Asia Buzz: Wahid's Dangerous Promise

How far is Indonesia's Abdurrahman Wahid prepared to go to save his faltering presidency? This week, while visiting Australia, Wahid told a radio interviewer how he plans to defeat impeachment proceedings lawmakers plan to launch against him this August in the National Assembly. "It's easy," Wahid said. "I just declare a state of emergency."

It took Indonesians nearly a half-century to shake off rule by military-backed dictatorship. Now, their fist democratically elected president is willing to re-impose rule by the barrel of a gun because parliamentary politics are going against him.

If Wahid had been the people's overwhelming choice for president, there might be a grain of sense in even considering such an extreme and dangerous course of action. But he wasn't. He was a compromise choice for the job because no candidate garnered a majority in national elections. However, should Wahid be forced from office by parliamentary means, the person who would undoubtedly replace him would be Megawati Sukarnoputri. Megawati won more votes during that election than any other candidate, and she remains as popular as ever. She also has support within the military.

Nonetheless, Wahid insists the army will obey his dictates to suspend democracy to preserve his position. "They will do anything the supreme commander will order," he said.

But army spokesman Brig. Gen. Franciscus Bachtiar responded by saying, "The army calls on the president not to declare a state of emergency. If the impeachment session goes ahead, we will join with the police and secure the event."

In the political circus playing out between the president and this parliament, the military is emerging as the most mature actor on the stage. What an irony that the very institution that for nearly half a century ruthlessly crushed any move toward democracy is now spurning an opportunity to reassert more political control, and perhaps guaranteeing the survival of parliamentary democracy.

The impeachment proceedings against Wahid are clearly unfair. They are built around corruption charges that are dubious at best. But Wahid has fallen victim to this parliamentary putsch because he has proven to be a particularly poor politician. He has displayed little skill at forging alliances and devising ways to work with this fractious National Assembly.

Impeaching Wahid is not a positive development for democracy in Indonesia. It is, however, a legal move that is being carried out through a legitimate process. Wahid needs to realize that saving his presidency is not more important than nurturing parliamentary democracy. The current direction has its flaws, but it is better that Indonesia travel down a road marked by democracy than one hemmed in by states of emergency and rule by force.