Death is an enemy. But when Jesus returns, God has promised to wipe every tear from their eyes. There will be no more death or mourning or crying or pain, for the old order of things has passed away.”- Revelations 21:4

The death and burial of former Indonesian dictator Suharto, is no longer news. It’s equally no longer news how President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono declared a state burial and one week of national mourning so as “to pay their last respects to one of Indonesia’s best sons.” Therefore let the soul of the departed rest in perfect peace. Amen.

However, how so many sobbed and called out the name of a dictator whose military regime was reported to have annihilated thousands of left wing opponents, had really closed a chapter of global totalitarianism and had added a new lexicon, nay school of how politics should not and never be played globally.
I have termed the new lexicon “Suhartology” after the man who means so many things to so many people. Unarguably as good students and products of politics and power, we should learn from the actions and inactions of our leaders, sifting the wrongs from the rights and therefore preparing ourselves for representative governance.

Just like many Indonesians, Suharto used only one name. He was born to a family of rice farmers in the village of Godean, on June 8, 1921. When Indonesia gained independence from the Dutch in 1949, Suharto quickly rose through the ranks of the military to become a staff officer. In the military, Suharto faced the challenge of his career when the army’s then commander, Gen. Abdul Haris Nasution, accused him of corruption in awarding army contracts. However, mother luck was on his side as he survived sack.
Consequently, in September 1965, when the army’s six top generals were murdered under mysterious circumstances, and their bodies dumped in an abandoned well in an apparent coup attempt, Suharto who was next in line of command, quickly asserted authority over the armed forces and promoted himself to a four-star general.

Suharto would not have been in a position of such influence if the organizers of the “September 30th movement,” had deemed him important enough to be included in their list of generals targeted for execution.
As President, Suharto placed his predecessor Sukarno under close surveillance or rather house arrest at his Bogor palace, where he later died in 1970.
He reversed some of the previous regime’s foreign policies, such as confrontation with Malaysia and general hostility to the West, thereby displaying a problem-solving style in his approach to domestic problems. However brutal, Suharto’s wresting of power from his predecessor, Sukarno, brought a shift in policy that allowed USAID and other relief agencies to resume operations within the country.

Suharto opened Indonesia’s economy by divesting government’s involvement in state owned companies and Western nations in particular were encouraged to invest and take control of many of the mining and construction interests in Indonesia.
The “New Order” regime, as it was later called also drew legitimacy from his appointments with a crop of technocrats and highly placed economists trained in the United States. Soon after coming into power, he passed a number of reforms meant to establish Indonesia as a center of foreign investment. The administration favoured privatization of its natural resources to promote their exploitation by industrialized nations, labour laws favourable to multinational corporations, and soliciting funds for development from institutions including the World Bank.

In the 1970s, when there was a surge in oil revenues, Indonesia’s economic situation improved substantially during Suharto’s presidency. Even with Suharto re-appointment to the presidency every five years with virtually no opposition, yet his administration was not devoid of criticisms.
Given Indonesia’s strategic location at the eastern entrance to the Indian Ocean, including command of the Malacca and Sunda straits, the country, no doubt was viewed as vital to the Asian interests of the West. Therefore, foreign relations after 1966 could be characterized as moderate and regionally focused.
During the 1970s, Indonesia was the largest recipient of Japanese official development assistance and vied with China for that distinction in the 1980s. The New Order targeted ethnic Chinese and enacted several anti-Chinese legislations, banning them from public life. Chinese literature and characters were outlawed, and they were forced to renounce their Chinese ties and adopt Indonesian sounding names. Many Chinese were forced into exile, while others were killed during the anti-Communist purges.

No doubt, the “New Order” was abused and virtually introduced unchecked forces in Indonesian society. However, members of the military and Golkar Party were heavily involved as intermediaries between businesses, both foreign and domestic. This led to the bribery, racketeering, and embezzlement, with wanton killings and annihilations of opposition. Historians would agree with me that during Indonesia’s 1975-1999 occupation of East Timor, up to 183,000 people died, owing largely to killings, disappearances, hunger and illness, according to an East Timorese commission sanctioned by the United Nations.
Suharto’s five successors as head of state all vowed to end the graft that took root under his regime, yet it remains endemic at all levels of Indonesian society.
However, in all of these, many would ask what do Africans or Nigerians intend to get and learn? Well, I believe when we are ready to critically analyze others, as they had and would assess our own leaders, then we are ready to face the realities of the global village.

From 25th May 1963 till 17th July 1964 when Haile Selassie of Ethiopia headed the Organization of African Unity OAU, and the aftermath of a sudden birth of the African Union (AU), which was formerly headed by Thabo Mbeki of South Africa between 9th July 2002 and 10th July, 2003 but now headed by Jakaya Kikwete of Tanzania, who started last 31st of January, have these leaders been able to respect the rule of law? Have these African leaders in their different countries been able to abstain from constitutional manipulation of which some of them participated in drafting, accepting and promoting?
How do we appreciate the fact that we have the umbrella union of all leaders in Africa, yet Zimbabwean President, Robert Mugabe, who has changed Zimbabwe’s constitution to allow the seizure of white-owned farm lands without any compensation?
The time for African leaders to realize the fact that investors would only invest in the continent of stability, rule of law and democracy has not only come, but has also come to stay.

Thus the call by these African leaders on the international community to establish a fair and equitable trading system through the elimination of tariff and trade distorting subsidies is mere shadow-chasing and sheer waste of time.
Our so called leaders should begin to think again, by confronting issues of government accountability, combating corruption, halting conflicts and the respect for human rights before convoking all the over-bloated conferences where the tax-payers money of their different countries is wasted.
The doubt that Africa is unable to resolve its own problems is further reinforced when most African leaders are busy globe-trotting, while Kenya remains torn apart by war and run by war lords.

The story is equally similar in Sudan’s western Darfur province, where tens of thousands of people have been killed and millions rendered homeless in a bloody conflict that has raged, despite the deployment of African Peace Keepers. Let these leaders learn from the mistakes of the past so as to make Africa tomorrow’s paradise.

N/B: I want to thank all the readers of this column who have sent me different mails on some of the issues which I had addressed. I assure them that with time I would reproduce them in full details for public consumption