Endy M. Bayuni, The Jakarta Post, Jakarta | Sat, 10/16/2010 11:01 AM
On Wednesday, Oct. 20, President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono marks not so much the first anniversary of his final term in office, but the start of a four-year countdown to build the legacy he wants to leave behind when he steps down in 2014 after 10 years in power.
Rather than entertaining the common questions about reshuffling the Cabinet, Yudhoyono should be asking himself about what he wants to achieve in the remaining four years as the hallmark of his presidency.
If Sukarno is etched in Indonesia’s history as the father of revolution, and Soeharto remembered as the father of development, how would Yudhoyono like the nation to remember him? Surely it won’t be for his three music albums, none of which made the top 20.
Granted, both Sukarno and Soeharto ruled with iron fists for many long years, and both ended demolishing whatever legacy they had built. Yudhoyono, the republic’s sixth president, will have served for 10 years, which is still more than the three presidents before him — B.J. Habibie, Abdurrahman “Gus Dur” Wahid and Megawati Soekarnoputri — who collectively served between 1998 and 2004.
Ten years should be enough for a president to create a historical legacy — something the nation will remember him by. However, judging by the way things are going, Yudhoyono will go down as another mediocre president, very much like Habibie, Gus Dur and Megawati. But unlike Yudhoyono, they had a valid excuse for coming up short: they never ruled for a full five-year term. Sukarno and Soeharto may have had their flaws, but history regards them as statesmen who made a real difference to their people.
It is doubtful today if history books will dedicate an entire chapter on Yudhoyono, unless he rises to the same stature of those two leaders.
Yudhoyono can claim recognition as the first Indonesian president directly chosen by the people in a free and fair election. However, he owes this to his three predecessors who presided over the transition from authoritarianism in 1998 to a full-fledged democracy in 2004.
Most of the political reforms that led to improving Indonesia’s present political stability had been launched before Yudhoyono took the helm in 2004. All he had to do was to continue on the same path of reform. In the anticorruption campaign, where he could have made his mark, he bungled with his poor selection of top law enforcement chiefs. This is part of the reason Indonesia remains as corrupt today as it was in 2004.
On the economic front, Yudhoyono could claim the nation made progress under his leadership through greater prosperity, more jobs, the declining number of poor people, promotion of development and a stronger economy. Yet credit for much of this improvement could be attributed to the hard work and struggle the nation went through to repair the economy after it tanked in 1998. There was no where to go but up by the time Yudhoyono came on the scene. In fact, because of the lagging development of economic infrastructure, Indonesia missed a great opportunity to leap into the double digit growth that economies like China and India enjoy today.
Would other leaders in his place have done as well as he has? That may be an academic question,
but most people agree that Yudhoyono was the right person for Indonesia. His landslide election victories in 2004 and 2009 testified to his popular support.
It is fair to suspect that other leaders in his place might have botched the job and made a mess out of the progress the nation achieved between 1998 and 2004. Therein we can probably find Yudhoyono’s greatest contribution to the nation.
Which brings us back to the question of how the nation will remember Yudhoyono in the absence of anything remotely great that he has done, or will have done, during the 10 years he served as Indonesia’s leader.
One epitaph to his presidency could read something like “SBY, the President Who Didn’t Mess It Up.”
He could have done more. Many people who voted him in 2004 and again in 2009 expected him to do much more than what he has done so far. He can still be remembered as a great historical leader, instead of a big disappointment.
Mr. President, you’ve only got four more years to make history.
