[TIME] What Indonesia Can Teach Thailand and Egypt About Democracy

[MarveL]

World - indonesia
What Indonesia Can Teach Thailand and Egypt About Democracy (and Vice Versa)
Yenni Kwok @yennikwok 4:22 AM ET

A member of the An-Nadzir Muslim sect shows his inked finger after casting his ballot at a polling station during the Indonesian parliamentary elections in Gowa, South Sulawesi province, on April 9, 2014


With democracy besieged in much of Asia and the Muslim world, Indonesia is something of a beacon. The world's most populous Muslim nation has successfully rid its politics of military intervention, and is about to embark on another free and fair direct election for its next leader

A coup in Thailand. A landslide electoral victory in Egypt for a former military chief who overthrew an elected government. Democracy remains elusive in much of Southeast Asia and in much of the Muslim world. Yet, one Muslim-majority country in Southeast Asia proves it is not necessarily so.

Indonesia, which holds both parliamentary and presidential elections this year, is a testament to transformation. In 2001, three years after the fall of authoritarian President Suharto, Indonesia faced a multitude of crises, from Christian-Muslim sectarian strife and Islamist terrorist attacks, to separatist conflicts. That year, Thaksin Shinawatra won elections by landslide and became Thailand’s Prime Minister, but Indonesia’s first democratically elected President,
Abdurrahman Wahid, popularly known as Gus Dur, was forced to step down after months of wrangling with lawmakers.

And yet, instead of turning to the men in uniform, Indonesia pressed ahead with political reform — reformasi, as it’s called in Bahasa Indonesia. In 2004, it not only held its first directly elected presidential vote (Gus Dur was elected by legislators), but the military lost its reserved parliamentary seats. “Reformasi achieved a great accomplishment for Indonesian democracy: pushing the military back into the barracks,” says Ulil Abshar Abdalla, an associate researcher at the Jakarta-based think tank Freedom Institute.

On July 9, Indonesia is set to choose its next President, in the third poll in which voters can directly elect their country’s top leader. The two presidential contenders are polar opposites. Joko Widodo is a soft-spoken and immensely popular Jakarta Governor. Prabowo Subianto is a former special-forces commander with a dubious human-rights record and infamously fiery temper.

Prabowo’s camp touts the ex-general as a decisive and firm leader, while Joko’s camp takes pride in his humble and down-to-earth quality. “One represents the culture of a tough military commander, and the other the culture of ordinary, rather than aristocratic, Javanese people,” wrote senior editor Endy Bayuni in the Jakarta Post.

Although the military is out of politics, many retired officers build their second career in it. Prabowo naturally attracts quite a few former soldiers, and there are a number on Joko’s side too, including Wiranto, the Hanura Party’s founder who, in 2000, lost his post as Security Minister over alleged involvement in East Timor’s referendum violence.

But no retired officer is more polarizing than Prabowo. His critics see the 62-year-old as part of Suharto’s authoritarian regime — he was married to a daughter of Suharto, joined elite military units and took part in military operations in the separatist provinces of East Timor and Irian Jaya. His quick
rise through the ranks was cut short in 1998 after he was discharged from the military because of his alleged role in the abduction of pro-democracy activists in the months before the fall of Suharto.

His Gerindra Party has formed a coalition with three Islamic parties, two of which are known for intolerant views toward religious minorities. Gerindra’s manifesto has also raised alarm. While it guarantees freedom of religion, it also says that “the state is required to guarantee the purity of teachings of the religions acknowledged by the state from all forms of defamation and deviation.” That is likely to spell more trouble to groups like the Shi‘ite and Ahmadi Muslims, who are frequent victims of violence and intolerance.

Although opinion polls show that Prabowo has gained ground, the 52-year-old Joko, nicknamed Jokowi, is the front runner in the presidential race. But even if Prabowo wins the election, some analysts argue that it will be difficult for him to bring back military rule. “Indonesia’s democratic institutions are pretty solid and can’t be overturned by him,”
Ulil says, adding that people should be more worried about “the radical forces around him that support his agenda.”

Prabowo himself tries to assuage fears. “I don’t want to lead in an authoritative manner,” he said on Twitter, responding to a tweet that suggested if the former general became President, he could follow in the footsteps of the Thai junta, which threatened to block social media (and, according to some reports, briefly did so on Wednesday). “Whatever my political rivals say, I support freedom of the press and of expression.”

But many remain skeptical. “The first obstacle that we have to face,” said Fadjroel Rachman, a student activist turned political commentator, “is the return of the danger of fascism.” And if anything, Indonesia should look to Thailand and Egypt to draw the most important lesson of all: democracy should never be something to be taken for granted.

What Indonesia Can Teach Thailand and Egypt About Democracy - TIME

 

[dlclong]

Indonesia Can Teach Thailand and Egypt ----Want to settle, should stay away from the United States

 

[Aepsilons]

The case of Thailand is rather interesting , and we should analyze their national story with a sense of understanding. The Army, for the Thais, is not just an arm of the Government, but, in regards to Thai / Siamese history, was the guarantor of the independence of Thailand from foreign aggressors. It was the Thai army that saved Thai identity from the Burmese (after The late Ayodhya kingdom was conquered. It was the Thai General Taksin, who would later become the 1st King of modern Siam; his successor being Buddayodfa chulakok or King Rama I, the first King of the current Chakri Dynasty. The old institutions of Thailand , one being the reverence for the monarchy and the army still live on. This sense of reverence of old , time-old tradition was akin to the time when the Emperor of Japan was considered a Living Deity. So, considering such historical quandries, we should empathize with the Thais and understand their situation. Not all democracy is universal; democracy must find a way to mold and adapt to a local culture and society. In Thailand, its doing just that.

Let us have confidence on our Thai friends.

 

[Indos]

I just wonder why Time magazine allowed this writer to write this good story.....the point and story is good though, they also have good momentum to write it, but the way she conveyed the message on her writing is not really interesting and not flowing in a smooth way either. It can be better written by someone else I believe. In my opinion, It should be written in a more anallytical way than just covering our current event and link it into the writing theme. The source person are also not a good political analyst in Indonesia. Another international magazine should write it again.

 

[Kyle Sun]

Thai destroy their own society and economy with so called democracy .

 

[Aepsilons]

Thai destroy their own society and economy with so called democracy .

How are they destroying their society? Thailand has progressed due to democracy, beginning with elightened policies started by King Chulalongkorn during the mid 19th century. Democracy takes time, and the Thai people , i believe, can do it.

I just wonder why Time magazine allowed this writer to write this good story.....the point and story is good though, they also have good momentum to write it, but the way she conveyed the message on her writing is not really interesting and not flowing in a smooth way either. It can be better written by someone else I believe. In my opinion, It should be written in a more anallytical way than just covering our current event and link it into the writing theme. The source person are also not a good political analyst in Indonesia. Another international magazine should write it again.

Indeed, they can learn from your country's progress. From the military dictatorships of Sukarno, Suharto etc, to the more secular government of the present Indonesia....its something that is to be emulated and respected. The same for the Philippines; from having the Marcos dictatorship , and to the the current Aquino administration that is rather transparent and strong in their anti-corruption agenda. We see the transition of the democracies of south east asian countries. And it is to be respected!

I believe that Thailand, as one of the founding members of ASEAN and SEATO (now defunct), can make a rebound.

One thing i know about Thailand and their people is this: They are resilient !

 

[Indos]

Indeed, they can learn from your country's progress. From the military dictatorships of Sukarno, Suharto etc, to the more secular government of the present Indonesia....its something that is to be emulated and respected. The same for the Philippines; from having the Marcos dictatorship , and to the the current Aquino administration that is rather transparent and strong in their anti-corruption agenda. We see the transition of the democracies of south east asian countries. And it is to be respected!

I believe that Thailand, as one of the founding members of ASEAN and SEATO (now defunct), can make a rebound.

One thing i know about Thailand and their people is this: They are resilient !

Actually Soekarno and Soeharto government are much more secular than any government after reformation. Islam politics was being confined at those time, even though since 1990, Soeharto moves closer to Islam. I just can say to you that Secular is something that we don't like, it is a bad term in Indonesia. Right now, we are free, and both political power whether Islam or Nationalist still have a chance to direct the nation based on their dream. And we will respect any one who will win the election.

 

[Aepsilons]

Actually Soekarno and Soeharto government are much more secular than any government after reformation. Religion is being confined at those time, even though since 1990, Soeharto moves closer to Islam. I just can say to you that Secular is something that we don't like, it is a bad term in Indonesia. Right now, we are free, and both political power whether Islam or Nationalist still have a chance to direct the nation based on their dream. And we will respect any one who will win the election.

I think that secularism is the only way Indonesia can remain intact, considering the mulitple ethnic groups, religious groups that make up Indonesia. Let us look at India; its success is due to its secular policies. India, which is overwhelmingly hindu, could easily apply pro-hindu policies and isolate ethnic and religious minorities; but that is not the case.

There has been a Sikh prime minister ; a muslim president, and even a christian defense minister. Secularism can work.

 

[Kyle Sun]

How are they destroying their society? Thailand has progressed due to democracy, beginning with elightened policies started by King Chulalongkorn during the mid 19th century. Democracy takes time, and the Thai people , i believe, can do it.

Yes , they do quite well .

They are enjoying the sunshine of Democracy.

 

[Aepsilons]

Yes , they do quite well .

They are enjoying the sunshine of Democracy.

Let's think objectively. At least the Thai government allowed protesters to voice their opinion. The recent military coup was only initiated after a constitutional court decided the current regime of Yingluck shinawatra no longer held the mandate. The military did not act by itself, it utilized the constitutional court, the supreme law of the land, as pretext for its action.

 

[Zsari]

Let's think objectively. At least the Thai government allowed protesters to voice their opinion. The recent military coup was only initiated after a constitutional court decided the current regime of Yingluck shinawatra no longer held the mandate. The military did not act by itself, it utilized the constitutional court, the supreme law of the land, as pretext for its action.

The cycle of protests, unrest, coup will continue. This is by no mean the end of the political turmoil.

 

[Fukuoka]

You mean Suharto the death squads maker for MOSSAD/CIA?

 

[Reashot Xigwin]

I think that secularism is the only way Indonesia can remain intact, considering the mulitple ethnic groups, religious groups that make up Indonesia. Let us look at India; its success is due to its secular policies. India, which is overwhelmingly hindu, could easily apply pro-hindu policies and isolate ethnic and religious minorities; but that is not the case.

There has been a Sikh prime minister ; a muslim president, and even a christian defense minister. Secularism can work.

Indonesia was never a secular country. Its a Plural one. Where instead of a "Church" we have different house of worships capable of influencing the state to some degree.

& bad news for democracy in the region.

Southeast Asia Retreats From Democracy
After decades of greater democratization, a new report says that democracy is in retreat throughout ASEAN.

By Zachary Keck
May 29, 2014

Image Credit: Wikimedia Commons

After nearly two decades of progress, democracy is now in retreat in Southeast Asia according to a new report by the Council on Foreign Relations.

The working paper, written by CFR Senior Fellow for Southeast Asia, Joshua Kurlantzick, argues that the significant democratic gains Southeast Asia made in the 1990s and 2000s have begun being rolled back over the last four years.

Kurlantzick begins by noting that not too long ago Southeast Asia was championed by democracy advocates as a leading example for other regions to follow. While the region was largely autocratic throughout the Cold War, the first two decades of the post-Cold War era saw most countries in the region at least make greater progress towards democracy. Kurlantzick argues that this was the result of multiple factors, including the end of the superpower rivalry, emerging middle classes after decades of rapid economic growth and new communication technologies that empowered these new urban middle class populations to challenge authoritarian governments.

Kurlantzick also points out that during this period there was a regional push toward democracy. During the 1980s, Northeast Asian states like Taiwan and South Korea had become democratic. Moreover, after the Cold War the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) began to take a greater role in promoting human rights and political reform.

In the early 1990s, this led to the emergence of new democracies in places like the Philippines and Thailand, as well as failed attempts to orchestrate democracy in countries like Myanmar. The devastating impact of the Asian Financial Crisis in the late 1990s only served to further discredit authoritarian governments. In countries like Indonesia, this paved the way for democratic movements to overthrow existing regimes. In Indonesia’s case, this resulted in two new democracies as a result of East Timor becoming the independent and democratic state of Timor-Leste.

Even non-democratic countries witnessed significant political reforms, Kurlantzick points out. For example, the opposition movement led by Anwar Ibrahim in Malaysia continued to gather greater support, forcing the ruling coalition to allow them some degree of power. Singapore’s opposition also began gaining power while criticizing the People’s Action Party became more acceptable. Later, in 2010, Myanmar began implementing political reforms under Thein Sein that reduced the role of the military and allowed the main opposition party to run in elections.

Altogether then, the 1990s and 2000s brought remarkable progress towards democratization to Southeast Asia. As Kurlantzick points out, whereas in 1989 only the Philippines was ranked as “partly free” by Freedom House, by 2009 the Philippines, Thailand, Singapore, Malaysia, and Timor-Leste were ranked as “partly free” nations, while Indonesia was ranked as “free.”

The first four years of this decade has seen this trend reverse itself. “Today,” Kurlantzick observes, “few people are touting… Southeast Asia as a democratic success story.” He notes that since 2006 Thailand has been mired in a political crisis that has seen the military reemerge as a powerful political force at the expense of civilian governance. Even civilian leaders like Thaksin Shinawatra, Kurlantzick contends, used the popular vote to govern as more of an authoritarian leader.

Similarly, the high point of Malaysia’s democratic progression was between late 2008 and early 2013, according to Kurlantzick. Over the last year, the BN-led government has taken steps to stymie the opposition’s growing electoral success, including resorting to various kinds of election fraud. It has also passed legislation reinstating authoritarian powers.

While Thailand and Malaysia are the most notable instances of democracy in retreat, Kurlantzick also notes that Cambodia and Myanmar have successfully rolled back some of their already limited political reforms. Meanwhile, the authoritarian states in the region like Vietnam, Brunei, and Laos have halted all reforms and have in some instances also begun rolling back previous reforms.

Kurlantzick contends that a number of factors have caused this democratic retraction in Southeast Asian. For instance, visionary first-generation democracy leaders were scarce in the region. Instead, most of the first-generation democracy leaders sought to use their electoral victories to consolidate their power and rule more like authoritarian leaders. Communication technologies also did not prove to be the magic bullet that many democracy advocates in Southeast Asia and elsewhere once hoped. The new democracies in the region also were ineffective at governing, and problems like corruption grew worse under the elected regimes. Regional factors were also important. Notably, ASEAN’s commitment to human rights has lacked substance, and China’s growing political, economic and social ties in the region have worked against democratization.

Kurlantzick also points out that democracy’s retreat in Southeast Asia mirrors the larger global trend of democratic reversals, which is consistent with the political scientist Samuel Huntington’s contention that democracies come and go in waves. One could also note that ASEAN’s retreat from democracy coincides with the generally hard times the region has fallen upon.

Kurlantzick contends that democracy’s retreat in Southeast Asia will have wide-ranging and largely negative consequences for the region itself as well as the United States. With regards to the latter, Kurlantzick writes, “If this democratic rollback continues, it is likely to seriously endanger American security cooperation in East Asia, undermine the region’s growth and economic interdependence, and cause serious political unrest, even insurgencies, in many Southeast Asian nations.”

Southeast Asia Retreats From Democracy | The Diplomat

 

[Maxtini]

Thai destroy their own society and economy with so called democracy .

Yes , they do quite well .

They are enjoying the sunshine of Democracy.

The essence of democracy is to let everyone voice their opinions~ whether it leads to the society for worse or better is fully on the hand of the peoples. At least you could have 5 year cycle for restarting, that means perpetual hope for the better future and reform.

If you have authoritatian state~ what would you have? You live in lottery ticket that span for your whole life. Get a good leader with determination to improve and manage your country well~ you hit the jackpot. Get a badass leader like Mugabe and Kim Jong Il, you live your life like a sh*t. How long have North Korean wait? Maybe for the lifetime of Kim Jong Il they have hoped for a change/reform like China. Alas! His son was no more better! Better wait for another 60 years to reform.

 

[aliaselin]

How are they destroying their society? Thailand has progressed due to democracy, beginning with elightened policies started by King Chulalongkorn during the mid 19th century. Democracy takes time, and the Thai people , i believe, can do it.




Indeed, they can learn from your country's progress. From the military dictatorships of Sukarno, Suharto etc, to the more secular government of the present Indonesia....its something that is to be emulated and respected. The same for the Philippines; from having the Marcos dictatorship , and to the the current Aquino administration that is rather transparent and strong in their anti-corruption agenda. We see the transition of the democracies of south east asian countries. And it is to be respected!

I believe that Thailand, as one of the founding members of ASEAN and SEATO (now defunct), can make a rebound.

One thing i know about Thailand and their people is this: They are resilient !

Wow，Qquino administration is rather transparent?
http://online.wsj.com/articles/corr...uino-tries-to-remake-nations-image-1401387259
Maybe because both Japan and Philipine are family politics, so you think it transparent.
Political dynasties in the Philippines - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia