21.05.1998

Indonesia in revolt

The masses are gaining a sense of their own power

Indonesia stands on the brink of democratic revolution. President Suharto, who has ruled the archipelago for three decades since coming to power in a bloody counterrevolutionary coup, has been forced to resign on May 21.

His replacement by vice president BJ Habibie leaves the regime intact. But the ruling elite can no longer rule in the old way.

The masses, spurred on by weakness and division at the top, are defiant. Student demonstrations are being swelled with support from the urban poor. The military is beginning to show signs of splitting - both from above and below - with troops openly fraternising with demonstrators. The masses refuse to be ruled in the old way.

This upheaval has roots both within Indonesian society and beyond. Clearly, the economy has suffered more than others from the crisis in the Asian financial system. The steep price rises on fuel, electricity and transport forced by the IMF’s emergency $40 billion bail-out provided the immediate spark. Yet to reduce this political crisis to the sudden economic slump is to miss the point entirely.

For the past two years, the pro-democracy student movement has been growing. It is explicitly against the Suharto regime and encompasses other democratic issues such as self-determination for East Timor. The July 1996 crackdown against the newly formed revolutionary Peoples’ Democratic Party and the more moderate Indonesian Democratic Party certainly led to the swelling of the ranks of the student movement. The fact that the PDI was led by the daughter of former president Sukarno, ousted by Suharto in 1965, ensured that events were given wide coverage and confirmed the anti-democratic nature of the regime in the minds of the mass of the population.

For over two weeks now, the student demonstrations have begun to spill onto the streets. The regime’s strategy had been to contain them on the campuses. But the shooting dead on May 12 of six peaceful demonstrators from Jakarta’s elite Trisakti University made that impossible. The action by the military - whether or not instigated by one faction of the military trying to discredit another, as some speculate - was the turning point. At this moment the students won the leadership of a large section of the population.

Rioters began to loot. Suharto, attending a G15 meeting in Cairo, was forced home. Yet on his return he dithered while Jakarta burned. All sections of Indonesian society recognised that the nation’s politics were at the crossroads. Revolution had now become possible. Action by a committed minority had become a mass movement. The regime is splitting, the masses are demanding radical political and social change. The hated dictator Suharto going is not enough. So must his undemocratic constitution.

The gravity of this situation for world imperialism was recognised by the G8 leaders meeting in Birmingham last weekend. Where for years a blind eye was turned to the dictatorship, there were now demands for Suharto to resign, Madeline Albright being the latest. Yet imperialism faces a dilemma. Because Indonesian society was systematically depoliticised by Suharto’s so-called ‘new order’ regime, no popular alternative leader is ready in the wings. Politics is being reclaimed by the people who are steadily learning their own power to effect change. Sops from the regime - such as the rescinding of price rises or even Suharto stepping down - now only spur the masses on, whetting their appetite for a new beginning.

What we are seeing is a rising mass movement in a maturing pre-revolutionary situation (‘pre’ only in the sense that a frontal - ie, armed - assault on power would at the present time be premature). Such a situation can be resolved positively or negatively. The way forward, for the classes and strata of Indonesia, is unclear, not least to themselves.

A crackdown now, favoured by some factions in the military, could well compound existing splits. Yet the movement for change is by no means fully conscious. All sorts of programmes are competing and are being tested.

The lessons for not only the Indonesian masses, but for ourselves, will be rich. No matter what the outcome, Indonesia will never be the same again. History is in the making. Its forward surges, its backward slips, its heroism and its sacrifice - all are being driven from below.

Wednesday’s mass demonstration on the ‘National day of awakening’, which marks the birth of the nationalist struggle against the Dutch 90 years ago, went ahead throughout the country, despite being called off in Jakarta by the ‘leadership’ for fear of bloodshed. The students still occupy the parliament building, determined to remain until the regime goes, despite increasing intimidation from sections of the military.

Rumours that generals may be prepared to ‘do a Tiananmen’ have been instigated. The present army chief, Wiranto, is supposedly a dove. His rival Subianto, Suharto’s son-in-law, is supposedly a hawk. Yet so far the military has remained intact. Nevertheless splits in the regime continue to grow.

Much to the shock of the military the speaker of the parliament had joined the call for Suharto to resign. Such divisions at the top can be used to the advantage of those below.

Without doubt the emerging revolutionary movement is spontaneously democratic and leftwing. From now on consciousness will be key. Marxists must organise themselves and merge with the movement. In that way the workers can be formed into a class and become the hegemon of the democratic revolution.

As the elemental movement unfolds, people will be hungry for ideas and answers to the crisis. A positive way forward will be sought. How did Suharto stay in power for 30 years? Why did the west support him? What about the Chinese-Indonesians? The East Timorese and national self-determination? The role of the military? And the IMF? All these matters - in fact the entire basis for present Indonesian society - are thrown into question by the struggle to oust the regime.

And there are dangers. The role of Amien Rais, leader of the 28 million-strong Muhammadiyah Islamic education and social group, has become crucial. He is attempting to place himself at the head of the mass movement. But on what programme? Should this reactionary receive any support from the revolutionary forces?

In an interview with the Far Eastern Economic Review (May 14) he went out of his way to prove his respectable credentials as a safe bourgeois alternative to Suharto: “Without doubt, the IMF is the only alternative. I could call it a necessary evil. We cannot get rid of the IMF if we want to overcome the crisis. But it is not of course a proud moment to be giving away our economic sovereignty to the IMF.” Further he argues: “I say the United States cannot escape from its global responsibilities ... we need moral support from the US to push forward our democratisation efforts.”

This fits well with imperialism’s own general programme. Since even before the end of the Cold War, the US was using its hegemony to replace anti-communist dictatorships with anti-communist neo-liberal democratic regimes. This occurred in Chile, Argentina, El Salvador, South Korea, the Philippines - even South Africa. In that sense, Suharto was a relic from the past and the corrupt regime is a barrier to the programme of the World Trade Organisation, the IMF and the World Bank.

Even if Rais is prepared to put himself forward for power, in whose interests will he take it? This raises the question of the current tactics being pursued by the Peoples Democratic Party. In a statement released on May 14, its central leadership makes this call:

“To all pro-democratic figures; to Megawati Sukarnoputri [ousted leader of the Indonesian Democratic Party], Amien Rais, Budiman Sujatmiko [jailed chairperson of the PDP], Sri Bintang Pamungkas [jailed chairperson of the Indonesian United Development Party] and others. It is time for you to state your readiness to replace Suharto. This must be done soon, because Suharto is no longer wanted by the people and is ready to step down.”

This tactic is in line with the PDP’s call for a people’s - read cross-class - coalition government. While this is supported by a call to “quickly prepare an independent people’s council to replace the parliament and the People’s Consultative Assembly [which ‘elects’ the president]”, the inclusion of Amien Rais as part of a coalition has the danger of handing the initiative over to counterrevolutionary forces. The example of the Iranian revolution of 1979-81 and its slaughter by the clerical-fascist mullahs should not be forgotten.

While the Muslim forces in this, the world’s largest Islamic nation, are not of the same fundamentalist ilk, a nationalist beheading of the revolution at the hands of a figure like Rais would be only too likely.

It was the crisis of 1965-66 which saw the birth of Suharto’s ‘new order’. This came about in response to an alleged coup being plotted by the Communist Party of Indonesia (PKI). The PKI had three million members and was the world’s largest non-ruling Communist Party. Its semi-Maoist ‘official communist’ programme hinged on support for the ‘anti-imperialist’ national bourgeoisie, personified by the then president Sukarno, who came to power through the anti-colonial removal of the Dutch after World War II.

The coup of 1965 seems to have been engineered by Sukarno himself to purge the right wing of his regime. This was supported by the PKI. The strategy turned into disaster. In a counter-coup to ‘defend the constitution’, Suharto seized power. In the months which followed, the PKI was all but liquidated. Up to 1.5 million people were killed in an anti-communist, anti-Chinese bloodbath.

Amien Rais sickeningly refers to this period as an example of ‘people power’. In the Far Eastern Economic Review he stated: “Indonesia gained its independence through peoples’ power. And again in 1966, when students mobilised forces together with the military to topple Sukarno, it was a form of people’s power.”

Clearly the PDP’s call to give power to Rais would be fatal.

On other fronts, the national question in Indonesia will certainly come to the fore. While the Javanese majority in this, the world’s fourth most populous country, is overwhelmingly Muslim, there are substantial minorities, including the Chinese-Indonesians, East Timorese (who are largely catholic), West Papuans and the Sumatran Ache people.

For these oppressed minorities, the current situation could be their opportunity. Any consistently democratic programme must champion the rights of the nationally and ethnically oppressed.

In the heat of revolution, new politics will be born, old certainties jettisoned. While the old Maoist strategies have largely been discredited, not only in the Indonesian context, but in the nearby Philippines and in China itself, the fact that the PKI was a mass phenomenon means that its negative legacy will not have been completely erased.

One thing is certain: history is being made by the masses. Whatever the outcome - whether the regime can organise a stable transition, whether there is a bloody crackdown, whether the masses surge forward to pose and answer new questions - the world will begin to ‘learn Indonesian’, just as the Indonesian movement will be learning the lessons of previous revolutions. No doubt the Iranian revolution and the Indonesian crisis of 1965, having ended in slaughter, are being studied.

The Indonesian revolution has the possibility of setting the tone for the new millennium. Long live the Indonesian democratic revolution!

Marcus Larsen