I am not ‘offended’ by the act of judging a leader by his/her satisfaction of the demands of his/her electorate. It is just that I think an analyst needs to bring something more to the table. It is a fact that Jokowi remains popular. But that is not an analytical statement.
To switch to a different country, the US electorate will face in November a choice between two candidates who, in my opinion, are almost equally undesirable and unfitted to govern the United States.
I am not ‘offended’ that the US electorate will undoubtedly choose one of these two awful candidates. One is an unpredictable clown and the other a mendacious hawk who is capable of, having called for a foreign leader’s death, gloating over his subsequent murder.
As someone who aspires to do analysis, I reserve my right to predict that US will be worse off from 2017 than it has been under Obama, whichever of these two people wins.
I don’t think a democratic administration has to respect all the prejudices of the electorate, a majority of which will have voted it into power. This gives no role to political courage, the kind that Mr Howard showed after the Port Arthur massacre.
The First World War was initially enormously popular in the electorates of Britain, France and Germany. The governments of these countries probably didn’t need their respective electorates’ support, but what a pity that they obtained it!
Electorates are not called upon to judge by plebiscite or some other means all the policies that the government they have voted into power decides to implement. Even if they were, should Jokowi change his mind on, for example, executing drug traffickers, he would be indulging in an exercise of leading public opinion rather than submitting to it. I can’t see what would be wrong in that.
Our Lord in Heaven, forgive this bunch of Political Crooks who are out there to poison the minds of Sarawakians who will be casting their votes tomorrow. Pray that your Holy Spirit will be presence at all polling stations.
Jokowi isn’t just concerned about economic issues. What Ken Ward and the article didn’t mention are the following
1) How is Jokowi dealing with the issue of 1965, which he did promise he would open up. He has taken tentative steps. This is a really big issue in Indonesian politics. Its the mother of all human rights issues in Indonesia. In the election he was accused of being a Catholic Chinese Communist.
2) Steps taken regarding the haze issue, which impacts millions in neighboring countries. If Jokowi can solve the haze issue by the end of his term, he would have won more foreign policy points than 100 of Marty and SBY’s conferences.
3) The crackdown on illegal fishing, I have heard western analyst saying Jokowi and Susi were playing the nationalist card. It would damage relations with her ASEAN neighbors. That he was putting narrow economic interest and crowd pleasing nationalism over Indonesia’s foreign policy objectives, without every specifying what they are.
What Susi did had far reaching consequences. People have know about those slaves ships for a long time, but there was little urgent action. When Susi cracked down on illegal fishing it resulted in Thai fishing boats operating in Eastern Indonesia to dump their slaves on Berjina and other islands. Hundreds if not Thousands. AP was investigating this issue for over a year, but had difficult getting access to the slaves. And all of a sudden they had access to thousands. And for that story they won Pulitzer. The story broke in Feb last year. The result was it pressured the State Department to pressure Thailand and Malaysia. Only now you see the Thais and Malaysians finding abandoned slaves camps, arresting human smugglers etc.
Why didn’t New Mandala do a story about that? The only story as far as I can tell was done in 2008 about shrimp slavery in Thailand.
4) The issue of putting your religion on your KTP (ID). As of February Depnagri has allowed people to leave the religion column on their ID cards blank. Its a huge thing for people outside the six “official religions”
The fact is Indonesia is the only real democracy in SEA. Philippines is most likely going to elect mass murderer on Monday. Myanmar is basically right now at Ordre Baru 1/2, this state of affairs could last a long time.
Thanks for the insightful article. It’s always interesting to keep up with how last year’s Beacon of Democracy is doing now that a prettier face has moved onto the front pages.
From what I was able to glean about Jokowi before his election, this article seems to confirm that what we saw is what Indonesia got. And that seems fine.
Also interesting are the first two comments, which seem to present in a nutshell one of the thorniest issues in liberal democratic politics in our time.
Ken Ward seems to be offended that a leader in a democracy might be judged by his satisfaction of the demands of his electorate. He would prefer that Jokowi be judged by his performance regarding “what Indonesia may happen to need”, which he obviously feels the electorate of Indonesia are inadequate to appreciate.
Ken apparently would fall to the “liberal” side in a debate over which element in the uncomfortable hybrid of liberal democracy should take precedence.
What the western liberal thinks of as “better” should surely take precedence over what any given electorate would prefer.
I mean, what if most Indonesians support the death penalty for a range of crimes and what if most Indonesians prefer that LGBTQ manifestations be kept on the index of mental problems as they were in the liberal west up until just a few decades ago? Is it not incumbent on a democratic administration to respect the values and beliefs of its sovereign electorate?
Iwan Sugiarto seems to feel that an elected government has a duty to improve the lives of its electorate regardless of how this may look to those whose judgement is more dependent on international relations theory or international law.
This seems to be a point of view that would fall more on the side of democracy when liberalism and democracy come to blows. An admirable emphasis on how people’s lives are impacted by purely economic considerations would seem to be at the bottom of this democratic view.
All around the globe we are witnessing this conflict being played out, not the least in Muslim-majority countries where very few westerners of any stripe are willing to support the right of sovereign electorates to choose when those choices offend liberal sensitivities.
I posted to Facebook and it disappeared. Computer people used to say it is because of volatile memory. What I said is, too late, and would take too long to achieve what James hopes the seminar series to achieve. The Town is so long separated from the Gown that all the horses and all the King’s men cannot put them together again.
In the international system we have today, how much does foreign policy really matter for a country like Indonesia. Indonesia isn’t going to suddenly go all Myanmar of 1960-1980s is it? Ask yourself how much did Marty / SBY actually achieved in terms of foreign policy that actually benefited ordinary Indonesians?
The maritime axis is just one aspect of his economic/infrastructure strategy.
AS for Bandung Jakarta project. Why China got it? Most likely because they offered better terms. If you look at side by side comparison, China’s experience now is competitive with Japan. Of course China has one major accident, but their network is far bigger than Japan’s and it is going to be even bigger in the future.
The Jakarta Bandung project is really a test run for Jakarta-Surabaya project. From an economic view point, a Java high speed train network makes alot of sense, it will transforms Java. Java is twice as densely populated as the Guangdong. It has the potential to reduce inter java air travel substantially, free up airports in Java.
From my experience dealing with people from DPU (Departmen Pekerjaan Umum, Jokowi is really pushing projects that have been stalled for years, and sometimes decades. What is the point of announcing goals, when projects are stalled?
What do you want in a President some who can spout Hans Morgenthau, but can’t complete long delayed Trans-Sumatra highway (3o years).
What Australian foreign policy analyst should be asking, is what are DPU infrastructure plans for Papua? All the government departments that have anything to do with infrastructure in Indonesia have extensive plans (project by project) that stretch 20-30 years. Jokowi’s infrastructure in Papua are only going to accelerate migrant movement into Papua. Papua’s population is growing at triple the rate of the PNG.
What the infrastructure department have planned for Papua in the next 20-30 years is infinitely more important for Australia, then executions or who is the current Foreign Minister.
Sarawak will remain a fixed deposit of UMNO as largesse always trumps ethics. The best thing for Sarawak and Sabah is to secede from Malaysia as the 1963 Agreement has been broken by UMNO, which has a thoroughly pernicious influence everywhere, but especially in Sabah and Sarawak.
Schadenfreude is probably the last thing on the Burmese mind right now. Just relief and hopeful expectation, the latter perhaps unrealistically high and the former set to be short-lived too. But thanks for the goodwill and wishes.
The Burmese waited half a century for real change after ceaseless popular struggle and sacrifice, and true, this apparent beginning of such a change could be wrested away at any point.
Inside the newly constituted legislative chambers the democratic upper hand that the NLD led by ASSK enjoyed has already earned an early complaint by the un-elected military contingent of ‘democratic bullying’. Thankfully it hasn’t come to blows as happened recently in the Turkish parliament, but outside the chambers the new government is definitely outnumbered and outgunned.
Still the public remains four square behind the Lady whatever her personal style of leadership. A benevolent queen will do just fine for now.
And now that she leads a democratically elected government the situation is radically different from in the wake of either the 1988 uprising or Cyclone Nargis for R2P to be promptly invoked whoever happens to be sitting in the Oval Office. The generals know this but it won’t stop them from stirring up communal strife against Muslims, also Christians, the Chinese earmarked perhaps for later as and when it suits them – their well honed modus operandi, for an excuse to intervene – a constitutional coup this time around.
This post is one of the best assessments on the Jokowi government published so far on this website.
It is nonetheless disappointing that the author’s final sentence focuses on what the Indonesian electorate’s expectations may be, rather than on what Indonesia may happen to need. Do we want some at least of Indonesia’s longstanding problems to be solved, or do we simply want the electorate to remain contented?
There is so much else that the distinguished author of this post could have considered. Why did so many poor-performing ministers survive the first reshuffle? Retno Marsudi, Ryamizard Ryacudu and Prasetyo immediately come to mind.
Prasetyo seems to be impatiently counting the days before the third round of executions of drug-traffickers takes place. Will this really serve Indonesia’s interests? How far did the first two rounds stop the marketing of narcotics in Indonesia?
Jokowi’s approval of this pointless and internationally-damaging policy doesn’t derive from any lack of support from Megawati, or from the absence of a parliamentary majority. It illustrates, on the contrary, his own intellectual shortcomings and lack of national government experience.
The author should also have cast a glance at foreign policy. How has Jokowi performed in this arena? This too is a field in which Megawati can’t be blamed for anything.
This is not to say that Jokowi’s foreign policy has been disastrous. Rather that it simply needs to be assessed in any survey of his first eighteen months in power.
Given Jokowi’s early image as a Mr Clean, it would have been interesting to obtain the author’s opinion on how the political and economic spheres have meshed together under his rule. In other words, has Indonesia become more oligarchic?
I have been particularly intrigued by the Jakarta-Bandung rail project. This project can hardly do much to bring closer the achievement of Indonesia’s becoming a global maritime axis, which is reportedly one of Jokowi’s foreign policy or developmental goals.
One consequently suspects there were various interests which were likely to benefit a great deal from the contract going to China. Some elucidation of this would have been very welcome.
Best wishes to Myanmar ….. may you succeed in your aspirations to be democratically free !
Thailand hiccups towards its path to full democracy are many so maybe Thailand could learn from your success and you learn from ours ( successes and hiccup )
Setting the bar for “democracy” so incredibly low will at least have the virtue of making it impossible for neoliberal capital to trip over anything like a stigma as it races into yet another potential goldmine.
Good points, Nicholas. Look for similar situations ins Eastern Europe in the late 80s and right now.
The problem, I think, is in all cases the army. In Pakistan we have a similar fragile situation: they will allow ‘democracy’ as long as their interests are secured and they feel somehow in control. In India (and even Malaysia), where the army is firmly under military control, things do not happen in the same way. Which does not mean that authoritarian forces cannot take over there, but the resistance is more entrenched.
My friends in Myanmar, btw, voice the same misgivings about the role and behaviour of the army. We will have to keep a close watch.
There is too much cronyism at the top of Malaysian society. Lack of transparency is obvious. It was only the Wall Street Journal which exposed the scandal.
There are some lessons to be learned for any government with a military that influences the democratic process. There are a few versions of this supercharged relationship founded on the politics of fear. Always happens when the world moves to the right of centre. Look how fast things have changed in one decade. Hmmmm…. what’s next?
Powerful people don’t like being punished any more than anyone else, but they have the means to prevent it happening. That usually means the truth doesn’t come out. It’s more important for the truth to come out than for the guilty to be punished. What happened was a civil war 50 years ago. Truth and reconciliation are well overdue. Shut the lawyers up and they will come.
Powerful people don’t like being punished any more than anyone else, but they have the means to prevent it happening. That usually means the truth doesn’t come out. It’s more important for the truth to come out than for the guilty to be punished. What happened was a civil war 50 years ago. Truth and reconciliation are well overdue. Shut the lawyers up and they will come.
Whereas his opponents are harping on continuity of the “improved economy” of the Philippines, Duterte has centered on cleaning the corruption and criminality in the country. Add to that his populist stand – pro poi holloi and anti establishment.
The fact: many are angry about the current weak governance and dire prospects of the educated and not-so-educated young workers. I believe this has resonated well to majority of the people.
Duterte leads in the lower class which comprises about 70% to 80% of the voters. Surprisingly, he is also leading the upper class – Class ABC. Maybe this sector is looking for strong leadership which current President Aquino has dismally failed to deliver .
Duterte has disengaged himself from traditional politics. He speaks his mind, talks dirty,challenges institutions, projects himself as a hero not a president and a take me as I am persona. “If you don’t like the way I talk, then don’t vote for me”. Very different from the others who seem power hungry for the presidency. Funny but in all his campaign ads, Duterte has mentioned “Don’t vote for me” more than “Iboto nyo ako”. And his platform of Federalism I guess is a plus factor too.
He has a cult following. It’s either you love him or hate him. No in betweens.
Yes he is a risk vote. But many Filipinos now believe he can repeat his crime-corrupt -free Davao success story into the whole country.
In the highly-charged and politicized environment in Indonesia (and I don’t mean specifically under President Jokowi), reconciliation is extremely unlikely. Nursing real or imagined wounds serves many “useful†purposes for Indonesians; on the contrary, evasion and dissembling are a more likely outcome, as they have a long local precedent.
Facebook 
Twitter 
Soundcloud 
Youtube 
Rss
Assessing the Jokowi presidency
I am not ‘offended’ by the act of judging a leader by his/her satisfaction of the demands of his/her electorate. It is just that I think an analyst needs to bring something more to the table. It is a fact that Jokowi remains popular. But that is not an analytical statement.
To switch to a different country, the US electorate will face in November a choice between two candidates who, in my opinion, are almost equally undesirable and unfitted to govern the United States.
I am not ‘offended’ that the US electorate will undoubtedly choose one of these two awful candidates. One is an unpredictable clown and the other a mendacious hawk who is capable of, having called for a foreign leader’s death, gloating over his subsequent murder.
As someone who aspires to do analysis, I reserve my right to predict that US will be worse off from 2017 than it has been under Obama, whichever of these two people wins.
I don’t think a democratic administration has to respect all the prejudices of the electorate, a majority of which will have voted it into power. This gives no role to political courage, the kind that Mr Howard showed after the Port Arthur massacre.
The First World War was initially enormously popular in the electorates of Britain, France and Germany. The governments of these countries probably didn’t need their respective electorates’ support, but what a pity that they obtained it!
Electorates are not called upon to judge by plebiscite or some other means all the policies that the government they have voted into power decides to implement. Even if they were, should Jokowi change his mind on, for example, executing drug traffickers, he would be indulging in an exercise of leading public opinion rather than submitting to it. I can’t see what would be wrong in that.
It’s raining money in Sarawak
Our Lord in Heaven, forgive this bunch of Political Crooks who are out there to poison the minds of Sarawakians who will be casting their votes tomorrow. Pray that your Holy Spirit will be presence at all polling stations.
Assessing the Jokowi presidency
Jokowi isn’t just concerned about economic issues. What Ken Ward and the article didn’t mention are the following
1) How is Jokowi dealing with the issue of 1965, which he did promise he would open up. He has taken tentative steps. This is a really big issue in Indonesian politics. Its the mother of all human rights issues in Indonesia. In the election he was accused of being a Catholic Chinese Communist.
2) Steps taken regarding the haze issue, which impacts millions in neighboring countries. If Jokowi can solve the haze issue by the end of his term, he would have won more foreign policy points than 100 of Marty and SBY’s conferences.
3) The crackdown on illegal fishing, I have heard western analyst saying Jokowi and Susi were playing the nationalist card. It would damage relations with her ASEAN neighbors. That he was putting narrow economic interest and crowd pleasing nationalism over Indonesia’s foreign policy objectives, without every specifying what they are.
What Susi did had far reaching consequences. People have know about those slaves ships for a long time, but there was little urgent action. When Susi cracked down on illegal fishing it resulted in Thai fishing boats operating in Eastern Indonesia to dump their slaves on Berjina and other islands. Hundreds if not Thousands. AP was investigating this issue for over a year, but had difficult getting access to the slaves. And all of a sudden they had access to thousands. And for that story they won Pulitzer. The story broke in Feb last year. The result was it pressured the State Department to pressure Thailand and Malaysia. Only now you see the Thais and Malaysians finding abandoned slaves camps, arresting human smugglers etc.
Why didn’t New Mandala do a story about that? The only story as far as I can tell was done in 2008 about shrimp slavery in Thailand.
4) The issue of putting your religion on your KTP (ID). As of February Depnagri has allowed people to leave the religion column on their ID cards blank. Its a huge thing for people outside the six “official religions”
The fact is Indonesia is the only real democracy in SEA. Philippines is most likely going to elect mass murderer on Monday. Myanmar is basically right now at Ordre Baru 1/2, this state of affairs could last a long time.
Assessing the Jokowi presidency
Thanks for the insightful article. It’s always interesting to keep up with how last year’s Beacon of Democracy is doing now that a prettier face has moved onto the front pages.
From what I was able to glean about Jokowi before his election, this article seems to confirm that what we saw is what Indonesia got. And that seems fine.
Also interesting are the first two comments, which seem to present in a nutshell one of the thorniest issues in liberal democratic politics in our time.
Ken Ward seems to be offended that a leader in a democracy might be judged by his satisfaction of the demands of his electorate. He would prefer that Jokowi be judged by his performance regarding “what Indonesia may happen to need”, which he obviously feels the electorate of Indonesia are inadequate to appreciate.
Ken apparently would fall to the “liberal” side in a debate over which element in the uncomfortable hybrid of liberal democracy should take precedence.
What the western liberal thinks of as “better” should surely take precedence over what any given electorate would prefer.
I mean, what if most Indonesians support the death penalty for a range of crimes and what if most Indonesians prefer that LGBTQ manifestations be kept on the index of mental problems as they were in the liberal west up until just a few decades ago? Is it not incumbent on a democratic administration to respect the values and beliefs of its sovereign electorate?
Iwan Sugiarto seems to feel that an elected government has a duty to improve the lives of its electorate regardless of how this may look to those whose judgement is more dependent on international relations theory or international law.
This seems to be a point of view that would fall more on the side of democracy when liberalism and democracy come to blows. An admirable emphasis on how people’s lives are impacted by purely economic considerations would seem to be at the bottom of this democratic view.
All around the globe we are witnessing this conflict being played out, not the least in Muslim-majority countries where very few westerners of any stripe are willing to support the right of sovereign electorates to choose when those choices offend liberal sensitivities.
Mindanao after 9 May
Shifting masculinities? Comprehensive peace in Mindanao? Can we start by explaining those terms?
Is the author writing from the Philippines?
Wonks in the real world
I posted to Facebook and it disappeared. Computer people used to say it is because of volatile memory. What I said is, too late, and would take too long to achieve what James hopes the seminar series to achieve. The Town is so long separated from the Gown that all the horses and all the King’s men cannot put them together again.
Kaypohchee
Assessing the Jokowi presidency
In the international system we have today, how much does foreign policy really matter for a country like Indonesia. Indonesia isn’t going to suddenly go all Myanmar of 1960-1980s is it? Ask yourself how much did Marty / SBY actually achieved in terms of foreign policy that actually benefited ordinary Indonesians?
The maritime axis is just one aspect of his economic/infrastructure strategy.
AS for Bandung Jakarta project. Why China got it? Most likely because they offered better terms. If you look at side by side comparison, China’s experience now is competitive with Japan. Of course China has one major accident, but their network is far bigger than Japan’s and it is going to be even bigger in the future.
The Jakarta Bandung project is really a test run for Jakarta-Surabaya project. From an economic view point, a Java high speed train network makes alot of sense, it will transforms Java. Java is twice as densely populated as the Guangdong. It has the potential to reduce inter java air travel substantially, free up airports in Java.
From my experience dealing with people from DPU (Departmen Pekerjaan Umum, Jokowi is really pushing projects that have been stalled for years, and sometimes decades. What is the point of announcing goals, when projects are stalled?
What do you want in a President some who can spout Hans Morgenthau, but can’t complete long delayed Trans-Sumatra highway (3o years).
What Australian foreign policy analyst should be asking, is what are DPU infrastructure plans for Papua? All the government departments that have anything to do with infrastructure in Indonesia have extensive plans (project by project) that stretch 20-30 years. Jokowi’s infrastructure in Papua are only going to accelerate migrant movement into Papua. Papua’s population is growing at triple the rate of the PNG.
What the infrastructure department have planned for Papua in the next 20-30 years is infinitely more important for Australia, then executions or who is the current Foreign Minister.
Stopping ‘change’: Sarawak’s electoral battlegrounds
Sarawak will remain a fixed deposit of UMNO as largesse always trumps ethics. The best thing for Sarawak and Sabah is to secede from Malaysia as the 1963 Agreement has been broken by UMNO, which has a thoroughly pernicious influence everywhere, but especially in Sabah and Sarawak.
Lessons from a dictatorial neighbour
Schadenfreude is probably the last thing on the Burmese mind right now. Just relief and hopeful expectation, the latter perhaps unrealistically high and the former set to be short-lived too. But thanks for the goodwill and wishes.
The Burmese waited half a century for real change after ceaseless popular struggle and sacrifice, and true, this apparent beginning of such a change could be wrested away at any point.
Inside the newly constituted legislative chambers the democratic upper hand that the NLD led by ASSK enjoyed has already earned an early complaint by the un-elected military contingent of ‘democratic bullying’. Thankfully it hasn’t come to blows as happened recently in the Turkish parliament, but outside the chambers the new government is definitely outnumbered and outgunned.
Still the public remains four square behind the Lady whatever her personal style of leadership. A benevolent queen will do just fine for now.
And now that she leads a democratically elected government the situation is radically different from in the wake of either the 1988 uprising or Cyclone Nargis for R2P to be promptly invoked whoever happens to be sitting in the Oval Office. The generals know this but it won’t stop them from stirring up communal strife against Muslims, also Christians, the Chinese earmarked perhaps for later as and when it suits them – their well honed modus operandi, for an excuse to intervene – a constitutional coup this time around.
Assessing the Jokowi presidency
This post is one of the best assessments on the Jokowi government published so far on this website.
It is nonetheless disappointing that the author’s final sentence focuses on what the Indonesian electorate’s expectations may be, rather than on what Indonesia may happen to need. Do we want some at least of Indonesia’s longstanding problems to be solved, or do we simply want the electorate to remain contented?
There is so much else that the distinguished author of this post could have considered. Why did so many poor-performing ministers survive the first reshuffle? Retno Marsudi, Ryamizard Ryacudu and Prasetyo immediately come to mind.
Prasetyo seems to be impatiently counting the days before the third round of executions of drug-traffickers takes place. Will this really serve Indonesia’s interests? How far did the first two rounds stop the marketing of narcotics in Indonesia?
Jokowi’s approval of this pointless and internationally-damaging policy doesn’t derive from any lack of support from Megawati, or from the absence of a parliamentary majority. It illustrates, on the contrary, his own intellectual shortcomings and lack of national government experience.
The author should also have cast a glance at foreign policy. How has Jokowi performed in this arena? This too is a field in which Megawati can’t be blamed for anything.
This is not to say that Jokowi’s foreign policy has been disastrous. Rather that it simply needs to be assessed in any survey of his first eighteen months in power.
Given Jokowi’s early image as a Mr Clean, it would have been interesting to obtain the author’s opinion on how the political and economic spheres have meshed together under his rule. In other words, has Indonesia become more oligarchic?
I have been particularly intrigued by the Jakarta-Bandung rail project. This project can hardly do much to bring closer the achievement of Indonesia’s becoming a global maritime axis, which is reportedly one of Jokowi’s foreign policy or developmental goals.
One consequently suspects there were various interests which were likely to benefit a great deal from the contract going to China. Some elucidation of this would have been very welcome.
Lessons from a dictatorial neighbour
Best wishes to Myanmar ….. may you succeed in your aspirations to be democratically free !
Thailand hiccups towards its path to full democracy are many so maybe Thailand could learn from your success and you learn from ours ( successes and hiccup )
Lessons from a dictatorial neighbour
Setting the bar for “democracy” so incredibly low will at least have the virtue of making it impossible for neoliberal capital to trip over anything like a stigma as it races into yet another potential goldmine.
https://mjw51.wordpress.com/2016/05/04/beacon-beacon-whos-got-the-beacon/
Lessons from a dictatorial neighbour
Good points, Nicholas. Look for similar situations ins Eastern Europe in the late 80s and right now.
The problem, I think, is in all cases the army. In Pakistan we have a similar fragile situation: they will allow ‘democracy’ as long as their interests are secured and they feel somehow in control. In India (and even Malaysia), where the army is firmly under military control, things do not happen in the same way. Which does not mean that authoritarian forces cannot take over there, but the resistance is more entrenched.
My friends in Myanmar, btw, voice the same misgivings about the role and behaviour of the army. We will have to keep a close watch.
Banking on change in scandal-hit Malaysia
There is too much cronyism at the top of Malaysian society. Lack of transparency is obvious. It was only the Wall Street Journal which exposed the scandal.
Lessons from a dictatorial neighbour
There are some lessons to be learned for any government with a military that influences the democratic process. There are a few versions of this supercharged relationship founded on the politics of fear. Always happens when the world moves to the right of centre. Look how fast things have changed in one decade. Hmmmm…. what’s next?
Massacre, memory and the wounds of 1965
[…] Heryanto, Ariel (2016) “Massacre, memory and the wounds of 1965â€, New Mandala, 2/05/2016, http://asiapacific.anu.edu.au/newmandala/2016/05/02/massacre-memory-and-the-wounds-of-1965/ […]
Massacre, memory and the wounds of 1965
Powerful people don’t like being punished any more than anyone else, but they have the means to prevent it happening. That usually means the truth doesn’t come out. It’s more important for the truth to come out than for the guilty to be punished. What happened was a civil war 50 years ago. Truth and reconciliation are well overdue. Shut the lawyers up and they will come.
Massacre, memory and the wounds of 1965
Powerful people don’t like being punished any more than anyone else, but they have the means to prevent it happening. That usually means the truth doesn’t come out. It’s more important for the truth to come out than for the guilty to be punished. What happened was a civil war 50 years ago. Truth and reconciliation are well overdue. Shut the lawyers up and they will come.
The neo-authoritarian threat in the Philippines
Why the Duterte charisma?
Whereas his opponents are harping on continuity of the “improved economy” of the Philippines, Duterte has centered on cleaning the corruption and criminality in the country. Add to that his populist stand – pro poi holloi and anti establishment.
The fact: many are angry about the current weak governance and dire prospects of the educated and not-so-educated young workers. I believe this has resonated well to majority of the people.
Duterte leads in the lower class which comprises about 70% to 80% of the voters. Surprisingly, he is also leading the upper class – Class ABC. Maybe this sector is looking for strong leadership which current President Aquino has dismally failed to deliver .
Duterte has disengaged himself from traditional politics. He speaks his mind, talks dirty,challenges institutions, projects himself as a hero not a president and a take me as I am persona. “If you don’t like the way I talk, then don’t vote for me”. Very different from the others who seem power hungry for the presidency. Funny but in all his campaign ads, Duterte has mentioned “Don’t vote for me” more than “Iboto nyo ako”. And his platform of Federalism I guess is a plus factor too.
He has a cult following. It’s either you love him or hate him. No in betweens.
Yes he is a risk vote. But many Filipinos now believe he can repeat his crime-corrupt -free Davao success story into the whole country.
Massacre, memory and the wounds of 1965
In the highly-charged and politicized environment in Indonesia (and I don’t mean specifically under President Jokowi), reconciliation is extremely unlikely. Nursing real or imagined wounds serves many “useful†purposes for Indonesians; on the contrary, evasion and dissembling are a more likely outcome, as they have a long local precedent.