Foreign Relations of the United States, 1955–1957, Southeast Asia, Volume XXII

248. Telegram From the Embassy in Indonesia to the Department of State¹

Djakarta, August 17, 1957—2 p.m.

432. At independence day celebration this morning Sukarno spoke for one hour and forty minutes on theme of “A Year of Decision”. This speech which in English is forty pages long will be completely analyzed by Embassy later. However following are my initial reactions.

In some respects this speech is probably most significant one Sukarno has made since Pantjasila speech on June 1, 1945.² Its central theme goes back to his June 1, 1945 statement that political democracy is not for Indonesians but that what they must aim for is social and economic democracy. In present speech Sukarno goes to greater detail in explaining his ideas and stresses particularly that social democracy which is to be brought about has as its aim the building up and glorification of the state. He makes strong plea for all Indonesians “to place interest of the state before group or individual interest”. He feels that system of political democracy followed during past twelve years has been a mistake and that corrective measures must be instituted. He says that new democracy must fulfill and be attended by certain conditions, first of which is “that democracy must be focused on the state”. He points out that present political democracy only benefits what he calls upper classes and that small people who “theoretically” have the same rights of free speech as others in practice “do not want to use the opportunity to wag their tongues”. He goes on to say they will not be happy with political democracy, particularly what he calls “free fight liberalism” policy of the present system. Small people are eagerly awaiting, according to Sukarno, social democracy that will give them happiness in all fields. This democracy must also contain the idea of “management toward one aim, i.e. a society based on social justice”. It must be a democracy that recognizes discipline and is in keeping with the Indonesian nation’s mental outlook for gotong rojong. In short it must be “a democracy having a leadership, a guided democracy”.

Sukarno attributes much of failure of present system to fact that Indonesian people have imitated indiscriminately foreign ways and have not remained true to Indonesian culture. He says that as a nation Indonesia lacks self-reliance and tenacity and therefore people are apt to follow the course of least resistance. He said that the people apparently feel “that talk and criticism constituted democracy and that more talk and more criticism amount to better operation of democracy”. This is not so, says Sukarno, and therefore disciplined guided democracy is necessary.

Before all this can be fully realized, however, Sukarno points out that revolution is still not finished, that twelve years after independence proclamation one-fifth of territory of Republic of Indonesia “is still under Dutch colonial domination”, and that the round-table conference agreements have not been completely abrogated. Till this is done it will not be possible in his belief to build up economic base for his new democracy.

On basis of ideas in this speech certain things become clear. It is definite now that Sukarno has made a complete break with normal western idea of political democracy and that he is determined to set up in Indonesia some new system which as he says is “in accordance with Indonesian nation’s own identity”. It is not clear from his speech exactly what final form of this new system will be but it could take either form of communism or a Hitlerian national socialism. In view of his emphasis on necessity of leadership, discipline and guidance it is clear that whatever form his new system finally assumes, the most important place at the top will be reserved for Bung Karno. He apparently is the only one who is allowed to criticize and to talk freely. Everyone else who engages in such activities is not a true follower of the state. This is clear from his repeated rejection throughout speech in various forms of whole idea of freedom of speech and criticism as we understand it. The new life movement to which he devotes the latter part of his speech is apparently devised in order to reintroduce the idea of discipline in country under leadership of Sukarno.

From our point of view or that of anyone who believes in our system of democracy this is a most discouraging speech. It will be most interesting to see what reaction this speech causes in outlying districts as well as among more liberal-minded Indonesians here in Djakarta. I am seeing Djuanda at ten Monday morning and intend to let him know of my worries as a result of this speech. When Embassy has opportunity first of week to send more carefully thought out analysis of this speech, we will attempt to include reactions of such people as Djuanda and Foreign Minister and if possible Hatta.³

Allison

1. Source: Department of State, Central Files, 756D.00/8–1757. Confidential.
2. See footnote 4, Document 86.

3. Telegram 469 from Djakarta, August 21, provided a more extensive summary of the speech. It commented:

   “Unanswered question of critical import is Sukarno’s intention and ability to walk the knife-edge between national disintegration and national totalitarianism. If he can do this with self-discipline which begins at home, the path may lead toward real democracy, which will find its proper guidance and definitive form through long-needed constitutional means. But if, on other hand, Sukarno fails arrest his tendency to be led down path of PKI support and fails produce or support workable plan for regional settlement, Indonesia’s national existence will become increasingly precarious.” (Department of State, Central Files, 756D.00/8–2257)