The history of Indonesian politics is characterized by the efforts of leaders to create strong governments in order to consolidate power and deliver what is promised; usually increased welfare for the people. Indonesia's first president, Sukarno, was well known for his "guided democracy" approach, which replaced parliamentarian democracy with president authority. However, Sukarno was not able to deliver on his promises of welfare for all.
Indonesia's second president, Soeharto, was quite successful in forming a quasi-democracy that allowed pre-approved political parties to participate in controlled elections for cabinet positions. Soeharto was able to significantly improve the welfare of the people, as various social-economic indicators reflect. However, his government fell because of his inability to control the greediness of his children and cronies.
It is widely accepted by the Indonesian political elite that a strong government is a necessary to ensure the effectiveness of economic policy and improve the welfare of the people. Even the short period of the B.J. Habibie administration (May 1998 to September 1999) took advantage of the inclusive coalition of political party's dominated by Golkar to transform Indonesia into a democratic country and start it on the road to recovery after the economic crisis.
Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono's (SBY) landslide re-election as president revives the idea of strong government. There has been intense discussion that could lead to Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle (PDIP) joining the Cabinet, not to mention Golkar's near certain partnership.
Even without the PDI-P, SBY's coalition will be a majority in the parliament. But the idea of a strong government is intriguing. The PDI-P, led by Megawati's husband Taufik Kiemas, seems to be responding the call for a grand coalition, but Megawati is still resisting.
The idea of a grand coalition is common place not only in developing country's like Indonesia, but even in a developed democratic country like Germany, where a grand coalition was formed in 2005. The result has been a cohesive economic policy, even though Germany has been hit hard by the global crisis. Under its grand coalition, Germany has apparently been able to recover from the crisis faster than other developed countries.
A grand coalition among Indonesia's three largest political parties as well as medium and small political parties would likely create a strong government and effective economic policies. The cabinet would be stronger with professionals at the core of economic team supported by ministers backed by the political parties.
However, a political system without significant opposition would certainly undermine the development of democracy, for which checks and balances are essential. The politicians inside the coalition will likely channel a significant portion of economic benefits to their own interest. This is precisely the criticism many observers have regarding the potential danger of the PDI-P to joining the coalition.
Whether the PDI-P joins the coalition or not, SBY's second administration will likely improve the economy and welfare of the people. The strong mandate he has been given as well as the favorable environment provided by the recovering global economy are great advantages. If President SBY is able to form a strong and effective cabinet, the next five years will be promising for Indonesia.
But we need to remember the problem with a strong coalition and a strong mandate is maintaining good results. It will be very hard to find a replacement for SBY who enjoys the same level of popularity. Moreover, he appears to personally hold the power and no significant progress has been made in building a Democratic Party institution. Unless SBY is able to transform his high level of popularity and strong mandate into strengthening reliable institutions, especially his own Democratic Party, we could face big problems after his term ends.
It is therefore more fruitful to concentrate on strengthening democratic institutions and the market based economy than creating an unnecessary grand coalition. What we should look at as a nation is progress that can be sustained beyond the SBY era.
The writer is chairman of the CIDES (Center for Information and Development Studies) and a senior fellow at the Habibie Center.
