Democracy appears to be in decline not only in Indonesia but also in India, the Philippines, South Korea, Malaysia and other parts of the world. Although their parliaments are officially populated by representatives of the people and sometimes they have a chance to alter its composition, there’s a big gap between the people and the ruling class.

As we all know, the Democratic-Republican party in the US, Labor or Liberal in Australia, Sonia Gandhi’s Congress, Ramos’s Lakas-NUCD, and Mahathir Muhammad’s UMNO, have all adopted the same strategy: as an employment bureau for political careerists and to win power for the interests of the bourgeoisie.

What can be done about it? The revolutionary political party is the most important intermediary between the people and the ruling class. Of course we don’t mean a ruling class party, but a party which could provide some kind of long-term perspective for the people. For those of us struggling against a military dictatorship, as are the Burmese activists, the party can be a political vehicle in challenging the military dictatorship.

The poverty' of opposition}}} A comrade just back from the Third Asia Pacific Coalition for East Timor meeting in Bangkok, told me he met an opposition activist who said that Indonesia, under the New Order government, doesn't have any tradition of struggle under the leadership of a political party, so it's not necessary to set up a revolutionary party. We must look at the origin of the pro-democracy movement under the New Order regime in Indonesia before we examine the correctness of this argument. Social Democrats and Liberal Democrats of 1970 never attempted to become a revolutionary political formation to topple the military regime. They never tried to make their program known to the public. When 1 million people spilled on to the streets of Jakarta in 1974 and 1978, they tried to request the masses retreat. The result was demoralisation and some returned to academia or set up NGOs (in the early '80s, there were literally thousands of NGOs). Through NGOs they turned their life into a career path, and they were exposed for what they were &#8212; petty bourgeois opportunists, with mobile phones, BMWs, houses with 15 rooms and weekends in Singapore. On the basis of these experiences, we marched forward with the clear goal of overthrowing the dictatorship and implementing democracy to its fullest extent. We came up with an alternative revolutionary party and mass organisations. In the early days, we were an NGO with three main political activists. Two remained NGO activists looking out for their own career and they didn't want to unite their forces with students groups who represented the student movement in that period. From the small student group in the early '90s, we succeeded in setting up a national student organisation called Students in Solidarity for Democracy in Indonesia (SMID). For the first time students, the student movement realised it must unite with the people's movement. This perspective encouraged us to work among workers, peasants and the urban poor. We built the Indonesian Centre of Labour Struggle (PPBI) as an independent trade union in the early '90s, followed by the formation of a national peasant's union (STN) and youth-urban poor organisation. Then came the time to combine the forces into one against the military dictatorship. In 1994, we established the People's Democratic Union as an umbrella organisation for the sector. Due to opportunism and reformism among some sections of the leadership of People's Democratic Union, there was a split in 1995. After the opportunist element was defeated, our organisation was able to move forward towards forming the People's Democratic Party in 1996. In the last eight years, the masses gave proof of their radicalism and militancy from their overflowing dissatisfaction with the regime. The question was with the masses now in motion, would they be abandoned? Under this condition, the PRD tried to propagandise about the importance of the mass movement and extra-parliamentary forces in challenging military dictatorship. The PRD was successful in bringing the message to broader and broader layers of people through mass meetings, and were even able to join with the masses in the fist attempt to break through military blockades. But the bourgeois opposition figures, who look to parliament, tried to hold the movement back and abandon the masses. As the result, 100 people died in a military crackdown in Jakarta on July 27, 1996 when the military took over the headquarters of the Indonesian Democratic Party (PDI). After July 27, the masses' dissatisfaction with the regime become stronger after the economic crisis hit. They ran the riots, smashing and burning the symbols of power and wealth. PRD discovered another base of strength, the masses who were already fighting the dictatorship. We intervened in order to educate people in the strategy and tactics of resistance and the meaning of thoroughgoing democracy. The other opposition groups and NGOs adopted the more moderate approach, or started to dream again of change from within. Some of them are waiting for the economic crisis to bring down Suharto. They are still teetering on the brink of collaboration with the regime or the army. Some of them have naive illusions that by begging bourgeois imperialist institutions, such as the IMF, and imperialist countries that they would somehow introduce democracy in Indonesia. Some opposition groups have argued that because the US is committed to foreign investment and the expansion of trade, it is therefore committed to democracy in Indonesia! Everyone can agree the US government wants Indonesia to be integrated within a free-trade zone that offers prospects for greater profits for US corporations. But the US government is interested in democracy only under certain circumstances, and it is interested only in a specific type of democracy. The US only supports democracy when the authoritarian government can no longer control the people, when the country becomes ungovernable. The US pays lip service to democracy, but its real commitment is to private, capitalist enterprise. When the rights of investors are threatened, democracy has to go; if these rights are safeguarded, killers and tortures will do just fine. The case of the Philippines is a good lesson. The US government supported Marcos's declaration of martial law in 1972. While Marcos sabotaged the legislature and the judiciary, closed down the opposition press and monopolised the economy for himself and his cronies, the US applauded. Military aid to Marcos went from $18.5 million in 1972 to $43 million in 1976. US economic aid quadrupled during the first six years of martial law. The US military helped to train the death squads in the Filipino military. In 1986, Marcos called for an election to prove his legitimacy. The Reagan cabinet supported Marcos until the election was exposed as a fraud. It was only at that point, after the elections were over, that the Reagan cabinet abandoned Marcos, after they found that Marcos couldn't control his followers any more. Some of the Indonesian opposition forces underestimate the masses. These groups are products of the New Order regime. Their access to social and political theory was always restricted, they were marginalised and powerless as they never linked up with the masses. Meanwhile, the masses still have illusions in bourgeois opposition figures and we had not yet won the leadership of the opposition. But at least we can win over some of the best elements who want to struggle. At least we can encourage them to think about the concept of alliances, although we are still far far away from the strong alliance from the whole anti-dictatorship forces in Indonesia. Apart from that, the PRD is the one of the few organisations which has declared its program and has a perspective on what people want: what is necessary to overthrow the dictatorship and achieve full democracy. The government knows this, and that's the reason why it continues to target the PRD (although most of the PRD's national executive has already been jailed after appearing in kangaroo courts). When the students' demonstrations escalated in the last few months, the military accused the PRD and its student wing SMID of being behind them. The regime has escalated its repression: three PRD members were arrested a few weeks ago and badly tortured. The president of SMID, Andi Arief, was kidnapped by the military and has disappeared. These arrests and disappearances will not stop our struggle. We believe that there is a spirit of mass resistance and that it just needs time to be organised. When the mass base has been built by the revolutionary party, it's time for the people to confront the ruling class, even though it's supported by the ruling class around the globe. {{{The ruling class versus the people}}} As soon as Suharto was re-appointed, Asian and Western governments reluctantly congratulated him. A report in the South China Morning Post said Fidel Ramos, the Thai government, Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Muhammad, the South Korean government, Boris Yeltsin and John Howard sent their warm support. This is evidence of how the ruling class work together globally for the rich. After the US election in 1996, the US Senate and media pretended to be more critical towards the Clinton government, because he was suspected as having received US$ 200,000 in <span class="base64" title="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"></span>Danding'' Cojuangco has been eager to sell his shares in San Miguel Corporation to First Pacific group, the money maker of Sudono Salim, one of Suharto's best connected business associates. Indonesia is also involved in a US$2.4 billion contract to rebuild Fort Bonifacio in Manila, and Tutut has invested US$475 million in the Metro Manila Skyway project. So, whoever becomes the new president of the Philippines, Ramos, Erap, or De Venecia, he will never forget the Suharto family. Some activists are quite confused about why the so-called <span class="base64" title="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"></span>You have to recognise that when the US government speaks of democracy, it is talking aboutmarket democracy’ and that market is, in particular, the market for the benefit of US corporations’’.

The recent revelations by Allan Nairn, that the US military has been evading a Congressional ban on IMET training for the Indonesian armed forces, is nothing new. The US military has been evading Congressional laws of this kind for years. Anyone who knows anything about US politics would simply laugh at the idea that the military would automatically abide by a Congressional ban on military aid.

Immediately after IMET was cancelled by Congress, the Clinton cabinet announced that Congress did not block the training that was funded by Indonesia itself. The Clinton administration has never really opposed the training Indonesian troops in the US. Quite the contrary, it has consistently done its best to find a ways to continue such training outside the IMET program.

Suharto understands the US government well. Consequently, it’s not hard to understand why would Suharto risk jeopardising the so-called IMF rescue package by threatening to walk out of negotiations if the IMF does not relax some parts of the agreement. He knows that if the financial crisis turns into a serious political crisis, his old allies in the state department and the Pentagon will prevail over the US Treasury Department and the IMF.

Other Asian countries are also concerned. Singapore and Japan have recently explored the idea of extending their own aid directly to Indonesia to prevent a regional cataclysm. In the battle of Suharto verses the world, the world worries the old man may not be bluffing.

Turning up the nationalist rhetoric to full blast, Suharto wants to give the image that IMF-US intervention in the Indonesian economy is something new, foreign and at odds with Indonesian cultural values. In reality, the US and the IMF have been backing him for the last 30 years. On the other hand, imperialist institutions such as the IMF are no a stranger these kind of dynamics.

Until recently, little was heard about the IMF in countries such Australia, Thailand and the Philippines. I noticed that one teenager even thought that the IMF was some kind of UFO.

Even before the end of World War II, the US and Britain had drawn up an agreement which sought to create a more stable basis for the post war capitalist economies. They tried to develop a world market through trans-frontier trade and capital movement. This kind of economic liberalisation'' offers large capital considerable advantages: a bigger market on the one hand and the possibility of playing national authorities off against each other on the other. Wartime negotiations in 1944 at Bretton Woods New Hampshire led to the establishment of the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund, as well as a system of fixed exchange rates. By the late '60s however, the system had come under considerable pressure and the IMF began to work to establish a global system of unrestricted trade and capital flow. Under the leadership of the US, the industrialised nations have been working since the beginning of the '70s towards the greater liberalisation of world trade. As a result, international competition is intensifying and any country that could reduce labour costs would have an advantage in the world market. {{IMF}} Ajay Kapur, a regional strategist at UBS Securities (East Asia), said what the IMF wants is all very good but added,Saying break down your cartels and open up the financial system is like telling a road accident victim that exercise is good for you and you need a jogging regime’’.

A study by the conservative Washington-based Heritage Foundation, found that of the 90 less developed countries that received money from the IMF between 1965 and 1995, 48 are no better off than they had been and 32 of them are poorer.

Those who opposed the much celebrated IMF bail-out of Mexico in 1995, point out that the real income of ordinary Mexicans is now the same as it was in the early 1970s, while the country’s debt burden has increased significantly. The IMF has also gradually taken control of the Mexican economy. Between 1976 and 1995, Mexico signed seven agreements with the IMF, pledging to reduce its federal budget, while adopting structural changes to its economy such as privatisation and permitting an increased role for foreign investors.

Today Mexico’s public debt amounts to $98 billion while the public and private debt combined is around $165 billion. While Mexico’s manufacturing industry and exports have experienced a boom, for most people things have gone from bad to worse as health and education spending has been cut in order to keep the banks afloat. It has also meant keeping workers’ wages low and preventing any growth in other benefits.

Meanwhile, Indonesia and the IMF are eyeing grim forecasts as they discuss how to lift Indonesia out of its worst economic crisis in 30 years. The Dow Jones News service quoted a senior Indonesian official as saying the two sides had already reached a new agreement, in principle, on revised economic and monetary targets for the current fiscal year budget.

The new figures are the result of a review between Indonesia and the IMF over the terms and implementation of the $43 billion rescue package. Under the revised targets, Indonesia’s gross domestic product is predicted to contract by five percent this year. In January, when the package was last reviewed, the estimates were for zero growth. GDP is also expected to contract by 3.9 percent in the current fiscal year, which ends March 31, 1999.

The Clinton administration has also established a system to police implementation of trade reforms in Asia backed by the International Monetary Fund, headed up by trade representative Charlene Barshefsky. Barshefsky’s agency, along with the Commerce Department, are jointly monitoring the status of structural and systemic trade reforms that the IMF is promoting in Asia — particularly in Indonesia and South Korea.

During a briefing for a private-sector advisory body, Barshefsky explained that it’s designed to make sure that IMF programs aren’t being used to create export incentives for Asian nations rather than more open markets as embodied in recent IMF agreements.

She said that Indonesia and South Korea are of particular interest right now because the IMF has secured structural reform commitments from their governments aimed at opening their markets. As the president of General Electric said: The free market gives us new opportunities to think through each of those countries and analyse where to specialise our manufacturing, we can occupy the single market by building a single factory for the entire region''. So austerity programs cut into health, education and any other government services, their assets are snapped up at bargain prices. {{APEC liberalisation}} As well as advocating a free floating currency, the US has also been pushing for accelerated deregulation, privatisation, and liberalisation of trade in goods and services in a part of the world which many US corporations regard as highly protectionist and having a high level of state intervention in the economy. The economic crisis in Asian resulted in delays to Washington's demands for faster trade liberalisation. Indeed they were able to de-rail Washington's push to transform the Asia Pacific Economic Corporation (APEC) into a free trade body. But in this new situation, Washington may be able to work via the IMF to complete the liberalisation and structural adjustments it wants. APEC was founded by Australia in 1989. In 1993, the organisation elevated itself to a leaders' summit and the next year it signed a pledge to achieve free trade within the region by 2010 and no later than 2020. APEC was sold as the vehicle that would resolve tensions in East Asia-US trade. The threat to China's most favoured nation trade status, the danger of Washington invoking Super 301 trade sanctions against Japan, Washington's spasmodic campaigning for insertion of labour and environmental clauses into trade agreements — all were seen as issues that could be ameliorated by APEC. Two things happened that diminished its effectiveness. Firstly, APEC's membership expanded to the degree that it lost its focus. It now includes Russia, Peru, Mexico, Chile and Papua-New Guinea. Although Russia is too significant to be ignored in any group of which it is a member, it makes no sense to integrate it into the Asia Pacific economy. APEC is now an unwieldy mini-United Nations. These changes were largely pushed through by the US who first insisted on including Mexico and then Russia — apparently in an effort to mollify Moscow over NATO expansion. The whole episode demonstrates the weaknesses of the Clinton administration's Asia policy, which is marked by episodic bouts of concern and a failure to take the region's institutions seriously. As for Asia, its contribution to APEC's enfeeblement was the insistence that APEC decisions be non-binding, and that it be a forum not for negotiation, but only for consultation. In an attempt to re-create the culture of exhaustive ASEAN consensus, it paralysed the institution. {{The struggle in Indonesia}} On April 1, the Los Angeles Times saidThe current crisis in Indonesia isn’t at all about money. It’s also about guns, armies and political power.’’ The process of globalisation — the flow of capital across international borders — inevitably affects a country’s economy. But in the end, globalisation offers no answers for some of the key questions that determine a country’s political future: who commands the troops and how will they be used? The Clinton administration knows these time-honoured truths. That’s why it has been fighting quietly but determinedly in recent days to preserve the ties between the Pentagon and the Indonesian armed forces — links that members of Congress mistakenly believed they had cut off several years ago.’’

For us the battle is more challenging. We are not only fighting against the Suharto regime, we are also struggling against imperialism and capitalism’s exploitation of people around the globe.

The People’s Democratic Party has taken the position that the IMF should not be involved at all in the Indonesian economy. This is quite different to the majority of pro-democracy activists who still have illusions that the IMF will introduce democracy (although they claim that they know they understand the real characteristic of the IMF).

Over the next few months, riots will escalate as the austerity program demanded by the IMF starts to bite. Of course these riots are in response to immediate economic issues such as price increases and shortages. Today, when student demonstrations are becoming more political, more radical and militant, we need to work with these people and provide a political perspective on how to fight and propagandise for an alternative political and economic program.

We need to build a strong mass movement that can topple the Suharto dictatorship and carry out pro-people economic reform in order to solve the economic crisis in Indonesia. A central demand of such a program would be the nationalisation of the assets of the Suharto family and his cronies. Although we understand that this alone will not overcome the economic crisis, it would be a good start.