•    HOME   
•    NEWS   
•    BUSINESS   
•    INTERNATIONAL   
•    TECH   
•    SPORTS   
•    LIFE & TIMES   
•    OPINION   
•    MY JAKARTA   
•    BLOGS   
•    EYEWITNESS   

Manila & Jakarta. A dictator who has ruled for a generation with the backing of the United States is suddenly forced from office and a population keen to throw off the shackles of authoritarianism looks to embrace democracy.

As Egypt looks to shift toward democracy, the experiences of the Philippines since the toppling of Ferdinand Marcos in 1986 and Indonesia since the overthrow of Suharto in 1998 show that, while the revolutions were all different, the transition is a bumpy and fragile process that can take decades to secure.

“What I think is important is both the Philippines but even more so Indonesia show that you can do it right, and that as you do get the reform away from an authoritarian leader of that many years, that need not go to a fundamentalist group, an extremist group,” said Bob Broadfoot of Political & Economic Risk Consultancy. “As messy as the process is, it can take them down the road to a more democratic system.”

Indonesia is seen by many as a better model for Egypt’s transition, both as a Muslim country that has largely held extremists at bay and because of its early progress made in developing and strengthening its economy and institutions.

Both the Philippines and Indonesia have managed to move the military out of the center of politics, a key issue for Cairo where the army allowed protesters to gather.

“Egypt has had more support from the US and it’s in a key strategic position in the Middle East, so that actually makes it harder for Egypt,” said political risk consultant Kevin O’Rourke in Jakarta.

“In Indonesia, the political elite was fragmented and so they agreed to hold elections. It’s different in Egypt, where Mubarak has handed over power to the military, which has never been very good at making the transition, especially in the Middle East. The key really is to have a civilian caretaker to usher in elections.”

The Philippines offers some cautionary lessons — both for Egypt and Indonesia. The peaceful “people power” overthrow of Marcos was itself revolutionary in 1986, coming before the fall of communism in Europe, but the country has failed to capitalize on its opportunities.

Asia’s experience shows it is crucial for a new democracy to keep the economy growing and that means the new leaders may have to work with those who benefited from the ousted regime or were part of its inner circle.

Many of those who gained wealth and influence under Marcos and Suharto have retained it. Efforts to pursue the massive wealth the dictators amassed have been mostly futile.

Without a growing economy, public discontent rises — even for dictators. It was fallout from the 1997/98 Asian financial crisis that helped topple Suharto, and the economy was a spark in the protests in Egypt and elsewhere.

With Egypt relying on tourism for a tenth of its GDP, it will be important for the Mediterranean country to avoid the communal violence that Indonesia saw in its first years of democracy or Manila’s repeated coup attempts and persisting insurgencies.

Corruption is also an issue.

“Some bad news, or reality, is that transitions to democracy are usually accompanied by a proliferation of corruption, not a reduction in corruption,” said Andrew MacIntyre, dean of the College of Asia and the Pacific at the Australian National University.

On the World Governance Indicators — Voice and Accountability, Political Stability, Government Effectiveness, Regulatory Quality, Rule of Law, and Control of Corruption — the Philippines went backwards between 1998 and 2009, while Indonesia improved across the board.

While Indonesia and the Philippines have failed to eradicate either high-level or petty corruption, they have made progress in terms of developing checks and balances on abuses of power through civil society and relatively free media.

Their success on maintaining harmony between different ethnic or religious groups in the absence of a strongman dictator has been mixed, but both have still held together much better than Yugoslavia or Iraq. Perhaps most importantly, their populations have maintained the sense that democracy is a right.

 
Reuters