Oligarchy Map Becomes More Complex After New Order, Why?

JAKARTA, KOMPAS – Although political actors in Indonesia have the option to adopt pro-people policies, they are bound by an oligarchic structure that limits their freedom to act. Therefore, criticism of the oligarchy should be directed at the political and socio-economic structure, not just at specific individuals.

This was highlighted in the Mini Conference "20 Years After the Reorganisation of Power in Indonesia: State and Capital in an Age of Polycrisis" organized by the Asia Research Centre, University of Indonesia (UI), at the UI campus, Depok, West Java, on Tuesday (11/2/2025).

Present as speakers in the discussion were political expert from the University of Melbourne Vedi Hadiz, Marcus Mietzner from the Australian National University, and moderator Amalinda Savarani from Gadjah Mada University. The main speakers were Richard Robison from the University of Melbourne and Faris Al-Fadhat from Muhammadiyah University of Yogyakarta.

In a discussion, Vedi compared the current political situation in Indonesia under the leadership of President Prabowo Subianto with the early period of the leadership of the seventh President of Indonesia, Joko Widodo. He assessed that the main difference between Prabowo and Jokowi lies in their approach to power.

At the beginning of his leadership, Jokowi had the desire to maintain a more decentralized system of power because he came from that system. Although Jokowi intended to uphold decentralization, he still relied on the support of the oligarchy.

Meanwhile, under the leadership of Prabowo Subianto, there are efforts to recentralize power. However, the return of centralization as in the New Order era is difficult to occur given the numerous interests invested in democracy in Indonesia.

According to Vedi, the factor considered in the discourse of recentralization is the role of security forces. "We have already seen the growth of the military in various aspects, more than before. Although Jokowi has opened the door for this, Prabowo will exploit it to the fullest extent," he said.

Vedi also highlighted how community movements should be directed in facing oligarchy. According to him, opposition to oligarchy should be directed at political and socio-economic structures, not just certain individuals. "If the focus is only on individuals, the conflict with oligarchy can become increasingly unfocused," he said.

According to him, since the fall of Suharto in 1998, the oligarchy map in Indonesia has become more complex and not centered on one figure. This, he said, contributed to disorientation in the political strategies of progressive groups.

With political dynamics continuing to evolve, the main challenge for Indonesian democracy is how to navigate oligarchic interests without losing the democratic principles that have been fought for since the reformation.

In his analysis of oligarchy, Richard Robison emphasizes that oligarchy is not simply government by an elite group or the rich, but a system of social, economic and political rules structured to maintain the interests of a handful of parties.

“Oligarchy is more than a ruling class. More than an elite. More than chronic capitalism. More than rule by the rich, or by a few,” Robison said.

He explained that oligarchy is a social rule that regulates economic and political power for the benefit of certain parties.

According to him, oligarchy occurs when wealth is centralized and managed by a certain group consistently, creating power that goes beyond public interest and is oriented towards personal gain. Thus, economic and political power is no longer used for the welfare of the wider community, but rather to maintain the dominance of a handful of individuals or groups.

Robison also touched on the history of oligarchy in the United States, saying that concerns about the Donald Trump administration as a threat to oligarchy are not new.

Since the early 20th century, the US has shown the characteristics of an oligarchy with wealthy families dominating the government. Today, the developing oligarchy system relies more on high technology and communication.

According to Robison, oligarchy is not only a problem in developing countries, but is also a phenomenon that has long been rooted in the political and economic systems of developed countries.

With economic power concentrated in the hands of a few, democracy can be threatened and public policy is more at risk of being directed towards the benefit of a small elite rather than the interests of the wider community.

Indonesia, he said, had the opportunity to escape from the grip of oligarchy after the Reformation marked by the overthrow of the Suharto government. But it turned out that it did not happen, among other things because of the weakness of the political and social movements.

"After the Reformation, do we see any parties working with a strong Reformation agenda? No. The parties remain similar to what happened during the Suharto period," he said.