Hope for Iraq's democratization: Indonesia's success came despite bitter religious rivalries too
November 21st 2006 03:17
An Indonesia-Iraq comparison about democratization is being made coinciding with US President George W. Bush's visit to Indonesia this week.
The comparison is in an article published today in Jakarta Post newspaper, which asserts that Indonesia demonstrates a democracy is possible in a Muslim majority country. The author is Ohio State University's political science professor R. William Liddle.
Liddle's main message: "Local actors must drive the democratization process, among the mutually antagonistic leaders with mass followings - who have the power to cut the constitutional and policy deals that will make the system work and give them a stake in it.
"Iraqi politicians have not been in a position to apply this lesson since the US invasion."
Similar to Iraq's groupings antagonistic along religious grounds, Indonesia has traditionalist and modernist Muslims with many historic grievances against each other. The traditionalists adhere to the classical Syafii school of interpretation in Sunni Islam. The modernists reject these schools in favour of direct understanding of traditions of the Prophet Muhammad drawn from the Koran and Hadith.
Indonesia's 1945 constitution emerged from a hammering out of the differences among the antagonistic parties, with four amendments between 1999 and 2003 which established a hard-won basis for today's presidential democracy. Secularists and non-Muslims feared the imposition of an Islamic state and all pious Muslims feared Soeharto-style discrimination and repression.
The US played a role in Indonesia's democratization process when the current World Bank's head Paul Wolfowitz was US Ambassador to Indonesia. During 1986 to 1989 he encouraged pro-democratic forces like Abdurrahman Wahid's Democratic Forum.
The Clinton Administration continued the process via the US Agency for International Development, giving "carefully calibrated support" according to Liddle who was in the team, "beginning with financial assistance to legal and human rights organizations".
"The democratization of Indonesia does give hope to Muslims elsewhere, but only in circumstances where outside intervention is minimal," he wrote.
"In Iraq, it may be another generation before that lesson can be applied."
Jakarta Post source 21 Nov 06
| 131 |
| Vote |
subscribe to this blog
Comment by Nina
Comment by Big Cat
Chatterpillar
More literate in economics than law, my guess is Saudi-style demonstrate's one religious grouping's hold over all others. Hardly likely to succeed in Iraq without a Saddam Hussein to do it by force. In which case could that really be a democracy?
Makes me glad of democracies that have separation of powers.
In case the NSW opposition leader (Peter What'shisname) reads Orble, what's your take on the meaning of separation of powers in this context?
Comment by Nina
Of course, this is all just personal opinion, but I do think that if religious law must be implemented, then it should be done so in a hybrid system. It helps to maintain an independent judiciary and allows the law to evolve more easily.
Comment by Daressi
I'm against implementing "weapon" democracy. And about what democracy we're talking about? USA held sanctions against Iraq for more than 10 years and thousands commons died because of that . USA cannot convince me that they actually want welfare for Iraqis. They want unstable situation so big companies can make more money from oil and also they want to have military forces in that region( strategic causes). Americans ( or more precisely American Government) terrorize whole World . Maybe Iraqis don't want American democracy.
Situation in Indonesia is not familiar to me , but I will not be surprised if USA also have some interest cover with talk about democracy.
Like one proverb say , live and let others to live ...
Comment by Nina
As for the war being about oil, I'm still not entirely convinced. While I know it is not always the most reliable source, Wikipedia quotes the cost of the war as being $6.4 Billion a month. Hundreds of billions of dollars to me seems to be a lot to spend just to get your hands on oil, but maybe I'm just naive.
Comment by Daressi
I don't want to say that Saddam is an "angel" but believe me he is bad just as Bush(s) or Clinton. You talk about $6.4 Billion/month but beside oil industry USA have military industry too. 60% or more of 6.4 are price for weapon they used. Old weapon is used , now the new one should make again , this is the economic of USA. Military industry is very significant part of USA economics. Don't tell me they want to help Iraqis. If they are so good guys why they do not help poor African nations?In African countries many hungry children dies each day .
By the way , I'm from Serbia. In 1999. USA and NATO made war against my country. Ostensible, they wanted to overthrow Milosevic's Government and to help Albanians ( who made lot of terrorist attacks in Serbia , but for USA they are not terrorist no matter they have closely relations with Al-Qaida and have same way of acting and same radical Muslim organization) . In that bombing many innocent people died , Serbs but Albanians too . They throw on civilians( in my city , Nis, they threw cassette bombs at one open market ) cassette bombs( forbidden by international law) , they bombarded our national TV station etc. Cynically, USA called that mission " The merciful Angel" . UN didn't approved that attack but USA are above international law and they attacked us no matter what UN said. At the end of the war one of USA " war eagles" Richard Holbruke received as reward 1/3 of actions of Kosovo's electric power corporation . Is that democracy?
So, I've passed 78 days of USA democracy course and believe me , democracy is not nice as you can see on CNN. Democracy is only USA excuse to do what they wants to do. First , Bush says : " They are not democratic society " and following is " Let bomb them and occupy their country". USA are world power No 1 and they do what they want to do ( repeat ) .
Bye
Comment by Big Cat
Chatterpillar
Agreed, democracies don't always produce nice outcomes. And a democracy's "tyranny of the majority" can severely disadvantage its minority groups. But it seems to me that most people act a hell of a lot nicer under democratic rule than they do under totalitarian and the other systems that preceded democratic rule. If you'd like an example of people in democracies being nice, Boxing Day is now less than five weeks away..
About billions of dollars
Agreed, billions of dollars are financed on wars by the US and other governments, including other democratic ones. But ordinary citizens of democracies deserve more credit, like in financing billions of dollars of help out of their own pockets.
On Boxing Day (26 Dec), we can remember the hundreds of thousands of Acehnese and other Indian Ocean communities engulfed by the huge 2004 Boxing Day tsunamas.
And the billions of dollars donated to help the survivors - by millions of ordinary mums and dads and kids from the US, Australia, UK, Norway, France, Japan and the nationals of a host of other democracies ranging from small like New Zealand to large like Germany. (Facts about ordinary people donating through NGOs here.)
These citizens of democracies donated without a thought about religion. What mattered to them were the people - whether they were Muslims in Aceh, Hindus in Sri Lanka, Buddhists in Thailand, whatever.