Instability Threats and Reconciliation Strategy

The determination of the vote results of the 2019 presidential election by the General Elections Commission (KPU) did not automatically dampen the turmoil in the national political constellation. On the contrary, the announcement sparked a political escalation and the outbreak of riots on May 22.

Information and speculation about the masterminds, networks, logistics suppliers and the main target of the riots continues to develop. However, the impact of the social, political and economic damage that they have caused has really been felt. In addition to claiming lives and degrading the image of Indonesia\'s democracy in the eyes of the world, the May 22 riots also hurt trade worth hundreds of billions of rupiah. All of these are unnecessary political-economic costs.

Now, the political constellation after the 2019 presidential election enters a new phase. The dissatisfaction of camp number 02 with the election results has been channeled through constitutional measures. The Prabowo Subianto-Sandiaga Uno pair has filed a challenge to the results of the presidential election at the Constitutional Court. However, efforts to neutralize the conflict through legal channels do not guarantee that it will cut out the roots of the conflict.

On the contrary, the potential for legal disputes to change into the threat of large-scale horizontal conflict remains open. The worry is quite relevant if the community looks at the legal challenge materials being submitted.

For example, the Prabowo-Sandi camp called on the Constitutional Court to overturn the KPU\'s decision on the determination of the presidential election results and declare it an illegal decision. Furthermore, the Prabowo-Sandi camp called on the Constitutional Court to disqualify the presidential- and vice-presidential candidate pair of Joko “Jokowi” Widodo-Ma\'ruf Amin from the 2019 presidential election because they were considered to have committed electoral violations and fraud in a structured, systematic and massive manner.

KOMPAS/WAWAN H PRABOWO

Prabowo Subianto-Sandiaga Uno’s campaign legal team chaired by Bambang Widjojanto files a lawsuit on the results of the 2019 presidential election at the Constitutional Court building, Jakarta, Friday (24/5/2019).

Looking at the two of the seven petition points being submitted, there are nuances of the political strategy of tijitibeh or “die one, die all”. This means the suspicion of partial fraud is likely to be used to erase most of the results of the election stages, which are considered legitimate.

The construction of such a way of thinking is born because of the deep conviction of massive fraud, although it is not easy to prove it. Moreover, the difference in votes is nearly 17 million votes. In the post-truth politics space, where entities of truth and lies are increasingly blurred, the belief in an object, including those that are still false, is relatively easy to maintain (Wu, et al. 2017; Bullock, 2007).

Potential of political deadlock

On the other hand, camp number 01 also made statements related to thousands of reports of alleged fraud that benefited camp 02. This means alleged fraud occurred on both sides. In that situation, the

possibility of a political deadlock increasingly arises. If the Constitutional Court does not grant the claim, the plaintiff has the potential to refuse (political denial) to recognize the legitimacy of the product of national leadership, which was produced by the various stages of the democratic process.

In the midst of this very open digital society, this political attitude has the potential to spread quickly to the grass roots, to give birth to large-scale political disobedience. On the other hand, the incumbent pair of Jokowi-Amin will certainly maintain the victory they have achieved. Therefore, if it is not properly anticipated, this conflict of interest could turn into a mobilization of mass forces that will face each other.

Mediation for reconciliation

The potential threat of mass clashes and horizontal conflicts after the Constitutional Court\'s decision can only be neutralized by reconciliation efforts between presidential candidates Jokowi and Prabowo. In fact, a meeting between the two alone could be an oasis for national political tensions.

To realize this reconciliation, there needs to be a political settlement at the elite level as the foundation for the realization of reconciliation. Each party must reduce tension without issuing provocative threats, including supporters. So far, the incumbent presidential candidate Jokowi has sent a special envoy as his negotiator to meet presidential candidate Prabowo. A number of names such as Coordinating Minister for Maritime Affairs Luhut Binsar Pandjaitan to Vice President Jusuf Kalla have emerged.

In mediation, equal dialogue between elites and stakeholders is the main requirement. The principle of winner takes all is not a wise choice to bring about peace (Moore, 2014; Galtung and Fischer, 2013). The ability to find a win-win solution in the national vision has become a necessity.

Thus, the future government can carry out its duties well, which is not only armed with the principle of legal compliance (Constitutional Court decision), but also the acceptance and recognition of the legitimacy of political rivals.

Amid the importance of national dialogue, law enforcement must also consider greater interests. The efforts of law enforcers to arrest people who are suspected of spreading hoaxes or hate speech must be impartial and uphold the principle of justice, because, a sense of justice is a fundamental requirement for the presence of peace (Gandhi, 2007; Rahardjo, 2005).

Indeed, it is not easy to take a political approach in the midst of the tension of the situation. Reliable mediators are needed to be able to embrace both parties. The latest meeting between Kalla and Prabowo may leave hope for the achievement of this meeting point, although no signs of success have emerged until now.

As an alternative, former president Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono (SBY) has the potential to become a mediator. In addition to having a track record in the conflict resolution process, SBY has no psychological or political problem with either. SBY was also the person in charge of the organizers of the 2014 election when Jokowi and Prabowo competed for the first time.

Another alternative, in addition to individuals who can be mediators, is that both parties can also use the collectivity of several figures, who are considered capable of bridging the communication gap between the two.

The last option is that President Jokowi, as the incumbent, could submit an open invitation to Prabowo to maintain the coolness and stability of national politics. The open invitation could be delivered directly through a press conference to be known to the general public and not involve contentious remarks about the existence of transactional politics. If the invitation is not accepted, the next invitation can be repeated as a confirmation of the seriousness of the intention to reconcile.

The response of each party will provide an opportunity for the people, especially every supporter, to provide an assessment of the quality and seriousness of their leaders in formulating the future of the Unitary State of the Republic of Indonesia (NKRI). Indeed, the Indonesian people believe that each presidential candidate must harbor glorious hopes for the future of this nation.

M Iftitah S Suryanagara, Strategy Practitioner, CEO and Founder of Romeo Strategic Consulting