The downfall of former Indonesian dictator Suharto in 1998 swept in an era of political freedom and hope for a better future.
But nearly a decade later, many in this nation of 235 million remain desperately poor. And in dozens of interviews with laborers, traders, hotel owners and entrepreneurs, Indonesians expressed what was once unthinkable -- nostalgia for the economic stability of Suharto's authoritarian, US-backed regime.
"What people want, what I want, is a return to Suharto's time," said Boan, a peasant who struggles to feed his three children by toiling in fields owned by wealthy farmers. "Life is bitter now compared to then."
He can barely pay for once-subsidized food and fuel, he said. And despite promises from authorities, the road in his village was never repaved after it was washed out in flooding six months ago.
"This government doesn't care about us," said Boan, sitting outside his dirt-floored home in Bekasi, near Jakarta, the capital, his worn feet caked in mud from the rice paddy.
The new sentiment toward Suharto, who is now 86, reflects how hard the transition to democracy has been in the world's most populous Muslim nation. Indonesia, a vast country of around 17,000 islands, endured centuries of colonization by the Portuguese, British and Dutch before being occupied by the Japanese during World War II. And now, with decentralization, it finds itself grappling with new layers of corruption, limited foreign investment and a string of terrorist attacks by Islamic militants.
Much of the current malaise is financial. While some people interviewed still oppose Suharto because of the rights abuses during his rule, especially in remote provinces where the military brutally suppressed separatists, almost all said they were financially better off 10 years ago.
Indonesian President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono, the fourth head of state since Suharto's ouster, has yet to make good on promises to cut poverty since his election three years ago. Around half the population still lives on less than US$2 a day, and democracy can be a hard sell if it fails to provide prosperity.
Indonesia's recovery from the 1997-1998 Asian financial crisis was slower than that of its smaller neighbors. The nation was thrust into a recession the World Bank described at the time as "the most dramatic economic collapse anywhere in 50 years."
After contracting 13 percent at the peak of the crisis, the economy has rebounded. But the disparity between rich and poor is growing, with a fifth of the rural population living below the government poverty line. Inflation is up, and so is unemployment, now at 10 percent.
The public perception is that the average Indonesian has not benefited enough from the recovery, IMF country director Stephen Schwartz said.
"There needs to be a system in place to protect the most vulnerable groups," he said. "Otherwise there will be resistance to keep the economy open."
Yudhoyono's government recognizes that widespread poverty can lead to political instability and is struggling to fund education, medical care and infrastructure. Some 51.4 trillion rupiah (US$5.5 billion) was allocated for poverty relief this year alone, including clean water supplies, electricity and affordable housing.
It is "the most important problem" facing the government today, said Defense Minister Juwono Sudarsono, whose budget was recently slashed to finance rural development and compensate victims of a long stream of natural disasters.
But for many in the countryside, it's not enough.
"If you go to the village level, they prefer a dictatorship to what they see, at times, as a chaotic democratic system," said Dewi Fortuna Anwar, head of research at the Habibie Center, a political think tank.
The economy has been further hurt by terrorism, which has severely damaged Indonesia's tourism sector.
After Sept. 11, 2001, suicide bombers killed more than 240 people on Bali and in Jakarta, many of them Western tourists. Suharto, by contrast, cracked down hard on Islamic militants in the 1980s.
These days Suharto lives a secluded life in a mansion on a leafy lane in Jakarta. In June, dozens of supporters unraveled banners wishing him a happy birthday at the Hotel Indonesia traffic circle, where a decade ago tens of thousands angrily chanted for his resignation.
The army general seized power in a 1965 coup that left up to half a million people dead and ruled the country with an iron fist for the next 32 years, killing or imprisoning hundreds of thousands of political opponents. Suharto and his family amassed up to 327 trillion rupiah by exploiting the country's vast mineral wealth.
Yet he also oversaw decades of nearly uninterrupted economic growth, while halving the poverty rate, expanding national health care, roads and schools and ending a dependence on foreign rice imports.
Suharto's rule ended in 1998 after the financial crash caused the prices of everyday goods to skyrocket, triggering nationwide riots and massive pro-democracy rallies. He has evaded prosecution on charges of embezzling state funds, with lawyers successfully arguing he is too ill to stand trial. Efforts to punish him for killings have also gone nowhere, in part because his family and supporters still have a grip on politics or decision-making, and once massive demonstrations calling for him to be imprisoned dried up several years ago.
In the northwestern province of Aceh, where his military tortured political dissidents and killed thousands in a war against separatists, many people still hold bitter memories of him.
"Today we no longer fear the soldiers," said Maisarah, a 35-year-old housewife. "Back then it may have been safer, more stable, but that was only because the leader was ruling with an iron fist."
Yet other Indonesians now prefer to remember the dictator's benevolent side.
Amad, 31, who makes less than US$2 a day trading used plastic and cardboard, is more worried about feeding his pregnant wife than bringing Suharto to trial.
"Now we cannot afford anything," he said, pushing a handcart down a potholed track. "It was better then than now."
A foreign colleague of mine asked me recently, “What is a safe distance from potential People’s Liberation Army (PLA) Rocket Force’s (PLARF) Taiwan targets?” This article will answer this question and help people living in Taiwan have a deeper understanding of the threat. Why is it important to understand PLA/PLARF targeting strategy? According to RAND analysis, the PLA’s “systems destruction warfare” focuses on crippling an adversary’s operational system by targeting its networks, especially leadership, command and control (C2) nodes, sensors, and information hubs. Admiral Samuel Paparo, commander of US Indo-Pacific Command, noted in his 15 May 2025 Sedona Forum keynote speech that, as
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) last week announced that the KMT was launching “Operation Patriot” in response to an unprecedented massive campaign to recall 31 KMT legislators. However, his action has also raised questions and doubts: Are these so-called “patriots” pledging allegiance to the country or to the party? While all KMT-proposed campaigns to recall Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) lawmakers have failed, and a growing number of local KMT chapter personnel have been indicted for allegedly forging petition signatures, media reports said that at least 26 recall motions against KMT legislators have passed the second signature threshold
The Central Election Commission (CEC) on Friday announced that recall motions targeting 24 Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers and Hsinchu Mayor Ann Kao (高虹安) have been approved, and that a recall vote would take place on July 26. Of the recall motions against 35 KMT legislators, 31 were reviewed by the CEC after they exceeded the second-phase signature thresholds. Twenty-four were approved, five were asked to submit additional signatures to make up for invalid ones and two are still being reviewed. The mass recall vote targeting so many lawmakers at once is unprecedented in Taiwan’s political history. If the KMT loses more
In a world increasingly defined by unpredictability, two actors stand out as islands of stability: Europe and Taiwan. One, a sprawling union of democracies, but under immense pressure, grappling with a geopolitical reality it was not originally designed for. The other, a vibrant, resilient democracy thriving as a technological global leader, but living under a growing existential threat. In response to rising uncertainties, they are both seeking resilience and learning to better position themselves. It is now time they recognize each other not just as partners of convenience, but as strategic and indispensable lifelines. The US, long seen as the anchor
RSS