Below are James Balowski's translations of the three interviews with key leaders from the left as well as from the nationalist PAPERNAS group. They were first published in JURNAL BERSATU in early 2008. They are interviews:
1. Irwansyah, Secretary General Working People’s Association (PRP)
2. Zely Ariane, Spokesperson People’s Democratic Party-Political Committee of the Poor (KPRM-PRD)
3. Harris Sitorus, Secretary General National Liberation Party of Unity (Papernas)
The KPRM-PRD has been built of the members expelled by the current PRD leadership who refused to support the proposed electoral fusion proposed with the Star Reformation Party, one of the small elite-based parliamentary parties.
PAPERNAS is the vehicle built by the PRD before the expulsions and was meant to become an eletoiral vehicle that could presentthe PRD's politics. It has been more-or-less inactive in public politics for more than one year now.
For more on KPRM-PRD and the PRD as well as on the PRP, see other articles on this blog.
Ideologically, PRP and KPRM explicitly advocate a socialist perspective. PAPERNAS proclaims itself as "populist in general or progressive nationalist" assserting that "all classes are confronting the grip of imperialism".
For the full text of the three interviews click on more just below. I have highlighted in bold what I think are key statemenys made in the three interviews.
1. Irwansyah, Secretary General Working People’s Association (PRP)
The situation for the people 10 years after the fall of Suharto
Over the 10 years of reformasi, the disparities and contradictions between groups whose quality of life is deteriorating and those groups who have greater access to economic wealth has been growing ever larger. The groups whose quality of live has been deteriorating are those who depend upon waged labour including the unemployed. In the midst of this situation, the creation of new space for the movement of capital has in fact broadened (privatisation and so forth) and the creation of a “new middle-class” as a social class that is not fully in control of capital but benefits in relative terms from the movement of neoliberal capital. It is this middle class that has given rise to fantasies that are also used to lull the poor as a whole into believing that anyone can improve the quality of their life if they are just prepared to work hard. The reality shows however that those who work the hardest are the social classes that are most oppressed, while the oppressor class lives without having to work hard.
The principle issues facing the people
The problem in the decline in the quality of social life is very closely linked with the problem of who is in power. Over the last 10 years political power has facilitated and been facilitated by the power of capital. The ever worsening crisis is a consequence of the power of the capitalist class that sacrifices the majority of people that do not have access to capital. This is why the PRP is proposing that a solution to the crisis must be based on a perspective of working people’s power – those who have become the victims of the crisis.
The state of the people’s movement post-Suharto
The people’s movement at the moment is facing a unique situation. On the one had, the movement succeeded in opening up greater political space when it toppled the Suharto dictatorship, but on the other hand, the movement is confused, because there has been no direct benefit that can be enjoyed after it succeeded in toppling the Suharto dictatorship. The movement to this day still carries out mass actions, but is confused about how to direct these actions. A crisis of political concepts has occurred that has resulted in the introduction and influence of counter-reformist ideas, such as concepts of sectarianism based on ethnic group, race and religion, which has in fact obscured the real problems.
As it happens there are left groups that actually still play a big role in the people’s movements at the moment. But there has been a retreat in the level of organisation of the left movement itself. They have also failed to put forward a program or concept about people’s power. What has occurred then is that these left groups continue to have an influence in people’s movement but have failed to lead the people’s movement.
People’s movement unity
The need to build joint unity clearly exists. The formation of the PRP itself was stimulated by this need, which is to address the left groups that are so splintered. Here, what is needed is a new consolidation that can learn from past mistakes. But this will first require a process to see whether this effort can proceed.
With regard to the obstacles to unity, at the programmatic level, there are actually not any differences that are too striking. Moreover at the rhetorical level, the issues that are taken by various left movement groups are mutually interconnected, such as anti-neoliberalism and so forth. The problem lies more with the inability to manage the consolidation process, because there is rarely any study of the processes that have already been undertaken. In addition to this, the spread of ideas of consolidation is still limited to elite organisational circles of the movement, as if the masses do not have the capacity or the need to consolidate, whereases at the level of actions or response, the stagnation of the elite is precisely what is being broken through by mass initiatives.
Right now, the process of the consolidation of the movement appears to be weakening, because there are still many problems in the process to which a solution is yet to be found. As a consequence, many people have given up in the consolidation of the movement. But optimism towards the consolidation of the movement must continue to be socialised, because the potential that exists is actually very big.
Aims of the struggle
The aim of the struggle for the PRP is a society that is based upon equality. Here, equality will never be achieved if the social system is established on patterns of relations that perpetuate the oppression of one group or class over another group or class. State power in society that is inequitable tends to facilitate classes that want to maintain inequality in society. So a society that is based upon equality is a socialist society.
Political parties
Political parties are one of the political tools of the oppressed classes to achieve the ideals of socialism. Political parties cannot restrict their role to the needs of formal political representation, but must relate to all strategic needs in order to realise the goal of socialism. Here, elections are not the goal, but only a space that can be tactically used to achieve strategic goals. But currently, it is precisely the procedural democratic hegemony that places elections at the final goal of for the existence of political parties, so many social movement groups who have formed parties have been trapped in the complexity of the electoral procedures and have failed to break down the limitations that hinder the achievement of these more strategic goals.
A political party has already become a necessity for the movement. This can be seen from the phenomena in the labour movement since 2006 which gave birth to the slogan “If the workers hold power, the people will be prosperous!”, which implicitly contains a desire on the part of the trade union leadership to take power politically. But the problem is that in managing the process to produce a party that is no only able to fight in tactical arenas such as elections, but one that is also able to achieve its strategic goals. With regard to the 2009 elections, although leftist organisations are not ready to participate, it could still become a momentum to consolidate and enlarge the movement, bearing in mind that there is a crisis of legitimacy exists among the parties that have failed to accommodate the people’s aspirations.
The 2OO9 elections
The 2009 elections represent an extremely important momentum, but not just in terms of the results that are achieved through the elections, but rather in terms of the possibility of change that could be generated through the non-electoral path.
The experience of 1997-98 shows that the greater the people’s antipathy towards the processes of the institutionalisation the forces that exist, the greater also are the possibilities of creative energy to generate a breakthrough in reform. What form will this breakthrough take, it is this that still has to be worked on by the people’s movement at the moment. The people’s movement, together, must increase its political consciousness and make use of the people whose positions have been hurt in this process of marginalisation to directly confront the system that exists.
With regard to former activists that have joined political parties such as the Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle (PDI-P) and so forth, there is a difference in consciousness between them and the masses who continue to learn. While former activists are increasingly enthusiastic about joining parties, the people on the other hand are increasingly reluctant to support these parties. The cause of this is because after experiencing political failures in the reformasi movement, and seeing that the forces that are corrupt and authoritarian have never successfully been punished for their errors, these former activist then think with the logic of what advantage and disadvantage can be gained and no longer in the framework of social reform.
The stand of the PRP itself towards the elections is to call for the formation of a [working] class or working people’s party. Even if a party such as this is unable to take part in the 2009 elections, it could still be used as an arena of consolidation by the people’s movements who no longer trust the existing parties. There is also a possibility that the PRP will take a position of opposing or boycotting the 2009 elections.
2. Zely Ariane, Spokesperson People’s Democratic Party-Political Committee of the Poor (KPRM-PRD)
The situation for the people 10 after the fall of Suharto
The economic livelihood of the people is deteriorating as a consequence of the neoliberal economic that have been pursued since the Suharto era. The burden of the foreign debt is sapping the state budget and there is no funding portion that is adequate to improve the people’s productive forces. In addition to this, the capacity of domestic industrial to absorb the productive forces has also been destroyed by foreign capital that has no interest in investing its capital to develop the national industry and prefers to speculate on the financial markets, in portfolios, bonds and shares. The destruction of the people’s purchasing power, unemployment, mass dismissals and outsourcing are a consequence of this neoliberal economic model.
In the political field meanwhile, since the fall of former President Gus Dur (Abdurrahman Wahid), there are three political forces that are dominant: 1) the New Order forces in the shape of the Golkar Party; 2) the fake reformists, particularly those parties that became parasites on the 1998 reform movement and afterwards; and 3) the military. The fall of Gus Dur itself was a reflection of how the military supported the first and second groups to bring Gus Dur down. And now, the political tendency of these three groups is to become the agents of foreign capital.
The principle issues facing the people at the moment
The source of the people’s problems at the moment is the low level of their productive capacity. There are a number of factors that have become obstacles to the people’s productivity, such as the low levels of education and health along with poor infrastructure; low wage levels, problems with the quality agricultural land, the provision of capital, technology, prices and distribution; the lack of employment opportunities and so forth. So in the midst of the destruction of the people’s purchasing power, the thing that could unite all of the above problems is the issue of the increase in the price of basic commodities.
State of the people’s movement
Currently there are two significant spectrums within the movement. First, the movements that still have a link with those of the 1980s and 1990s, such as the Green Indonesia Union (SHI), the Working People’s Association (PRP), the Workers Challenge Alliance (ABM), the Indonesian Farmers Federation (FSPI), the National Students Front (FMN) and so forth. This spectrum is more open to programs to solve neoliberalism radically or in stages and their action committees have demands that are quite radical politically. Second, the spontaneous, fragmented and economist movement, which does not have or only has a small link with the movements of the 1980s and 1990s. Included within this movement is the response or resistance by the people that statistically could reach the thousands every month. Their actions are also becoming richer with revolutionary methods such as occupations, strikes and so forth. This spectrum is far broader and must be united and influenced by the first spectrum of the movement.
Aims of the struggle
The KPRM-PRD’s aim is to struggle for a socialist society, because socialism is the one and only solution to capitalism that is destroying humanity’s future. Under capitalism, as a result of the ownership and control by a small handful of people over the companies that produce products needed by humanity, suffering is occurring in the midst of an abundance of goods. This ownership is the principle obstacle to improving human productivity, a basis for which has already been provided by advances in scientific knowledge and technology.
Now, the development of socialism has two prerequisites. First, democracy, that guarantees the fullest possible direct participation of the people and that does not end in elections or the ballot paper, such as referendums and communal councils ala Venezuela. Second, the centralisation of all funding components under the state and under the control of the people. This is necessary to: 1) fund the emergency needs of the people, which if they are not immediately addressed could reduce the people’s productivity; and 2) funding national industrialisation by and for the people.
People’s movement unity
Movement unity is absolutely essential to provide self-confidence to the people and to build the people’s hopes to take power. The pressing issues are: 1) laying aside sectarianism and preconceptions; 2) uniting those programs of struggle that can be agreed upon; and 3) organising regular conferences to discuss and debate scientifically the programs that are unable or not yet able to be unified.
Political parties
Political parties are a necessity for the movement and their function is political education for the poor to build their own forces. Under bourgeois representative democracy, the movement is given an opportunity to form political parties and step forward as participants in elections, as if gaining seats in the parliament is only a way to advance the democratic struggle. Real change cannot be achieved through parliament. Here, these efforts to get into parliament will only be beneficial to the people, if it is based on the necessity to motivate the direct involvement of the people and confront the people with the state as the obstacle to their participation. Without this, movement parties will become no different to the other traditional parties, which believe that change can be achieved only by gaining seats in the parliament.
Currently, the reality is that a number of elements in the second spectrum of the movement have already started to form their own political parties and this represents a form of political advance for the movement, because in the past the movement has been faced by the problem of an anti-party sentiment. The current problem however is no longer the establishment of a party, but instead one of unity. Because without unity, it will impossible for these parties to succeed in becoming electoral participants, bearing in mind that the present obstacles to becoming a contestant in the elections can only be broken down with united mobilisations. This is what the National Liberation Party of Unity (Papernas) has failed to do.
The 2OO9 elections
Given the current composition of the participants in the 2009 general elections and the increasing cooling of the people’s enthusiasm towards elections, it is impossible for the 2009 elections to answer the people’s problems. Meanwhile alternative party forces such as the United People's Party (PPR), who are not yet very popular, and Papernas, whose structure is inadequate as a result of a split within its structures that opposed forming a coalition, will find it difficult to take part in the elections. Moreover Papernas’s image has been destroyed as a consequence of its plan to merge with the Islamic based Star Reform Party (PBR) – which has now been rejected by the PBR – and carrying out a secret negotiations to form colation with the Democratic Party of Reform (PDP, a split off from the Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle).
With regard to Papernas and its other activities directed to joining the traditional political parties, they have begun to be coopted by the elite, the fake reformists and even remnants of the New Order. Politics such as this represent a demoralisation on the part of activities in the first spectrum of the movement, that do not want to think hard about how to cultivate the current and advantageous objective situation and also because of careerist opportunism. This last point cannot be ignored, because it will destroy the movement and the people’s trust in its own forces and political alternatives. They must be criticised and if it become increasingly detrimental, must be opposed.
The position that must be taken with regard to the 2009 elections is to unite all the political expressions of the people’s struggle and the movements under coalitions, conferences and the unification of mobilisations with various demands and solutions for the people, in order to challenge the hegemony of the existing parties and the remnants of the old elite forces. Without uniting this political expression, all of the election calls, weather they are for a boycott or to elect the PPR or Papernas, will not be able to be successfully undertaken or gain the support of the people.
3. Harris Sitorus, Secretary General National Liberation Party of Unity (Papernas)
The situation for the people 10 years after the fall of Suharto
In general terms, there has been no significant change in social welfare over the 10 years since the fall of Suharto. This can be seen from the gap between levels of income and expenditure, where half of the Indonesian population have an income of less than 18,000 rupiah a day, whereas there is a need to buy rice and so forth. This is already included in the category of poverty, but officially the government states that the number of poor in Indonesia is only around 39 million or 16.7 percent, whereas it is actually three times this number.
The principle problems facing the people at the moment
The urgent problem in Indonesia is the lack of welfare that is a caused by incorrect policies, because of the grip of imperialism. Indonesia itself actually has a great deal of natural wealth, but it is not used for the benefit of the ordinary people. The state, which should be the servant of the public has instead liberalised all sectors of the economy. This is what we must take back, because we are the owners of this land of Indonesia.
This discourse, in principle, has also been developing in groups outside of Papernas. Moreover many bourgeois politicians have also been taking up the issue of national autonomy, although their seriousness is open to question. But a means has not in fact been found to correctly put the above discourse into practice. Hopefully groups or individuals that understand it can continue to mutually discuss the problem in order that it can become a joint issue that in turn can become a new political force.
State of the people’s movement
Following the fall of Suharto, many critical individuals emerged and on the one hand, this was positive, because it signified that people were struggling though their own methods and endeavouring to advance these means of struggle. But this situation of struggling individually could not be maintained, and this has been the reason for the weakness of the people’s movement over the last 10 years. Unity is needed, not just as a perspective, but with concrete measures.
People’s movement unity
Since 2001, there have been many concepts of unity. In general terms, among various movement elements, there has been a similarity in the vision and views about the basic problem in Indonesia and the means to overcome it. The problem is – and this has existed since the Suharto era – in practice these various elements have had unique and different characteristics. For example, in viewing the mass movements, there are those that prioritise moving quickly and there are those that prioritise prudence and strengthening the basis first before a large mass movement can exist. In addition to this, after Suharto was toppled, there were different experience of struggle and new ideas.
One of the best possibilities to apply is to mutually carry out things that can be jointly agreed on and to undertake individually things that cannot be jointly agreed to, while testing this in practice to obtain an understanding about which practice is the most correct. In addition to this, elements in the movement also need to discuss how, if full unity cannot yet be achieved, to mutually support each other. Papernas itself is of the view that unity in concrete terms, is building a political party, because the problem in Indonesia is a problem of power, bearing in mind the forces that have been in power up until now have not been able to pursue that which is being demanded by the people.
Aims of the struggle
Papernas’s concept is one of national unity. This concept sets out from the fact that the Indonesian people in general, from all classes or sectors, are confronting the grip of imperialism through neoliberalism.
For Papernas, it is this that must be resolved first of all. Indonesia must rise up first and become a nation that is autonomous though a national government, so that its tendency is populist in general or progressive nationalist.
So the fight with domestic capitalism can be continued later after this initial stage is finished, although this does not mean that Papernas excludes this fight right now.
Political parties
In a situation where state institutions have been modified in such a way that is it difficult for it to be accessed by the movement, unity is thus indeed a necessity for the movement if it is to compete with the parties that already dominate. Communication in this direction must be built in order that in 2010-2011 or other years, the movement can unite its forces. All parties also need a concrete picture about the practical steps needed for unity, so that it is not just groping around, which could then lead to splits and conflicts.
Papernas itself is projecting to take state power, because real power lies in the state institutions, such as the parliament and so forth. It is here that political power is established, not in the streets. So, Papernas is currently endeavouring to combine extra-parliamentary methods with parliamentary methods to broaden its influence. This is why Papernas is endeavouring as fully as possible to be involved in the 2009 elections. So the form of an open mass party has been taken so that Papernas can become a tool to accelerate the political consciousness of the marginal layers, bearing in mind the potential for this exists and can be seen from the unrest that is currently spreading in society.
The 2OO9 elections
The 2009 elections are strategic, because it is linked with the issue of power. For Papernas all issues that are linked with power are strategic in character, because all of these issues will determine what Indonesia wants to become in the future. The state institutions that exist at the moment cannot of course promise anything, but in de facto and concrete terms a movement that could make revolutionary change possible does not exist. So, no matter how bad our state institutions are, they must still be intervened in so that we do not just become spectators who simply accept their policies. Although we must indeed work on concrete issues in society, at the same time we must also put forward the perspective of holding power. That is what Papernas is currently trying to do.
In the 2009 elections, the elements of the movement must take a stand and not become apolitical, such as carrying out golput (white movement, abstaining from voting). If indeed there is no alternative, it is better to carry out a boycott than to golput. Papernas itself is currently seeking another way so that it can be involved in the 2009 elections and if successful, colleagues in the movement can elect Papernas people. If this turns out to be a failure, we can elect other alternative forces such as United People’s Party (PPR). If not, perhaps in other parties there are good individuals, who have been tested and can represent this social unrest. We could elect them with the hope that after they are in power, they will not become free individuals. Papernas itself does not trust individuals such as those in the Golkar Party, because they must become a part of an organisation or collective.
[Translated by James Balowski.]