|
 |
|
Why
Megawati Lost
As the vote count rolls on it has become clear that Susilo
Bambang Yudhoyono and his running mate Jusuf Kalla are going
to win in a landslide and lead the nation for the next five
years. The results are showing a stunning defeat for the
incumbent President, Megawati Soekarnoputri. By Tuesday
evening, with approximately two-thirds of the estimated
120 million votes counted, the Susilo/Jusuf Kalla pair are
in total command and lead by more than 20 percentage points.
These numbers are likely to hold, especially because in
the heavily populated provinces of Central Java, East Java
and North Sumatra, which have traditionally been bases of
Megawati loyalists, Susilo is leading.
Now the question becomes, why did Megawati lose, despite
all her efforts during the last 10 weeks to get reelected,
to the point of maximizing the facilities offered by the
office of the presidency? This interesting question will
likely keep a great number of political analysts and research
institutions busy in the months and years to come. However,
at this early stage we would like to make a few preliminary
remarks that perhaps could help reveal the drastic socio-political
changes that have been taking place in Indonesian society.
Apparently, the majority of the Indonesian electorate were
on Monday expressing their ethical rejection of a culture
of permissiveness that the Megawati leadership (with the
assistance of her husband, Taufik Kiemas) has been spreading,
not only within the Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle
(PDIP), but throughout the important agencies of the Indonesian
government. Corruption by political leaders and government
officials, perfected during the later years of President
Soeharto's tenure and practiced almost blatantly during
President Megawati's administration, has indeed been a constant
problem in Indonesia. Because of the cynical attitude of
those leaders of PDIP, the majority party professing to
adhere to the basic principles of democracy, social justice
and transparency, the Indonesian public was forced to conclude
that enough was enough.
Another significant factor in Megawati's defeat was probably
the limited intellectual weight of her leadership and the
poor quality of her government's policy decisions, though
of course, there are always exceptions to the rule. The
organized dialog of the presidential candidates with selected
panel members last week, televised nationwide, showed in
an embarrassing manner, that Megawati simply could not fathom
the questions posed to her. On the other hand, Susilo Bambang
Yudhoyono displayed an impressive intellectual aptitude
by presenting coherent statements on a wide range of issues.
The preliminary results of the Sept. 20 presidential election
clearly reflected the strong yearning for change that exists
among Indonesians, as well as the prevailing opinion that
this nation deserves leadership, which adheres to moral
principles, imbued with a more respectable intellectual
quality. Although the full and detailed results of the Sept.
20 runoff presidential election have not been made public,
it is not too early to point out that drastic and significant
changes have taken place, affecting the social psychology
of Indonesian society, with far-reaching political consequences.
In the years to come, this country's new leadership should
constantly remember that, politically speaking, the majority
of the Indonesian populace has reached a level of independence
that is not easily swayed by massive public relations campaigns,
nor by clever money politics. At the same time, however,
this new development in the form of a newly found socio-political
independence constitutes a factor that the new leadership
under Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono and Jusuf Kalla will have
to reckon with.
|
