Even before the
first vote is cast in the legislative elections on Monday, April 5,
2004, the Indonesian elections are a success. Indonesia and
Indonesians have made remarkable strides in democratizing their
government and society, and the outcome of the election is less
important than the success of the process. Indonesia is peacefully
transitioning to the world's third largest democracy, and the U.S.
Congress should reconsider its sanction-oriented policies toward
Indonesia.
On the
institutional side, April 5 is only the second election since the
demise of authoritarian kleptocrat Suharto's thirty-year reign in
1998. But the 2004 elections are more than just an exercise in
democracy; they feature institutional improvements in the election
process over the 1999 elections. In 1999, voters were able to vote
only for a political party. Party leaders then selected legislators
off a party list. In the April election voters are able to select
regional representatives to the legislature and in July, for the
first time in Indonesia's history, voters will go to the polls
again to directly elect their President.
Another important
change is that the newly elected legislature will no longer contain
members of the military and police who have been appointed as
legislators. The military and police officially surrender their
seats this year. In a controversial, but seemingly well-intentioned
move to further demonstrate that the military is subordinate to
civilian rule and will not interfere in the election, Indonesia's
military chief, General Sutarto, prohibited all members of the
uniformed services from voting in the election.
There are also
indications that Indonesia's civil society continues to mature. In
the past, election violence was a major problem in Indonesia.
Hundreds of people were killed in 1997, the last election under
Suharto, and about 175 were killed in the 1999 elections. This
year, little election related violence is expected and only 10
deaths have been directly attributable to election violence.
Another favorable
indicator is that the police have been able to enforce order at
political campaign rallies. During the 1999 elections, the police
and military, associated with Suharto-era repression, were
reluctant to approach campaign rallies for fear of inciting riots.
This year, reports are that the police, detached from the military
in 2000, were able to enforce traffic regulations and good order at
rallies.
The most important
election-year sign for Indonesia's economic future is that the
Jakarta stock exchange has been unaffected by the campaign season.
The Jakarta stock exchange continued to rise every day during the
last week of campaigning. Success on the trading floor does not
mean that Indonesia is out of the economic doldrums, but it is an
indicator of political stability.
The April
elections are no guarantee that Indonesia's polity is out of the
woods, but they are a step in the right direction. Congressional
policy toward Indonesia has been almost solely event-driven, such
as the sanctions imposed after the 1999 East Timor disaster and the
murders of the American teachers in Timika, Papua. In light of
Indonesia's imminent graduation from a transitioning democracy to a
mature republic, Congress should re-evaluate its policy toward
Jakarta and base future relations on Indonesia's status as a fellow
democracy and not as a recalcitrant dictatorship.
Dana R.
Dillon is Senior Policy Analyst in the Asian Studies Center at The
Heritage Foundation.