Three issues stand out.

First is the concentration of political and economic power among relatively small elites. More than a quarter century after the reform movement, competitive elections have become firmly established, but democracy has not prevented elite capture. Elections are expensive, political parties depend heavily on wealthy sponsors and the boundaries between political office and major business interests are blurred.

The word oligarchy has moved from academic analysis into everyday Indonesian political language. This is hardly surprising in a political system where influence depends so heavily on money.

Second, and even more familiar, is corruption. Indonesia has fought corruption through democratic reform, a once powerful Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK), greater media freedom and an active civil society. But corruption has proved remarkably resilient and remains systemic, linking political financing, public procurement, natural resource concessions, appointments and business interests.

Corruption and oligarchy reinforce each other. Expensive politics creates incentives to seek private financing; private financiers expect influence; political authority provides access to licenses, contracts and natural resources; and the proceeds help reproduce political power. The result is a circle that democratic elections have been unable to break.

The third source of discontent is more sensitive but should not be avoided: growing foreign influence over strategic parts of the economy. For example, Chinese capital and technology have contributed substantially over the past decade to industrial development and economic growth.