Insight: Making the most of politics as usual in 2012

If one were to ask a question pertaining to Indonesia’s future development, perhaps he or she would quickly phrase it in the context of the economy. As such is not something that requires a lengthy explanation, as it would be at the top of the list of the concerns of the country’s stakeholders — the state and society.

While it certainly is the case, the question would soon be linked to nothing but politics. This is not because of its primacy, but simply because the two have intertwined themselves in such a way that the economy has a profound impact on politics and vice versa.

Taking into account this line of thinking, the question is therefore what would Indonesian politics be in 2012?

Part of the answer lies in whether or not the country’s political practitioners have something new to
offer in 2012. This is not something that is difficult to answer, actually. Observing their ideas and practices throughout 2011, especially in a couple of months before the end of the year, it is doubtful that there will be something substantial being offered in 2012.

If my readings of the year end discourse on politics were correct, the concerns of our political activists are still very much centered on party politics and power politics. This would include transactional politics; harming in any way possible of Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono’s presidency through the Bank Century case or Muhammad Nazaruddin’s, a former Democrat Party treasurer, corruption scandal; negotiating laws on political parties and elections, etc.

But, on top of everything is undoubtedly legislative and/or presidential politics. That is, what party is likely to get the largest vote and to win the still-years-to-come parliamentary and presidential elections. For reasons which only party practitioners know, many of them are increasingly haunted by the specter of presidential succession knowing that Yudhoyono is in his second term and therefore —
according to the Constitution — is ineligible to run in 2014.

Should it become a vocal point of Indonesian politics in 2012, this legislative or presidential politics will prompt negative sentiment from the public. It can yield negative sentiment as legislative and/or presidential politics have the potential to lure party activists away from its primary function in articulating the interest of their constituents. This kind of politics can be a hurdle to the realization of policies deemed necessary for the public.

Moreover, in the midst of the nation’s daunting problems, such as corruption, weak law enforcement, bureaucratic incompetence and so on and so forth, the public understandably has high hopes that the government will concentrate on solving these issues. They know that these are not easy problems to tackle, but at least those who are in the position to do so will provide decent policies as well as a road map on how to address them, and prioritize them accordingly.

But, again, all of us have to hold our breath. These things are simply not going to happen. Enchanted by power politics, 2012 will be considered a stepping year toward 2013 — a year when every single political party will want to have a head-start for the official countdown to the 2014 legislative and presidential elections.

In spite of the possible negativity of the narrow concerns of party activists, including those who are in the executive as well as legislative branches of government, one can actually hope for a bright side of this political reality.

As suggested, such a political reality would prompt negative sentiment from the public. Putting this negativity aside, preparing for and concentrating on the 2014 legislative and/or presidential elections would not necessarily be a bad thing.

This, however, should not be the work of only party activists. Rather, it should be a national project where all citizens begin to take stock for the best candidate for 2014.

Throughout the history of modern Indonesia, we have not been accustomed to seriously preparing the best possible candidates for any given public office. We have not been able to formulate decent measures — politically, morally and intellectually — in selecting our candidates. Partly because of that, I would argue, our former presidents were unable to enjoy their retirement peacefully. One way or the other, they were all confronted with unnecessary political or legal problems.

Had only elections of public office holders been prepared in a way where political, moral, and intellectual competency were equally weighted, perhaps we would be able to somehow twist the destiny and fate of our future former presidents. This would enable them to enjoy their retirement with joy and dignity.

The writer is the dean of the School of Social and Political Sciences at the State Islamic University in Jakarta.