Democracy

Economy

Education

Development

Global Issues

Research

The Concession

How PDIP gets into trouble and why it needs Akbar

2/29/04

The February’s big story in Indonesia was obviously the Akbar Tanjung’s acquittal by Indonesia Supreme Court of his corruption conviction. It has sparked controversies and raised speculations. In The Akbar’s Show we have hinted that a closed-door deal might have been the reason for Akbar’s acquittal, but we didn’t want to speculate until the smoke gets clearer. The recent revelations, however, have erased some of the doubts about the issue, making some speculations become reality. Apparently, Akbar’s acquittal is a part of a grand political concession. The questions are, with whom and at what price?

Recently was reported that Taufik Kiemas, the key figure of the PDIP has expressed interest in a formal coalition with Golkar in the presidential election.  “[Golkar] share a similar platform,” said Mr. Taufik during his recent visit to Surabaya. Source

Perhaps there is another story other than the similarity of ideology. So it appears that the other party involved in the concession is the PDIP (Indonesian Democratic Party – Struggle). But, why?

The erosion of reputation

It is not difficult to realize that the reputation of the PDIP has eroded during the last four years. Its close connection to the resurgence of the military power and influence aside, what people strongly dislike of the party is its weak commitment to combat corruption, revamp the judicial system and to provide an acceptable solution to the nation’s socio-economic problems, three of the nation’s most fundamental challenges.

The diminishing of “Megawati factor”, a phenomenon that has elevated the party in 1990s to become a major player in the nation, is also another factor causing the erosion of the party’s reputation. Objectively, without the name of “Soekarno”, it is hard to imagine that Megawati could energize millions of folks and rise to her current level. The name of Soekarno, just like JFK in the US, is still an aura. Moreover, with the crisis of national leadership in the late 90s, millions of people were suddenly dreaming of Soekarno, the nation’s first and the charismatic president. “No father,” shouted some folks, “the daughter is ok as well.” After all, Indonesia is not a unique case. Pakistan and Philippines have already elected the daughters of their former national leaders to lead their countries.

But the aura of a name has its limit. While some people might still find it appealing and put sentiment before rationality, others have come to question the capability of the individual who carries the legacy of the name in leading a troubled country. Much of their concern is, ironically, due to the performance of Megawati herself. Specifically they question her tendency to distance from the folks, the same folks who really view her as a part of their community.

Whether one likes or dislikes Soeharto, the former president had something good to offer: his town-hall meetings. There is no doubt that those meetings, or as often called folk meetings, were highly ceremonial, heavily bureaucratic and very costly.  But at least people could see him talking candidly, always with his repetitive word “daripada”, and answering people’s questions with smiles. People could form their judgment about his communication skills and his understanding of the nation’s problems. It would be naïve to assume that the questions asked to him were spontaneous. But even in a pre-arranged questions-and-answers environment communication skills are still greatly needed.

The bottom line is, as a leader, Megawati must not hide, but should come forward; should not pretend as not having weaknesses, but should emphasize her strengths and vision in leading a country. It is also at those opportunities Megawati could demonstrate herself as the people’s leader, a leader that cares of people’s concerns and a leader who really wants to fight for the nation’s interest, not solely for her family’s interest. Put it simply, it is at those opportunities Megawati could define herself as a leader, not as someone who just happened to inherit a legacy. What is really lack of the Megawati’s leadership, as many questioning, is the leadership itself: who is really in charge? This is because people rarely see her speak of her mind about the nation’s challenges and her strengths and vision in responding to the challenges. Whether people agree or disagree with her/his strengths and vision, it is a secondary issue. Reasonable people will evaluate her objectively and those who strongly dislike her would probably never like her anyway, regardless of her public appearance.

Had Megawati followed Soeharto’s food step and made the meetings less ceremonial, less bureaucratic, less costly, more spontaneous, and more on substance, her popularity would have been higher than what she has today. Megawati’s popularity has dropped because it relies too much on the name of Soekarno, not on the substance of her strengths and vision. Instead of erecting a monument, her own capabilities, on the shoulder of a giant – her father’s name, she has almost left the latter flatly.

The third factor causing the erosion of the PDIP’s popularity is the failure of the party to carry out an internal reform. Built upon the disfranchised PDI (Indonesian Democratic Party) in 1993, joint subsequently by several military generals and idealistic figures such as Kwik Kian Gie and Frans Seda, and inspired by its proclaim as a grass-root party with a nationalism ideology, the PDIP has become a party of hope in 1999, at least for more than 30 percent of the voters. With a strong leadership, good national policies and a sound internal recruitment strategy, the party could garner a higher percentage of votes in the 2004 elections. But that is very unlikely to happen. While the party has failed miserably on the first two aspects, it is almost doomed at the latter. For the last four year, the party has been unsuccessful in developing a recruitment policy that could both attract the middle class, especially the intellectuals and business people, and the mass.  Instead, the party is still relying heavily on the old crack politicians, the party’s elite and other influential figures who joint it after leaving their former parties.

The problem with the old crack politicians is while they have idealism, an essential ingredient in building an ideal party, they lack of optimism – managerial and intellectual skills as well as fresh ideas. A more problematic perhaps is their too familiarity. Just as people were so familiar with 30 years of Suharto’s presidency, people also got bored with his familiarity. This is absolutely normal. People generally want change – be it about environment, people and etc, and it applies in almost every aspect of life. Take a sport for example. At some point, people get bored with Michael Jordan, no matter how great he plays basketball is. They want a new face, that’s why many people are now in tune with Kobe Bryant, especially before the allegation of his sexual assault. And also people get bored with Sean Connery and want to see a new and fresh face, and now they admire Tom Cruise. These are great people in sport and entertainment industries where lies, deception and hypocrisy (except when they build their career on anabolic stereoid) have little contribution to the quality of their playing and acting, their means of expressing their capability.

Meanwhile, politicians mostly express their capability through their statements, rhetoric and votes on policy and laws. In both cases – listening or reading politicians’ statements, rhetoric and learning about their votes, people get bored much quicker than watching great games and wonderful acting. The politicians, if they are around too long, are becoming a boring factor. And worse, they are becoming liability rather than assets to their party. In the US for example, no matter how the Democratic Party will spin the “overstaying” political existence of Edward Kennedy, he does more harm than bring benefit to his party. His recent over-the line accusations of the Bush Administration of cocking the Iraq war in Texas solely for political gain is an indicator that he can no longer produce fresh and constructive ideas in debating his party opponent’s policy. And eventually, his statements will likely dissuade some independent voters in the 2004 elections from voting for the Democrats. 

The old crack politicians must go just as regeneration is something inevitable in life.

Constantly keeping the old cracks at the top has already been a failure, continuously placing the party crossers, those who left other parties to join the PDIP, at influential posts has been a blunder. If the PDIP really wants to be a respectable, it must start by building a respectable recruitment process. While the crossers may bring resources to the party, they must not have a central role in the party.

Lastly, the party’s ideas and recruitment strategy have also failed miserably in attracting the intellectuals and business people of the young generations. Eventually, a good and strong party must have a strong intellectual base. If it is mainly based on “grass-root”, claiming itself to be a party of “wong cilik” (low class) because all its elite are wong cilik, its fate has been sealed: a marginal party. Many of the party’s national and local elites do not possess real commitment to promote their nation’s and their region’s interest. And many of them are not intellectually refreshing and challenging.

Kwik Kian Gie maybe an exception, but he lacks a fundamental factor in building a politics of persuasion -- a politics which is based on civilized debates and networks. That is, he is not trying to reach out to others who have idealism and capabilities, especially of the young generations. Rather, it seems he is trying to portray himself as a sinless individual who knows everything, who is better than anybody else and who is out of touch from the young generations.

Maintaining status quo

It appears that the PDIP, just like the old Suharto’s political machine, views the young generations merely as a power to intimidate others physically, not as an intellectual base and main resources to the future of the party and the nation. Recent physical clashes involving barisan muda (banteng) PDIP and the absent of think-thank as well as intellectual debates involving the young generations within the party are indicators that support the assertion.

The failure of the PDIP to launch an internal reform is very likely due to the intention of the party’s elite to keep the status quo. But keeping a status quo has often been, if not always, a sign of regress rather than progress.  What the party’s elite apparently has missed is time and environment have changed. And while the environment has changed, the PDIP is still operating under the old paradigm: try to convince people at the last minute by using the old method -- a politics of money and power. The new paradigm already suggests that only through a good preparation and only by using a politics of ideas and persuasion, a party can build its credential and win the people’s votes. And if in 1999 people still had no idea of what the party was all about, now they have a better picture: the party is no better than the old political machine of the New Order regime, Golkar. In such case, when keeping the status quo becomes a top priority, failure or defeat is just a matter of time. Indeed, the party now finds itself in trouble. It lacks not only ideas, but also human resources. As expressed by Mr. Kwik in the beginning of February, the PDIP could be the the smallest party -- get the lowest votes, in this election year. And Megawati’s presidency looks like to end permanently in 2004. They need a partner.

Enter Akbar Tanjung. But why is him?

The Akbar’s factor

Not surprisingly, during his recent visit to Surabaya, Mr. Kiemas said Megawati deserved a presidential running mate of the calibre of Golkar leader Akbar Tandjung or Nahdlatul Ulama (NU) head Hasyim Muzadi. “They share a similar platform,” said Mr. Kiemas. Meanwhile, President Megawati has hinted that she might get Golkar leader Akbar Tandjung to be her running mate in the upcoming presidential election. It was reported that Megawati was eyeing a quick finish to the election and, therefore, would need a running mate who could ensure a landslide win and no run-off election. Source

And Golkar seems to be the final choice, for several reasons.

Firstly, although building a coalition with NU is beneficial both for the PDIP and NU, the difference between the two cannot fully be bridged by a rather vague similarity in their political platforms. The PDIP is based on nationalism ideology and its members and supporters are people from different religious background. On the other hand, NU, while it strives for national unity, cannot disregard its base, homogenous religious followers, Islam. This does not imply that a coalition between a nationalism-based party and religious-based one cannot be built. There is more reason to it.

The relationship between PDIP and NU has not been so intimate since the ousting of the former president, Abdurrahman Wahid, the PKB (National Awakening Party) in 2001. The NU, an organization which claims 40 million supporters, is nominally affiliated with the PKB, which finished fourth in the 1999 election. And if Mr. Wahid decided to run for president, which apparently he will, NU will be confronted with difficult choices, either to support the PKB, to stand behind NU leader or to form a coalition with the PDIP. Given its history and tradition, it is really hard to imagine that NU will abandon Mr. Wahid for Mrs. Megawati.

Secondly is Golkar’s influence. While Golkar has been associated with a bad history, surprisingly it still has a relatively important influence. Having enjoyed its domination as a ruling party for almost three decades prior to the 1999 election, the party’s national and regional and infrastructure and networks are still well placed. Even at the lowest point of its reputation in 1998 and 1999, Golkar still managed to finish second after the PDIP in the 1999 election. And for the last four years, Golkar, although has not initiated an internal reform, has managed to consolidate its power and influence across the countries. Most of the regional executives for instance are affiliated with Golkar. And ironically, the performance of the PDIP and the conducts of some of its members during the last for years have made Golkar’s bad history look like a petty problem. Many for example still view that Golkar’s human resources, at least at the national level, are more capable compared to those of the PDIP.

Thirdly, Akbar is the undisputed leader of Golkar.  Solidly emerged from the late 90s’ political turbulence, Mr. Tanjung has steadily built his base and has, to some extend, been successful in restoring his image and in distance himself from the New Order regime’s gangs. As a proof, nothing could be more solid other than his post as the speaker of the House. Not until the US$ 4.7 million graft case and the lower court’s verdict last year of his guilty of a corruption charges. Mr. Tanjung’s political future was suddenly in a limbo. Although he announced his intention to contest the presidential candidate selection at his party's convention, many believed that his bid would be short-lived. In several instances, he was trailing behind Aburizal Bakrie. But the Supreme Court came to the rescue. His political future seems to be lived again. Already the Sultan X, one of the Golkar’s potential presidential candidates, has withdrawn from the contest. Akbar’s image suddenly restored. His loyalists are jubilant.

Certainly, there will always be protests of his acquittal. But the Court already has its say. He is innocent and ready to pursue another endeavor, presidency or at least to be vice president. With the Court’s decision, it will be easier for him to compete with other Golkar’s candidates. However, to get elected is not as easy as what he might think – or he might also think that is not easy. It is fair to say that his chance of being elected as a president in the coming election is negligible. But his chance for vice-president is not so tiny, especially if he can get an external back up from other party. Here comes the deal: support Megawati for president and in return, the PDIP will support him for vice president. It sounds reasonable, and more importantly, doable. After all, Megawati and Akbar have known each other for a long time, and the two have been on each other's side during the ousting of Mr. Wahid.

Will this concession work? It remains to be seen. While the PDIP and Golkar may benefit from doing it, the losers are clearly the people. It would have been better off for the PDIP, and for the nation as well, had the party launched productive initiatives to improve its reputation. Alas, regret is always too late, if they do regret.

 Your comment

Back to top