Globalization process in the last three decades changes configuration of the world’s economy, social, culture and politics in unprecedented way in our history. The process toward borderless world challenges every nation state in the globe in the effort to get something from the ongoing process that can make better off or worst off. The continuing of changing process of the world needs adjustment in nation state institution. In the more competitive situation, the failure in respond to globalization could lead to disastrous condition for nation state, as proofed by the fall of Berlin Wall, and the collapsed of Sovyet Union and former Yugoslavia.
Institutional adjustment is needed in respond to this process, to maintain the competition to reach efficiency and effectiveness of the government. Moreover, the pressure of changes toward more globalize government because of effects of globalize economy, should be supported by political institution adjustment. This essay will elaborate adjustment on political institutional in Indonesia in respond to many impacts of globalization process. Since analyzing globalization impacts on political structure is a complex effort, it needs deep understanding and familiarity of the country object. Indeed, focusing in one country (Indonesia within and post-Soeharto era) that in the process of democratizing is an effort to get comprehensive analyses.
In this research essay I will argue that Indonesia has experienced the changes of political institution to respond the pressure of more globalized world. This process is indicated by the revitalization of House of Representatives (DPR), State Audit Board (BPK), and the Central Bank (Bank of Indonesia), the establishment of Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK), Constitutional Court (MK), Regional Representative Council (DPD), Fair Business Competition Commission (KPPU) and the abolishment of Consultative Assembly (DPA) through amendment constitution as correction to the failure in the past.
Terms and Real Challenges
Globalization is broadly views by experts as a process of interconnectedness and interdependence between countries in the world. From economist perspective, this process lead to economic integration of many nations in terms of trading among countries, international labor division, and trans-national investment or capital flow and more fluid mobility of people (Kohler, 2003). Moreover, the other impacts of globalization exist from spreading of thought and ideas until competing spiritual values (Cable, 1999, p-2). This unstoppable process is boosted by advances of information and transport technology.
The globalization term has neutral meaning, however, there are two sides viewing the ongoing process. The critical view stated that globalization fail to fulfill its promise to reduce poverty and promote equality in economic, shaping the better new construct of the world economic. In the more political economic approach, Stiglitz, 2007 stated that “the ongoing process of globalization bad for environment, increase inequality, weaken cultural diversity, and advance corporate interest as the expense of the well being of ordinary citizens”. The failure of the IMF’s formula to cure the Asian economic crisis has been criticized by Stiglitz (2007), and be considered as a negative effect of financial market integration.
However, Wolf (2005) and Bhagwati (2007) are defended the globalization process as the relatively success achieving its objectives. While anti-globalization movements protesting many symbolic events of international financial institution since 1999, there are agreement among both side that ongoing process of globalization is unavoidable with neutral nuance and influenced almost every country in the globe.
Moreover, Stiglitz (2007) viewed globalization process as diminish power and sovereignty of nation state, more liberal market and more power of transnational corporation. Globalization has economic, political, and social dimensions in which it simultaneously influenced many actors. Many countries respond to globalization by enhance its efficiency and effectiveness of its government to avoid being loose in the global competition. In Darwinism perspective, institution has to responsive and adaptable to the changes in the world to survive in competition, hence nation state institution could emerge, abolish or revitalize.
In nation state level, globalization changes of the way we organize political system to avoid its bad effects and get its valuable impacts. Nation state as human collectivity with its objectives and goals basically just like organism, in which has forming structures and mechanism in social orders and cooperation. Institutionalization is the consequence process of state structure, commonly codify with constitution, legal system, formal organization, government and public services.
Politics is a mechanism to resolve the different competing interest among citizen, especially related decision making on allocation of the scarcity of resources. Harold (in Warhurst, 2000, p-3) stated politics is “the process of deciding who get what, when and how”. In context of Indonesia as multiethnic archipelagic country, politics also means canalization of different aspiration in a civilize way. Political institutionalization is the continuing process from national identity building as a result of independence or other historical process. Political party with many ideology or interests will try to competing each other in voting system or other means of power achievement to drive decision making process to establish responsible government in a mature political development (Siarof, 2005, pp. 45-46).
While world economic integration almost occurring smoothly, there is less political integration in the world (Cable, 1999, p-31). Regionalism such as European Union, ASEAN, AFTA, and APEC tend to economics, while global government is still a future vision.
Global economic and political pressure
The crises caused by globalization could affect social dissolution such as urban violence in Latin America until ethnic conflict in Indonesia (Stiglitz, 2002, p-8). Asian economic crisis in 1997-1998 impacted on Indonesian economically, politically, socially and also boosted security instability, sectarian conflict and religious tension around the country. Indonesia in democratic transition was very badly deteriorated by the changes (Sukardi, 1998, p-421).
After the worst crisis because of globalization Indonesia turned to the process of democratic transition, democratization indicated by organizing free and fair election in 1999. Political institution as corrective action as a result should drive to combat corruption, separate executive and legislative power, decentralization, judicial reform (Rondinelly 2007, pp. 151-164). Moreover, Rondinelly (2007, p-229) argued that the structural change in Asia was a response to the crisis and as the direct impact of globalization.
Even though anticorruption issues initially was drive by IMF and Worldbank as conditionality for the loan given, finally accepted by Indonesian government as a real need. Indonesia establish anticorruption super-body to cure the latent problem in government; corruption, collusion and nepotism. In this process, the NGO such as Transparency International support the effort.
In the new political institution configuration, Indonesia also established Constitutional Court that adopted United States as a model. In the developing democracy, it was introduced polling process with new system of election. The consolidation Democracy in Indonesia is a gradual process as a respond to the global pressure.
Indonesia in response to globalization (within and post-Soeharto era)
Soeharto is the second-world leader par se who grown his power in the Cold War era when anti-communist movement supported by the Western Block. Hundreds of thousand people died as the cost of the effort to diminish the biggest communist power in Asia in that era. As the history actors in this process the Smiling General seen by many political experts almost as charismatic as Soekarno who historically proclaim the Indonesian independence from the Dutch colonial. However, during Soeharto’s terms Indonesia occupy eastern part of Timor Island that for years neglected by Portuguese colonial.
While Soekarno’s Jargon was anti-colonialism and anti neo-imperialism Soeharto was more pragmatic in economic policy. During Soeharto’s administration, Indonesia is an active member of the International Monetary Fund (IMF), the World Bank, ASEAN, AFTA, and APEC.
With the Javanese style leadership, the smiling general with military background used western educated technocrat (Mafia Barkeley), backed by military and loyal administration, and Golkar Party as a political pillar consolidated its power. He effectively built his power with the characteristic of centralistic, political monopoly, focus on economic development (Cassing, 2000, pp. 162-163). He dominated all government institution, included House of Representatives (DPR), People's Consultative Assembly (MPR), State Audit Board (BPK), the Central Bank (Bank of Indonesia), Consultative Assembly (DPA), and “all” formal and informal structure of the state.
The first half period of his administration is relatively stable with developmentalism; economic growth, decrease in unemployment, family planning program. However, by the more time go, his second half of 32 years administration turned to be corrupt, inefficient, and despotic. His dictatorship style of administration rely on censorship, included prevent any critical foreign scholar to influenced their though to save his power. Some regional separatism spread in his administration term (especially in Aceh and Papua).
World’s politic configuration has been change since the fall of Eastern Bloc. The worst economic condition as an indirect effect of Asian economic crises weakened Soeharto’s power and finally toppled him from his power. In this time was spread aspiration of reform for more decentralized government, military distance from public affairs, civil society domination and democratization.
The idea of democracy in Indonesia was boosted by any middle and elite class influenced by western concept of ideal society and ideal government. The scholars who graduated from or influenced by western education and values such as Nurcholish Madjid, Abdurachman Wahid and Amien Rais transform the term democracy, civil supremacy into Indonesia. In this process, many non-Government Organization also introduced and advocate democracy in their daily activities. They came to the conclusion that political reform is solutions for Indonesian problem.
The political change as a result of political reform is very broad, from direct presidential election, and also local leader in Province, Regency and Municipality level. Decentralization gives local government control over financial budget and expenditure. By the approvement from House of Representatives, nowadays Indonesia has 33 Province from 27 Province before, while Regency and Municipality from around 250 to become around 500 today.
Furthermore, to enhance transparency and accountability BPK release its audit result through the internet. For years since bureaucratic reform, the government with assistance from donor countries introduced efficiency of government with zero growth of government employee recruitment. The introducing of e-government in many countries, included in Indonesia also to enhance efficiency and effectiveness (Rondinelly, 2007). The adoption e-government process make all stakeholder can access government policy and boosting transparency and accountability. Moreover, amendment constitution from 1999 to 2002 is one of political response from Indonesia to get the more effective and efficient government toward more competitive world. The new commitment in the amended constitution such as clearly statement of 20% budget for education and the social benefit system for Indonesian.
This corrective action also related to revitalization of the House of Representatives as part of check and balance political institution. This amendment also accommodated independency of the Supreme Audit Board, and the Central Bank, and abolishment of Consultation Assembly (DPA) that considered as ineffective state body. Creation of new institution such as Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) and Constitutional Court (MK) is the success story of Indonesian reform. Regional Representative Council (DPD), Judicial Commission (KY), and Fair Business Competition Commission (KPPU) are indication of the seriousness of government to build more political channel, judicial reform and more health competition in private sector. The establishment of these institutions is also an effort to balance role of the state, market, and civil society that Soesastro (2000, p-54) argued as very important factor for Indonesian economic recovery.
Political system in Indonesia post-Soeharto giving fertile land for multi-party, but no one party could dominate political landscape like in the Soeharto era. However, Sherlock (2009) the basic ideologies of these political parties are still Islamism and Nationalism (minus Marxism that has been destroyed by Soeharto’s regime). Despite this two poles ideological dichotomy, the ruling government should build coalition in parliament.
However, in respond to the Globalization process with all economic and political aspect, there are two side of political standing, nationalistic and pro-globalization. The political party such as Gerindra Party and Justice and Prosperous Party basically anti-neoliberalism, while Democratic Party, Golkar Party and Democratic Party of Struggle is supporting. They compete each other in issues such as privatization of state own enterprises, liberalization domestic market, and free trade agreement in political process.
Even though citizens now can criticize government through Facebook, Tweeter and other means of the internet social networking also has great impact on democratization and aspiration channeling. In the case of “The KPK Drama” related criminalization of the two KPK’s leader, the mounting support from online petition could influenced the released of them from the custody (Loubke, 2010, p-87). The ongoing democratic consolidation in Indonesia has up and down process, trough new political institution that has been created along reform process.
Indonesia has been follow long road to achieve the better political condition and also economic situation. Recent day Indonesia is relatively recover from the impact of Asian economic crises. Nowadays, Indonesia is the members of G-20 (The Government of the 20 highest GDP countries) to anticipate future Global Economic Crises. Indonesia as an economic recovery country cannot be neglected in the future economy that more globalized and interconnected. Indonesia as an institutional state is being influenced and influences the globalization process.
Conclusions
To sum up, since the Asian economic crisis, Indonesia has experienced the dramatic political institution changes into a more democratic country. This process initially an endogenous and exogenous factor influenced as respond to the pressure of more globalized world. This development indicated by the establishment of new institutions, revitalization and also abolishment some institutions through amendment constitution. This process is intended to build more effective and efficient government to respond the other impact of globalization in the future.
References:
Bhagwati, Jagdish., 2007, “In Defends of Globalization”, Oxford University Press, New York.
Cable, Vincent, 1999, “Globalization and Global Governance”, Royal Institute of International Affairs, New York.
Cassing, H. James, 2000, “Economic and Political culture in Indonesia”, European Journal of Political Economy, Vol. 16, USA.
Kohler, Horst, 2003, The Challenges of Globalization and the role of the IMF, in Reading Brick for POGO 8012, Comparative Government and Politics, Semester 2, 2010, Policy and Governance, The Crawford School, Australian National University, Canberra.
Loubke, Christian Von, 2010, The Politics of Reform: Political Scandals, Elite Resistance, and Presidential Leadership in Indonesia, Journal of Current Southeast Asian Affairs, USA.
Rondinelly, Dennis A. and Heffron, John M., 2007, Globalization and Change in Asia, Lynne Rienner Publisher, London.
Siaroff, Alan, 2005, Comparing political regimes: a thematic introduction to comparative politics, Broadview Press, Ontario.
Soesastro, Hadi, 2000, Globalization: challenges for Indonesia, in Reading Brick for POGO 8012, Comparative Government and Politics, Semester 2, 2010, Policy and Governance, The Crawford School, Australian National University, Canberra.
Sukardi, Laksamana, 1998, Indonesia’s Future, in Reading Brick for POGO 8012, Comparative Government and Politics, Semester 2, 2010, Policy and Governance, The Crawford School, Australian National University, Canberra.
Sherlock, Stephen, 2009, Parties and elections in Indonesia 2009: the consolidation of democracy, Research Paper, Australian Parliamentary Library, viewed 23 September 2010,
Stiglitz, Joseph, E., 2002, Globalization and its discontents, Penguin Books, London.
Stiglitz, Joseph, E., 2007, Making globalization work, Penguin Books, London.
Warhurst, Singelton Aitkin Jinks, 2000, Australian political institution, Pearson Education Australia, Malaysia.
Wolf, Martin, 2005, Why globalization works, Yale University Press, London.
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar