Why does Governor Ahok lose election?

Recently, with 70% approval rating, Governor Basuki “ Ahok” Purnama loses DKI Jakarta gubernatorial election to Anies Baswedan, former President Joko “Jokowi” Widodo’s Minister of National Education. Meritocracy through crowd wisdom seems not working. Since Jakarta is the barometer Indonesia’s politics, the reasons must be investigated and the lessons-learned must be taken out.

The background of this election is the fallout of 2014 presidential election. It is the proxy war between Prabowo’s camp and President Jokowi’s camp. It is likely the 2019 presidential election will pit both camps too. So this is the warming up.

Indonesia has been experiencing democracy for 18 years. Win or lose happens in election, but this time is different. The downgrade of Indonesia’s democracy is seen. Religious sentiment, instead of merit, emerges as the decisive factor this current election. 

Before blaming religious sentiment as the culprit, the root of the problem might be at Governor Ahok’s personality. He fails to understand that politics entails not only rational but emotional value. Understandably, along with then Governor Jokowi, he indeed makes Jakarta better with massive infrastructure development, public service and governing system and this draws national admiration. But then he becomes over-confident and so naïve.

After Jokowi being elected as president, Ahok as Governor denied Boy Sadikin, PDI-P Jakarta chapter leader to be the vice governor. Ahok preferred to be paired by Jarot Saiful Hidayat, the other PDI-P cadre and former mayor of Blitar. Later, Boy Sadikin joins Anies Baswedan campaign team. In this gubernatorial election Ahok, at first, refused to run through political parties which he deemed corruptive. He would run independently through the support of Teman Ahok (Friends of Ahok). Only after being convinced by PDI-P chairman, Megawati, and potential administration problem of collected identity cards, Ahok accepted the political reality.

Ahok is a very good governor. Like in welfare state spirit, he arguably takes care of the Jakartans from cradle to grave. I see Singapore’s Lee Kuan Yew in him. But in doing this, inevitably he must do the unpopular policies, notably eviction of illegal squatters and legal settlers in the river bank. Indeed he does the right things. Without these, Jakarta will not lift up itself to world class metropolis.

Coupled with his combative demeanor, all these become ammunition for his rivals. Worse, his gaffe on Quran’s verse on arguably choosing leader in Islam brings him to court. His opportunist rivals applied the 2000 year-old Sun Tzu’s war strategy: … attack the opponent’s weaknesses. Furthermore, they relentlessly practice the end justifies the means. They cannot compete in terms of performance and achievement, not only Ahok is an incumbent but also a darn good governor.

They take advantages of barbaric religious sentiment against Governor Ahok through concerted public protests. Even Anies Baswedan who previously promotes “the fabric of the nation” seems to tear it down by seeking endorsement from the hardliners. And his supporters unabashedly threatened Governor Ahok’ deceased supporters not to perform last rites. This is the catch of Anies Baswedan’s election win.

Out of 70% approval rating, Governor Ahok only rakes in approximately 42% of votes. It means 28% of voters acknowledge Governor Ahok’s good performance but refuse to re-elect him. Besides Governor’s contentious manner, the only cogent explanation is that religious sentiment fanned by Governor Ahok’s rivals successfully changes some voters’ mind. Some Muslims can be convinced even though in earthly matters such as electing city manager, the religious label rather than capability determines the choice.

Certainly, religion is very important factor in personal and public life. However, in constitution inspired by Pancasila ideology there is no clause or article hampering any one to assume any public office because of religious identity. 

Finally, we must sincerely accept and fully support Anies Baswedan as governor. The stake for DKI Jakarta development is too high if we let him fail. Governor Ahok loses because his unsuitable character and religious sentiment. The latter lower Indonesia’s democracy standard, jeopardizes nation building and poses threat to national unity. And because of its effectiveness, I believe, somehow, some will utilize this sort of strategy as means in the next presidential election.  

*****

           

Biological process explains Iraq War

published @ The Jakarta Post

The unfolding chaos in Iraq is very similar to biological processes in nature. A book entitled Serengeti Rules — The Quest to Discover How Life Works and Why It Matters by Sean B. Carroll, a molecular biologist, which was recently published, is unlikely to be able to explain the Iraq war. Serengeti is a national park located in Tanzania and Kenya. In the early 1960s, the park saw a rapid explosion of buffalo, wildebeest and giraffe. After analyzing data, biologists concluded that the cause was rinderpest, a virus that kills cattle, wildebeest and buffalo. After the outbreak of rinderpest, an eradication campaign in the 1950s succeeded in reducing cases of rinderpest.

There appeared to be a correlation between rinderpest and the rise and fall of wildebeest and buffalo. When rinderpest is down, wildebeest and buffalo are up, vice versa. This gives us some idea of the Serengeti Rules, which are relevant to the Iraq war.

First, elements/players in ecosystem/societies correlate with each other following certain rules. The change of one element can be followed by the rapid change of other elements. Saddam Hussein was in only one element in Iraqi society. The ramification of Saddam’s removal lead to the rise of ISIS and a Sunni-Shiite sectarian war.

Second, Saddam to Iraq is like wildebeest to Serengeti Park. They are keystone of society/ecosystem. The keystone (species) is the most important element in ecosystem. The change of keystone results in the change of whole elements in society/ecosystem.

Third, repressors play a key role in the existence of elements. The population of wildebeest and buffalo is regulated or in this case suppressed by the existence of rinderpest as a repressor. In a similar vein, Sunni-Shiite conflict and the rise of radical groups is regulated by the existence of a dictator. An understanding of biology will enrich the insight of policymakers and help them avoid simplistic solutions that bring about disastrous consequences.

* * * * *

How to stop Islamic State?

published @ The Jakarta Post

After Paris, Western countries and their allies are trying to figure out how to eliminate Islamic State (IS) movement. Unfortunately, there are confused about the problem and subsequently, there are flaws in their strategy.

Western countries see IS as a problem caused by Syria’s President Bashar al-Assad. Western logic goes like this: In the midst of the Arab Spring, Syrians wanted democracy and so they rebelled against President Assad. And then IS, a free rider, infiltrated the rebellion with its own agenda. Accordingly, the solution is very simple: Assad must go, period. But we should ask: Is this true?

First, a disturbing fact is that Western allies, namely Turkey and the Gulf countries, put their weight behind the rebels. But embarrassingly, they themselves are not democratic countries.

To some extent, Turkey is not democratic because it regularly suppresses media freedom. And Turkey has also acted unfairly toward the Kurds and has never accepted them as a part of the nation. And the Gulf countries, most especially Saudi Arabia, know nothing about democracy, and yet they presumed to get involved in a democratic rebellion in Syria. This is the pot calling the kettle black.

Second, IS didn’t come out of thin air and strengthen its position without outside help. Former British prime minister Tony Blair has publicly acknowledged that the war in Iraq helped create IS. Turkey and the Gulf nations helped to arm the Syrian rebels. What we don’t know is whether the rebels they raised included IS factions. We have known for a long time that Saudi Arabia finances Salafist movements and it is Salafist Muslims, alongside disaffected Sunnis in Iraq and Syria, who form the backbone of IS.

If you look at the map, you will see that the only safe way for foreigners to join IS is through Turkey. When three British teenagers left London to join IS, they flew to Turkey. These facts must be acknowledged before developing any strategy to fight IS. Unfortunately, Western powers overlook these facts to keep these allies on their side.

* * * * *

The New White Man's Burden

published @ The Jakarta Post

To euphemize America’s colonization in the Philippines, Rudyard Kipling, a British writer, “justified” it as the white man’s burden to spread its superior civilization. Certainly, the true motive of colonization is self-serving. After centuries, the burden is still undertaken — America and its western allies still force its interests on the rest of the world, but now with the backfire of the migrant crisis in Europe.

The recent news is rife with the heart-rending stories of Syrian refugees. Prolonged civil war and Islamic State (IS) movement savagery force them to leave their homes. The root of the problem is partly the West’s interference in the conflict in Syria (and Middle East in general). But this takes place in the cloak of spreading democracy and defending human rights.

The Arab spring — the demand for democracy — engulfed the Middle East and North Africa a few years ago. But it turned out the West’s own geopolitical and economic profit takes precedence over democracy. The unintended consequence of Western intervention in the Middle East is the rise of IS. Moreover, this group would have never existed without support from Gulf countries and Turkey, the allies of the West. The West and its allies have helped create a monster that they now fear.

Now Iraq, Libya and Syria are torn apart; the economy has collapsed; public services have disappeared; the fabric of society unravels. So when all hopes dash, the people must flee their homelands. The recent migrant crisis is unprecedented. After four years in war, the Syrian refugees are the middle class. With their skills and education, they vote with their feet and seek asylum in Europe. This is the new white man’s burden. The West must in part take responsibility. Had the West not intervened the refugee crisis would have been non-existent.

The genie is out of the bottle. The West, particularly the US, says it supports human rights, now it is time for it to prove it by accepting these refugees.

* * * * *

MUI's edict on BPJS Kesehatan

published @ The Jakarta Post

Fortunately, the Indonesian Ulema Council (MUI) has denied that it declares the Health Care and Social Security Agency (BPJS Kesehatan) to be haram.

But it did say that the Social Security Management Agency (BPJS) is inconsistent with sharia (The Jakarta Post, July 31, 2015). In its implementation, BPJS Kesehatan contained elements of gambling and other interests. This is utterly irritating.

In essence, the elected government is responsible for providing an affordable health-care system. And BPJS Kesehatan is meant to give universal health care to all people regardless of their income or illness.

Those who can must pay premiums, and the government will pay the premiums for those who can’t. Although the system has diversified, it has been working for decades in many countries.

There are many success stories of people benefitting from BPJS Kesehatan, including mine. People welcome the system. The long queues in many hospitals show that affordable health care is desperately needed.

Prior to this, people hesitated to go to hospital for treatment, because of payment. Now, it’s no more. Whatever the disease, people will see a doctor with confidence.

And regarding the premiums, Indonesians are lucky. Thanks to a large population, the premiums are relatively cheap. However, BPJS Kesehatan is still not perfect. The existence of the first-level health provider is still not well distributed yet. The queues are too long. Learning from my own experience, the examinations and preparation for surgery take too much time.

If these weaknesses are addressed by MUI through its edicts, I shall give them two thumbs up. It means MUI cares about the improvement of public services. In contrast, elements of gambling or interests in BPJS Kesehatan are too abstract for us. Frankly speaking, we don’t give a damn.

From now on, the government and Indonesia’s Muslims must be clear about MUI’s stance. MUI arguably represents Indonesian Muslims, so it has power to influence, especially narrow-minded people. To some, including myself, an edict is not necessarily from God. And in each case, there will be several contradicting edicts.

Modern health care didn’t exist in the past. Surely, in terms of “technical” issues such as funding systems, it is ridiculous to find them in religious references. But the spirit of cooperation to solve a public problem, to help people in need, the ruler’s obligation to serve people and religious teachings undoubtedly can inspire.

Indonesia’s public policy should not be interfered with by religious teaching. It has all the potential to hamper Indonesia’s development and public services.

* * * * *

Political Dynasty

published @ The Jakarta Post

This is to respond to The Jakarta Post’s editorial entitled “Unbreakable dynasties” on July 10. I completely agree with the Constitutional Court verdict scrapping the discriminatory clause in Law No. 8/2015 on regional elections.

Previously, the law included unfairly banning relatives of the incumbent to run in regional head elections. In a democracy, as long as no law is being broken, people’s choice should be the only filter in the election.

A political dynasty is not necessarily a bad thing. In America — the pioneer of modern democracy — political dynasties are well-accepted. No one is complaining about the Kennedy family, Bush family, or Clinton family for dominating American politics.

They ascend to power simply because of their capability of public service. The dynasty grooms them well and politics is ingrained in daily life. Nothing is wrong with this. Unfortunately, instead of quality, the Indonesia’s political dynasties depend only on popularity.

The essence of democracy is crowd wisdom. The idea is that all eligible voters decide and the outcome naturally fits with the people’s interest. And the precondition for a functional democracy is the quality of voters. They must be aware of how a democratic system works.

They must know the wrong decision means disaster to their opulence. Dating back to early democracy, only the rich, professional and the likes whose interest need protection could vote. They were very rational and only voted for the candidates who would really take care of them. Gradually, more people became eligible and finally universal suffrage was applied.

Democracy was not invented here. Indonesia is not well prepared to embrace democracy. Since the beginning, Indonesia has implemented universal suffrage — no filter for irrational voters. Both rational and irrational voters will choose a leader. Unsurprisingly, the outcome sometimes is illogical.

The member of a political dynasty who achieved nothing in the past, even without experience, can easily assume office. Democracy goes haywire.

Accordingly, the key is the rational voters. People must have awareness of the consequences of their choices. Good education emphasizing logic might work for this goals. Since we can reverse the flow of democracy, to be fair, political dynasties must be accepted. To curb the much-concerned corruption, law must rigorously and indiscriminately be enforced. To avoid the low quality of popular candidates, the people must be filled with information.

In my opinion, in the long term this will work.

The problem of Indonesia’s political dynasties lies in the existence of rational voters rather than the political dynasty itself. Had the people become rational, the regional heads would have been democratically selected based on meritocracy. The best must lead the rest.

* * * * *

Understanding the Greek tragedy

published @ The Jakarta Post

Tragedy is surrounding Greece. Since the economic crisis in the eurozone in 2008, Greece has never recovered. The economy is shrinking and unemployment soaring. To fix the economy, Greece borrows money from the International Monetary Fund (IMF). As usual, the IMF’s recipe for handling economic crisis is focused on austerity.

In contrast with Keynesian economics — where governments spend to move an economy in recession — austerity measures involve government budgets tightening up and letting the economy grow by itself. This recipe is frequently wrong, and it has turned out to be wrong in Greece. The Greeks has suffered for years with austerity measures that don’t work. It is unsurprising that in the referendum recently held over approval of more austerity measures, the Greek people rejected them. Why does tragedy continue to happen in Greece? There are two reasons: the eurozone and the Greek welfare state.

The European Union was established to avoid wars among European nations. After two devastating world wars, the Europeans wanted unity of all countries, politically and economically, to strengthen peace in Europe. Of the EU’s members, some have adopted a single currency, the euro, which was introduced in 1999. The group of countries using the euro is called the eurozone.

Many, including EU members, had doubts about the idea of a single European currency. That’s why England has not adopted the euro. A single currency means a single interest rate for all countries involved. It is a flawed theory. Every country has a different economic performance and different economic problems. Germany is very competitive.

It failed in theory, and now it has failed in practice.

Make no mistakes, the other problem lies in Greece itself. Welfare-state policies introduced by the much revered Andreas Papandreou, a socialist, are to blame. He served two terms in office – 1981 to 1989 and 1993 to 1996.

His legacy has unintentionally contributed to Greece’s bankruptcy. For instance, the Greek pension system is “better” than that of Germany. In Germany, 40 years of service allows a civil servant to get a pension equivalent to 70 percent of their final basic salary. In Greece, however, after only 35 years, if you are 58 or older, you receive 80 percent of your previous salary.

The Greek tragedy of economic disaster is currently being written.

* * * * *

Should Air Ticket Prices Be Regulated?

published @ The Jakarta Post

Low cost carriers (LCC) are an innovation of value in serving airline customers. Some customers value convenience, but others value low prices, especially for short-distance flights. This market niche has been well-filled by some airlines. To cut the price, a no-frills service is given.

Following the crash involving prominent LLC AirAsia, the Transportation Ministry is to set a minimum fare for air travel tickets. This policy will require that companies charge no less than 40 percent of the price ceiling. The basis for this policy is the argument that LCC neglect safety, jeopardizing passengers. But is it true?

Data reveal that the link between ticket price and flight safety is extremely tenuous. LCC know very well how to manage low margins in this highly regulated business. Ridiculously, a director at the ministry wondered how LCC could sell tickets for only Rp 10,000 (79 US cents) for the Jakarta-Medan route (The Jakarta Post, Jan. 8, 2014). To him that’s impossible.

He forgot that low prices are simply a marketing strategy. LCC do not sell all their seats at such low prices, and, of course, not all the time.

Such an impossibly low price is intended to prompt hype in order to spread the LCC brand. As a result, the load factor (the number of passengers compared with seats available) will be high, and the airline still has a good margin because of its economies of scale.

LCC are created by entrepreneurs pursuing profit; don’t teach the fish how to swim.

This would-be regulated minimum price will also aggrieve consumers. For the last decade, people have enjoyed travelling throughout the archipelago by plane because of these cheap prices.

Another concern is that the regulator will have no idea or control whether the funds from the increased price will be allocated for safety measures or simply for profit.

Worse, if the minimum price has been set and in the future – hopefully never — a plane crash occurs, then this policy will have been pointless and disadvantageous to all stakeholders.

But without regulating minimum prices, how do we address safety issues?

The responsibility lies with the Transportation Ministry. Instead of setting a minimum price, it’s better to issue strict regulations for flight safety. Plane maintenance, weather data provision, operation audit etc: the regulations must be put in place. LCC must comply with regulations. As long as all safety regulations are fulfilled by airlines, then the safety of the plane must be left to The Almighty.

The policy of minimum price definitely barks up the wrong tree. The focus should be on strict regulation, certificates of safety and good supervision. After that, let the airliners compete, and let the customers decide and enjoy the low prices.

* * * * *

Bukittinggi: The Town That Killed Colonialism

published @ The Jakarta Post

Pramoedya Ananta Toer, Indonesia’s most remarkable writer, once wrote a piece entitled The Book that Killed Colonialism. In it, he stressed the importance of Eduard Douwes Dekker’s 1859 novel Max Havelaar, which highlighted the misery wrought on Indonesians by the policy of forced cultivation. This book energized the liberal movement in the Netherlands, eventually leading to new, more ethical colonial policies, including Western education for Indonesians. 

Well, if a book can kill colonialism, then why shouldn’t a town be able to? That town is Bukittinggi. The back-story is the coffee trade and the scene is the Padri War.

Since the advent of Westerners arriving in West Sumatra, coffee as an export commodity had been thriving. To begin with, the Dutch held sway only in Padang and the surrounding coastal area. The coffee plantations were far inland. Then the Padri War broke out.

The war was ignited by a group of Wahabi-inspired clerics, recently returned from the Middle East. They insisted on the brutal implementation of fundamental Islam in the Minangkabau region. However, the clerics met resistance from traditional chiefs called the Kaum Adat. The war raged for decades.

In 1821, the embattled Kaum Adat asked for support from the Dutch in Padang. The Dutch were keen to help in order to safeguard their coffee supply chain and to gain power in areas where coffee was grown.

To strengthen their military position, the Dutch built the Fort de Kock in 1833 in the middle of the Agam plateau; the local Agam people named this colonial town Bukittinggi. The Dutch defeated the clerics in 1837.

To boost the economy, using the export of coffee as the backbone, the Dutch built infrastructure including schools and coffee warehouses, and trained locals to run the coffee-related businesses as well as the administration of the local government. The Minangkabau people were dragged into the modern era, giving birth to a class of Dutch-speaking local teachers, civil servants and intellectuals. This class and its offspring would later play a leading role in Indonesian independence.

A notably large proportion of Indonesian intellectuals involved in the struggle for independence were in some way related to Bukittinggi and nearby Koto Gadang, including Bung Hatta (1902-1980), Abdul Muis (1883-1959), Tan Malaka (1897-1949), Agus Salim (1884-1954) and Sutan Sjahrir (1907-1966).

Bung Hatta was a co-founder of the nation. Along with Bung Karno, he proclaimed and signed the declaration of Indonesian independence in 1945.

Tan Malaka was an underground fighter and a prolific writer. One of his books, Madilog, is still widely read. He also had the first clear vision of the country’s future, in 1925 writing an essay entitled Toward the Republic of Indonesia.

Both H. Agus Salim and Abdul Muis were activists in Sarekat Islam, the commercial-turned-political organization that spread nationalism all over the archipelago. Sutan Sjahrir was the first Indonesian prime minister. He played a key role in the 1946 Linggarjati agreement — the first negotiation between the Dutch and the formally declared Indonesian nation.

The Minangkabau people and their culture maximized the hidden benefits of Dutch rule, at least in part resulting in a consequence unintended by the colonialists: Indonesian independence.

* * * * *

RI's Democracy Homework

published @ The Jakarta Post

Democracy is a system to form a governing institution and its leader for a certain term through regular general elections. The underlying idea is to get wisdom from the crowd. However, effective democracy needs several intertwined conditions, including a relatively high-income society and a rules-conscious society.

People’s prosperity is the cornerstone of democracy. Psychologists know well that people who lose their wealth suffer more, as compared to long-time poor people. So, the richer the people, the more rational they will be. They will apply freedom hand in hand with obligation. They will not endanger their good lives by not participating in forming a legitimate government. Some experts suggest that democracy runs better in a country with a per capita income of more than US $10,000 a year. That’s why in earlier years suffrage was only for the rich and land owners.

The other substantive matter of democracy in a general election is competition. Rules are set and all participants must abide by these. There is a referee who supervises the competition and guarantees fair play. The competition results in a winner and inevitably a loser. And most importantly, the loser must accept the results gracefully. That’s why, in a mature democratic country, soon after the quick count result, the loser will give a concession speech and ask his supporters to support the winner. If not, democracy brings chaos.

These preconditions bring us to the current situation of RI’s nascent democracy. In fact, after 16 years RI’s democracy has run quite well. However, the recent dispute in the presidential election is a wake-up call. Here are some notes:

Hours after the election people got confused because the two camps claimed different results. One camp announced Prabowo Subianto’s win, but the other claimed Joko “Jokowi” Widodo won. But if we scrutinize further we find that the former camp carried out its survey with a tendency to justify Prabowo’s win. The latter’s result was similar to the General Election Commission’s (KPU’s) result. Obviously, the quick count had been used to disrupt the democratic process and give false hopes to the loser.

Second, there was the blow-up over baseless vote-rigging accusations. After expressing jubilation at “winning” the election, Prabowo‘s supporters asked people to wait for the KPU’s result, but one or two days before the KPU’s announcement Prabowo suddenly asked for a cancellation. Then he withdrew from the vote recapitulation process just minutes before the official announcement that declared Jokowi the winner.

As a last ditch effort, Prabowo resorted to his constitutional rights by filing his case with the Constitutional Court. He made accusations about a structured, systematic and massive vote rigging by the KPU.

Finally, some have blatantly abused the tools of democracy, such as the quick count and the right to dispute the results, since there is no solid proof — let alone 10 truckloads of evidence. Unfortunately, some people still buy this humbug and tolerate such denial of losing. This might be the corollary of a lack of education.

* * * * *

A Few Good Men

Published @ The Jakarta Post http://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2012/12/17/imo-view-good-man-and-husband.html 

If we define a good husband as a man who has only one woman, then US presidents Jefferson, Roosevelt, Eisenhower, Kennedy and Clinton of are definitely not good husbands. They cheated their wives with extramarital affairs.