Soeharto’s National Hero Designation Sparks Fierce Debate Over Reformasi Ideals

By Riza Bahtiar, interpreted for worldys.news

The recent designation of former Indonesian President Soeharto as a national hero, timed with the commemoration of National Heroes Day, has sent ripples of controversy across the nation, challenging the very foundations of the Reformasi movement that ended his 32-year rule.

For the “Keluarga Cendana,” the former president’s family, this recognition, bestowed by his former son-in-law and current president, marks a significant reprieve after decades of grappling with a tumultuous post-’98 legacy. However, critics argue that this move seeks to bury historical wounds rather than heal them, potentially undermining the hard-won principles of democracy, justice, and accountability.

“What is done out of love always occurs beyond good and evil.”

— Friedrich Nietzsche

The decision has been met with dismay by many who see it as a historical reversal, implying that the sacrifices and ideals of the 1998 Reformasi movement were a mistake rather than a salvation from authoritarianism and widespread corruption, collusion, and nepotism (KKN).

Reversing the Narrative of Reformasi

The core of the public backlash centers on what many perceive as a “historical cancellation” of the Reformasi values. This perceived reversal creates a series of logical contortions:

• The activists of 1998 are recast as “national scoundrels” for ousting a figure now deemed a national hero, effectively branding the struggle for democracy as treason.
• Students and citizens who demanded Reformasi are now seen as disloyal for challenging a recognized meritorious figure, making criticism of power an act of “infidelity.”
• The severe human rights abuses, KKN, and systemic corruption of the New Order era are dismissed as minor issues or fabrications, overshadowed by claims of “developmental contributions.”
• Justice for victims of New Order violence is sidelined, creating obstacles to reconciliation and the enforcement of human rights by labeling the perpetrators with heroic status.
• Soeharto’s 1998 resignation is reframed as a statesman’s noble sacrifice rather than a consequence of public pressure demanding accountability, shifting a political defeat into a narrative of magnanimity.
• Popular resistance and systemic change movements are characterized as historical errors, with the authoritarian stability of the New Order presented as the acme of nationalism.

Normalizing Impunity and Authoritarianism?

Beyond the reinterpretation of Reformasi, critics warn that the designation risks normalizing impunity and authoritarian tactics, suggesting that the methods employed to maintain power under Soeharto were justified.

• Soeharto’s dissolution of the Old Order in 1966 is lauded as heroic, while the mass killings of 1965-1966 are rationalized as necessary consequences of national safeguarding.
• The suppression of press freedom and civil liberties is defended as essential for stability and development, rather than anti-democratic actions.
• Massive foreign debt and systemic KKN, which led to the 1997-1998 economic crisis, are downplayed as mere “minor accidents” within a larger narrative of economic success.
• The constitutional mandate (TAP MPR No. XI/1998) to investigate Soeharto’s wealth and that of his associates is effectively rendered moot, with attempts to hold him accountable now cast as disrespectful to national honor.
• Civil lawsuits, such as the one concerning the Supersemar Foundation’s alleged misappropriation of funds, are viewed as affronts to a national hero’s dignity, hindering legal processes and asset recovery.
• Supporters of the New Order who resist Reformasi and long for the past are positioned as historically correct and patriotic, while proponents of democracy are labeled as destabilizers.

Challenging International Standards and Ethics

The implications extend to the international stage, potentially blurring ethical lines in governance and human rights discourse.

• International reports and National Commission on Human Rights (Komnas HAM) findings on severe human rights violations in East Timor, Aceh, Papua, and the May 1998 tragedy are implicitly deemed invalid or irrelevant foreign interference.
• Figures like B.J. Habibie, who facilitated the East Timor referendum, may be seen as less patriotic than Soeharto, who maintained control through force.
• Individuals recognized internationally for human rights advocacy or anti-corruption work, who were critical of the New Order, could be perceived as exaggerating or mistaken in the new historical narrative.
• The military’s (ABRI/TNI) central role in politics via the “Dwifungsi ABRI” (dual function doctrine) is implicitly presented as an ideal leadership model, negating the Reformasi demand to return the TNI to barracks.
• Indonesia’s persistently low corruption perception index during the New Order era is disregarded, with the accumulation of wealth by the ruling elite framed as a natural outcome of a centralized economic development.
• Globally, Indonesia could be seen as setting a problematic precedent, suggesting that nations transitioning from authoritarian regimes need not scrutinize or hold their former autocratic leaders accountable.

The designation of Soeharto as a national hero is thus more than just an acknowledgment of deeds; it is perceived by many as a fundamental reshaping of Reformasi’s core values. This creates a moral ambiguity that appears to justify authoritarianism, normalize impunity, and prioritize “stability” over democracy, accountability, and the rule of human rights. The consequence, critics argue, is a rewriting of history that diminishes the struggle for justice and freedom.

“Man is a rope, tied between beast and overman—a rope over an abyss. Dangerous is the crossing, dangerous is the looking around, dangerous is the stopping and the miserable security.”

— Friedrich Nietzsche

The debate over Soeharto’s legacy underscores a critical juncture in Indonesia’s historical consciousness, prompting a vital national conversation about how the past is remembered and what values will guide the nation’s future.