Democracy

South East Asian countries are not new to democracy. With the exception of Myanmar, they have been experimenting with the western style of democracy for a hope of a more open and prosperous society. However, I feel that establishment of a democracy is a painful and endless process and that the idea of western democracy may not really suitable for us.

In Philippines, President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo faced a strong resistance from the opposition group who claimed to represent the people. She enacted an emergency decree to restore order in the country which is getting out of control. The treat of coups and the possibility of another people’s movement that remove Ferdinand Marcos from power loomed large on her radar screen. Her opposition associated her harsh action in restoring order to the action of a dictator. The opposition seemed to bent on upholding the doctrine of democracy, but in fact they have their own agenda. This is a democracy grow awry. Too much power in the people’s hand derails the stability.

In Thailand, Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra, who won the election by popular votes, is facing a huge resistance from the opposition groups. They are concern about the possibility of Thaksin becoming another Pibul Songgram. Thaksin offered an election that would determine whether it is the people of Thailand who are against his rule, or a mere instigation from the unhappy opposition. They are organizing street protests and deciding to boycott the coming snap election. They just demanded Thaksin’s resignation from the PM post. The doctrine of democracy that the opposition seemed to champion is not democracy at all. But it is more of anarchy.

However, the ASEAN community seemed to be interested in the peaceful transition in Malaysia. The handover of power from the former PM Mahatir Mohammad to PM Abdullah Badawi took place in a very smooth manner. The Western community applauds the maturing democracy in Malaysia. But think again. Is there a real democracy even in Malaysia? Barisan Nasional, an alliance of UMNO (United Malay National Organisation), MCA (Malaysian Chinese Association) and MIC (Malaysian Indian Committee), won the power ever since the country embraced democracy and introduced voting. The strength of the alliance themselves keep the opposition weak, which guarantee government’s return to power on every election. Opposition like Hadi Awang and Anwar Ibrahim were brutally crushed, in a political sense.

The United States praised Indonesia on its consolidation of democratic system. President Susilo and Vice President Jusuf Kalla get elected to lead the nation of 220 Million through a direct voting mechanism. It gives an appearance of democracy. In practice, the country is getting undemocratic, as evidenced by the control of the press and limited control of the freedom of expression like the oppression of people in Papua when they protested against government policy.

All of those events suggested to me that Western style democracy, that USA and its allies has been promoting, is not a suitable tool for the ASEAN community. The ASEAN countries, unlike their western counterpart, consist of different nationalities that made up a bigger notion of nation. In short, their societies are fragmented. Democracy cannot ensure conformity in terms of national direction and national social contracts. Too diverse. Democracy cannot bring about the stability like those in USA and Britain. In ASEAN, political stability determined by the ability of the ruling classes in each society to overcome political, cultural or economical divides that exist among their people.

Arendt Lijphart once mentioned that when a society is split into sharp divisions, with no or very little overlapping membership, when the political culture is deeply fragmented, movement toward moderate attitudes is absent. Meanwhile, political stability, in its democratic sense, depends on moderation. Hence, the introduction of democracy will actually put the stability in balance.

I recognized the need for a democracy, but I don’t subscribe 100% of it. What matter most is the ability of the society to come together, decide on matters through musyawarah mufakat, seeking of consensus and agreement in which all parties’ view and interests are represented. As such, there is no notion of opposition winner takes all. Democracy may allow a marketplace of idea to bloom, but also allow the possibility of chaos to prevail.