in Pearls & Irritations, 7 October 2020: 
https://johnmenadue.com/oh-dear-what-will-the-neighbours-say/

 

 

 

 

Thursday, October 10, 2019

REMOTE VILLAGER OR JAKARTA ELITE, ALL VOTES EQUAL - FOR NOW


Democracy – can it be improved?         
  

            

The April general election in Indonesia which saw President Joko Widodo returned for a second five-year term was a logistical megatrial for the Komisi Pemilihan Umum (General Elections Commission - KPU), and an ordeal for participants.

Around 240,000 candidates jostled for over 20,000 seats in local and national legislatures in the world’s third largest democracy.  (India is first, the US second). 

Ben Bland of Australia’s Lowy Institute called it ‘the most complicated single-day ballot in global history’. 

Although almost 600 of the seven million Indonesian election workers reportedly died from exhaustion, the event was reckoned a success, though the operation may be modified next time round in 2024. Indian parliamentary elections this year were spread across six weeks.

The original Greek idea of democracy (‘demos’ - commoners, ‘kratos’ - strength) has been around for 2,500 years yet it’s still a work in progress. No nation has a mortgage on how best to represent the will of the people so ensuring voting is fair and equal is a global issue.
Now Indonesians and others have the chance to comment through a neighbor’s parliamentary inquiry. The search for definitions and better ways has spread to Australia, a self-governing democracy since 1901. 
The Senate (the upper house representing the States in the national parliament in Canberra) is holding an open inquiry into Nationhood, National Identity and Democracy and inviting submissions – including from foreign individuals and associations.
The British Economist Intelligence Unit publishes a Democracy Index.  This ranks 164 United Nations member states into ‘full democracies’, ‘flawed democracies’, ‘hybrid regimes’ and ‘authoritarian regimes’.  It does this by measuring pluralism, civil liberties and political cultures.
Indonesia is labeled a ‘flawed democracy’, along with neighbors Singapore, Malaysia and the Philippines. This group also includes the United States where only 55 per cent got involved in the 2016 elections.
More than 80 per cent of the 193 million eligible Indonesian voters exercised their rights though participation was voluntary.  These figures seem to show the Republic’s teenage democracy is robust and optimistic despite having the ‘flawed’ tag.

Indonesia only became a democracy this century after 32 years of the late General Soeharto’s New Order dictatorship so many questions are bubbling to the surface.


Foremost is this:  Is democracy, which comes from a Western cultural tradition, the best model for choosing leaders? The winners are happy, the losers not so, like supporters of the failed presidential candidate Prabowo Subianto.

They claim it’s unfair that a villager laboring in a rice field should have the same single-vote power as a member of the educated elite debating esoteric issues in Jakarta’s high-rise offices.

As outlined in Strategic Review two years ago http://sr-indonesia.com/web-exclusives/view/diehard-myths-threaten-indonesian-democracy a hankering remains for the traditional decision-making systems like musyawarah (consensus after long discussion).  That way differences can be resolved without resorting to a binary Yes-No vote.
A decade ago US social scientist Larry Diamond’s book The Spirit of Democracy: The Struggle to Build Free Societies throughout the World, argued that a renewed democratic boom needs ‘vigorous support of good governance—the rule of law, security, protection of individual rights, and shared economic prosperity—and free civic organizations.’

Why should a ‘full democracy’ nation like Australia indulge in a spate of navel gazing?  The riots in Hong Kong show political ideologies can no longer be confined by high border walls when the Internet wafts across oceans and immigration controls.

Thousands of Chinese students studying in Australia and raised to believe in the supremacy of a one-party state have been clashing with pro-democracy supporters on Australian streets and campuses.  Free-speech issues have been wrenched out of political science tutorials and onto the front pages of mainstream newspapers.

Of the 800,000 overseas students in Australia, 230,000 are from mainland China.
Submissions to the Senate inquiry are not confined to Australian citizens and agencies based Down Under, so psephologists, policy analysts, journalists and others here and elsewhere can make their own points.   They do not have to be specific to Australia.

They need to be quick as the closing date is the end of this month.  
Of interest to internationalists are three questions among the many flagged for attention:


*          What role does globalization and economic interdependence and economic development play in forming or disrupting traditional notions of national identity?

*          What are contemporary notions of cultural identity, multiculturalism and regionalism?
*          The extent to which nation states balance domestic imperatives and sovereignty and international obligations;
The inquiry’s discussion paper to aid submitters can be downloaded here:  https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/Senate/Legal_and_Constitutional_Affairs/Nationhood/Discussion_paper   
The paper states that ‘around the world, voters seem increasingly dissatisfied with how democratic politics works for them. Public trust in democratic institutions is declining. Notions of national identity, which can be the roots of a democratic community, are changing as our world becomes increasingly interconnected.’
Apart from disillusionment there’s growing disinterest.  This month The Guardian newspaper polled 1,075 voters, finding only 15 per cent follow events in Canberra closely.
A similar number showed no interest in politics, with the rest casual consumers of national affairs.  What Australians really like is sport.
The discussion paper adds: ‘There is a wealth of evidence showing a worrying decline in the level of public trust. In 2007, 86 per cent of Australians were satisfied with how democracy works in Australia. That figure is now 41 per cent.
‘Evidence also suggests that those with the lowest incomes are least satisfied with democracy.’
These issues aren’t limited to the Southern Hemisphere. British researchers have revealed around half of UK voters reckon the big parties and politicians don't care about the wee folk who put them into power.

A Pew Research Center study in the US disclosed that only 17 per cent of Americans said they can trust the government in Washington to do the right thing 'just about always' or 'most of the time'.
Australians won’t be the only people studying the Senate inquiry’s findings due next May. 

Whether the Australian Parliament or other legislatures will implement any recommendations is another matter.
##

First published in Strategic Review - 9 October 2019.  See:http://sr.sgpp.ac.id/post/democracy-can-it-be-improved