The rise of Jokowi and Prabowo can be explained by SBY’s inability to get things done and show leadership, writes Jeffrey A Winters.
On the eve of Indonesia’s presidential election, the gap between Joko Widodo (Jokowi) and Prabowo Subianto has closed dramatically. Jokowi’s popularity peaked months ago and has eroded steadily ever since. Prabowo’s popularity has trended strongly upward over the same period.
His Gerindra coalition got an extra boost at the end of June when Partai Demokrat officially declared its support for the Prabowo-Hatta ticket. In a race dominated early by Jokowi, the momentum increasingly favors a Prabowo win.
Roughly a fifth of Indonesians remain undecided. If they are truly unable to figure out which candidate they prefer, there is no compelling reason to think they will end up surging strongly in favor of either candidate – unless something very dramatic happens in the final days of the campaign, which is unlikely.
Time and national campaigning have clearly worked in Prabowo’s favor. In hindsight, Jokowi would have benefited greatly had the presidential election been held simultaneously with the parliamentary vote back on 9 April. The Constitutional Court decided in January that parliamentary and presidential elections must be held on the same day. But the Court delayed the implementation of the ruling until 2019 – due, in part, to fierce pressure from PDIP, which the party now likely regrets.
Several New Mandala pieces have examined the candidates, their backgrounds, their campaign machines, the obvious controversies and risks, and whether the country is moving forward or backward.
I’d like to focus on a slightly different question: Why these two figures, and why now?
Factors like money, oligarchic power, party alliances, and campaign tactics matter. But this tight contest also reflects important sentiments in the Indonesian electorate. What do the people want and why do they want it?
Context matters. It is impossible to account for the rise of Jokowi and Prabowo, or explain why they are the last two candidates standing, without reference to ten years of dissapointment with Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono.
It has been a long slog under SBY’s presidency. The rhetoric has been thick and the preening has been non-stop. For extended periods, one had the feeling the country was stuck in the mud, wading through molasses, or sinking to the nostrils in quicksand.
One way to understand the choices Indonesians are making is to start from the two most colossal failures of SBY’s presidency — his inability to follow through and get things done, and his incapacity to show leadership and make tough decisions.
These failures are related but distinct. And Jokowi and Prabowo reflect a response to deep frustrations in these two areas.
Jokowi consciously presents himself as the ultimate administrator and a master of managerial competence. He examines how things are (not) working, diagnoses problems, and focuses on how to get things moving. He displays his greatest passion when yelling at slothful bureaucrats and administrators. He perks up when talking about “systems” in a way few people can. His oratory is about nuts and bolts.
Jokowi wants to put a responsive apparatus in place. His solution to a broken corps of civil servants is to replace them with as much e-government as possible. Bureaucrats can’t slow down, screw up, or steal from administrative processes they never touch.
They will all still hold their jobs and get paid (attrition will be by retirement and nonreplacement). But instead of doing barely any work and lots of damage, civil servants will do even less work but also inflict much less damage. Plenty of Indonesians, particularly in the cities and in business, immediately recognize what a net gain this would be.
Government via the Web is the ultimate Weberian bureaucratic leveler. And cutting back on the petty taking and squeezing that scores of millions of Indonesians endure year round (amounting to enormous sums) would represent a revolutionary change, even if packaged as technocratic tinkering.
If this were SBY’s only failure, Jokowi would probably win by a landslide no matter who he faced. But a managerial-systems solution doesn’t resonate with all voters, especially those who don’t use computers and websites, or are unclear about what e-government is. For many Indonesians, administrative competence is simply not enough.
Enter Prabowo. His electoral success is often linked to nostalgia for Suharto. But a significant percentage of Indonesia’s voters were children or teenagers (or not even born) during the years when Suharto was at his dictatorial best. His final decade, especially after his wife died, lacked pep. His declining years in office were memorable for how indecisive he was, particularly when it came to controlling his predatory children.
A better and more proximate explanation of Prabowo’s popularity rests on SBY’s second major failure – his chronic inability to make decisions, take risks, or show leadership. Indonesians are painfully aware that fundamental changes are needed. And they do not hold back when expressing their frustration and disgust with SBY for delivering a lost decade.
While SBY dithered, the country has essentially stood still, which is to say it has lost ground with regard to major competitors globally. The rupiah is weak again. Manufacturing as a percent of GDP has declined year after year. The country continues to rely the extraction of non-renewable resources. The domestic market is flooded with imported goods from China that Indonesians ought by now to be making themselves. Irrigation systems in the countryside are in serious disrepair. And barely any new infrastructure was completed during SBY’s presidency.
Depending on how you see things, you might be attracted to a Jokowi solution to the suffering this gross mismanagement has caused. But lots of Indonesians will tell you that nothing will get done, and there will be no break-throughs, unless someone strong and “tegas” (firm) is in charge.
This desire for a tough leader troubles elite observers both in Indonesia and abroad. It is puzzling that millions upon millions of Indonesians could be drawn to a thundering figure like Prabowo (who has nearly lost his voice from campaigning, while Jokowi still sounds normal). His campaign style alarms almost as many Indonesians as it excites.
As Prabowo presents a message of firm resolve and calls for national dignity, it is noteworthy that he rarely references Suharto. Maybe this is because much of the “bocoran” (leakage) he refers to – whether the pandemic corruption or the vampire fangs major foreign extraction companies have plunged into the country’s neck – really took off under his former father-in-law.
His conscious strategy is to emulate the nationalist style of Sukarno, right down to “berdikari” (stand on our own two feet).
Many observers comment on how dramatically Prabowo’s rhetoric changes depending on the audience he is addressing. The style and content certainly shift, and he even switches languages. But what doesn’t change is the basic message that Indonesia is facing daunting challenges that he portrays as tantamount to fighting for independence against the Dutch, and that nothing short of tough, passionate leadership will meet the challenges.
Whether Prabowo champions this message because he really believes it, or because he knows it resonates with a large swath of profoundly frustrated voters, is obviously relevant for the coming five years. But the only thing that matters for both candidates on 9 July is winning votes. And you win the presidency in a contest like this because you can tap into the frustrations and hopes of broad segments of the population.
Jokowi and Prabowo are consciously presenting the Indonesian electorate with a stark choice of tone and solutions to the country’s problems. But both are positioning themselves in different ways as the antidote to SBY.
Rhetoric and campaigning aside, it is an entirely different matter whether either of these candidates has a chance of succeeding with their stated agendas in the face of entrenched power relations and interests across the country. Given the composition of their teams and the political alliances each has forged, there is good reason to be skeptical.
Jeffrey A Winters is professor of politics and director of the Equality Development and Globalization Studies program at Northwestern University.
No, Jokowi and Prabowo reflect a dearth of choices in quality candidates in Indonesia, reflective of the incomplete maturation of the Indonesian electorate. There are as many Indonesians as frustrated with Megawati or
Gus Dur (whom I admired philosophically, but not technocratically) or Habibie, and certainly Soeharto and Soekarno, as there are Indonesians upset with SBY, for varied reasons. This is not a one-off phenomenon, but a culmination of Indonesia’s erratic experiments in “Islamised Democracy”, a set of experiments that are in their infancy, and have a long way to go before the research data can be “published”. The desire for democracy among the Indonesian electorate, vastly exceeds the institutional requirements for its inculcation.
2
5
Excellent article.
It makes me have a wishful thinking.
If only, Prabowo is the president and Jokowi is the vice president. Wouldn’t it be perfect for Indonesia?
A firm idealistic leader, paired with hard working honest administrator on his side.
Oh wait, did we have that before? SBY and JK?
🙂
4
9
If Jokowi loses, the PDIP should at long last decide to dump Megawati, who has been using her father’s forged KTP ever since he died. She has been the least impressive of all the daughters or widows of Asian presidents who have come into office themselves or at least head opposition forces (such as Aung San Suu Kyi). A Jokowi defeat would nicely round out Megawati’s astonishing record of ineptitude. Her party scored over 34% in the 1999 parliamentary election, and yet she lacked the nous and energy to get herself elected president, being defeated by Gus Dur whose PKB had won about 11%. Gus Dur kindly insisted that she be voted in as vice-president, though he later enjoyed likening her to an intellectually-challenged little sister. Without his help,offered in a spirit of pluralism, she would never had made it to the palace. In 2004, she lost the presidency to one of her own former ministers. This was a rare accomplishment. In 2009, she lost again. Some Indonesians are now claiming that Puan has a deal with Prabowo to become DPR speaker. This may be no more than inaccurate and spiteful gossip, but who can claim that it is not entirely plausible? It’s high time to throw Sukarno’s incorrigible descendants onto the dustbin of history.
8
0
This welcome article begs the question, however – Why was SBY indecisive, dithering and unwilling or unable to make the hard decisions?
I suspect you will find the answers in the murkey corridors of Indonesian money politics. (Ask Hatta.) Who knew what and who had guns held to whose heads.
SBY became president because of money politics – then he had to deliver on the deals and the promises made that got him to the presidency. He had his hands tied from the beginning. Too many favours owing and too many people had the dirt on him – so he had to keep his mouth shut to keep their mouths shut.
As well, I would be surprised if SBY wasn’t distracted for most of his presidency – covering his back and making money.
Ask his wife and son about this.
Why for instance did SBY call a halt to the KPK investigation into Megawati’s husbands ‘legendary’ corruption?
Certainly I agree – this election is as a result of SBY’s bad presidency – described recently in the media as behaving like a king. Megawati was likewise described as thinking she was a queen.
You know, sadly Prabowo ( and Kalla said the same on a trip to China) may well be right: Democracy doesn’t suit Indonesia. The mentality simply isn’t there. Meanwhile feudalism and the cult of personality reigns kept alive by money politics and an abominable asian sense of ‘respect’ and ‘face’. Something I find destetable when you see those who are respected. Or demand respect. Indonesia will get the President and the politicians Indonesia deserves.
What’s going to be really sickening will be the accolades and the testimonials about SBY and what a great man he was and what a great job he did. And a lot of this from foreign governments, not to mention those who hate him in Indonesia. I only hope he doesn’t write a farewell song! Oh – and he couldn’t sing for nuts, either.
8
2
Sadly, I do believe Indonesia is not ready for Democracy yet, probably another 10-20 years till the citizens are better equipped with the concept.
Clearly, Indonesia Democracy is at its infancy at best (and to be honest, is there even working Democracy in South East Asia?). However, for someone with excellent records of human abuse and racist views to suggest throwing out the system that put him in that position in the first place is totally absurd.
For SBY “so-called incompetent”, one should not forget that he was not able to do things as Soeharto, since it is Democracy during SBY time. For example, if SBY wants A, PDIP or other major Parties insists on B, all for the sake of making SBY tenure looks bad (which has been happening for his 2 terms, which also happening on Obama terms)
For a decade, Indonesia has been bleeding internally from all the political in-fighting, some of the better policies are outright rejected due to personal gain rather than National gain.
As long Megawati is clinging on her power as the Chairman of PDI-P, Jokowi will always be viewed as a puppet, this has been ongoing issue even before he was formally nominated as the President election candidate. (Same issue facing SBY party if they were to join in the fray, will SBY still the chairman with other Presidential candidate?)
Which also address another issue why Indonesian do not have specific support to certain political parties, the answer is actually simply, the parties themselves do not have specific view and always changing depending on personal/party gain. Look at all the parties/politicians changing sides as contrary to their support/non-support comment prior to changing side. (Too many to list..)
As for which Candidates are better, none. It is an election to pick which one is not as worse compare to the other.
4
6
Prabowo is still better than jokowi. Jokowi was made by generals who are responsible in so many cases against humanity. Letting jokowi leads will be worst than megawati’s era. Now people just need prosperity, law that is functioning, good country reputation. Prabowo never makes scenes using violents just like generals in jokowi’s team. Creating fake terrorists, making people fight between religions, etc. Plus when wiranto made FPI.
Jokowi is clearly as puppet from bosses. At least SBY is doing better than megawati. No human is perfect. Politicians????. So, there are plus & minus, and we just want to elect real leader, not fake one.
Dont pretend to be modest, when you rent house in menteng area (so expensive, I bet), yr wife is member of rotary club, etc. No need camera to show yr modesty. We need a proof from yr work. Prabowo has done better in kopassus, and his efforts to open up truth after being slandered, treated unfairly by those coward, jealous generals.
SBY is not doing good as he should, but his cchascter n prabowo’s character are different. Prabowo isnt afraid to make sensational decision. SBY tends to please everybody. Prabowo is type of leader who can unite all indonesians. That is crucial. Jokowi is manager type. And too bad, he even look bad wearing suit. Really embarrassing for international event.
4
23
I pity you for eating up all the lies and rumours that Prabowo’s team has spread. What a very intelligent comment you made there, Madam.
8
2
My experience of rural and remote Indonesia suggests is that it is not just frustration with SBY specifically, that is involved here, but rather a widespread lack of a sense of tangible dividend from the democratic era.
The ‘tegas’ association that Prabowo enjoys appeals to many rural folks who see a level of disorder and chaos in national politics. Hopes for a potentially moral political force in PKS were dashed; hope for a new start with a cleanskin party such as PD were also dashed not so much by SBY’s famed indecisiveness (in Western terms), but by party scandals. What hope remains? A tough guy who can sort out the mess, even if a bit heavy-handed.
Add in an elderly generation who retain a level of nostalgia for the predictability and stability of the New Order period, and a younger generation new to voting with no direct experience of authoritarian rule who are favoured in electoral terms by Indonesian demography.
The main frustration is with the failure of democracy to deliver, not with SBY (though clearly, he has contributed).
2
2
excellent article!
0
0
Excellent analysis. When one considers the huge number of un/under- employed, SBY’s government look pretty unspectacular.
0
1