Again, the month is beseiged with a third death. The departed Haji Muhamad Suharto is the third death of the year, coming from the same era of the recently departed Benazir Bhutto. Its a sad day but unfortunately everyone faces their death. Death is untimely and leaves not a single hint.

However, i am deeply disturbed by the actions of the press and the perceptions of this man that is being circulated around the region. The AFP calls Suharto “a ruthless dictator“.

“We could not have expected a leader for Indonesia worse than Suharto. But he was no Pol Pot,” said Asmara Nababan, head of the Centre for Democracy and Human Rights in Jakarta.

True, i am not a man of their era to witness at first hand all the actions of his governance. True, he did invade Timor Leste wrongfully and ruthlessly. However, i do believe he is an important man that came at the right time for Indonesia. He has done wrong things. Yes, he is into cronyism, corruption and taking control billions of dollars. However, you have to pay respects to the man. Tell me which man has not done mistakes. American presidents are littered with scandals.

Indonesia is a sprawling metropolitan with a strong economy. During his time, Indonesia enjoyed a GDP of 7% in each year from 1987-1997. Education and medical costs were low compared to what it is now. He had the power to unite and control the many islands of Indonesia. I don’t believe that he controlled with an iron fist and crushed any opinions said. HE isn’t like Paul Pot or the Myanmar government which has repressed it’s people, killed, starved and tortured them. Has he prevented democracy? Is he really a DICTATOR?

Dictionary.com states that a DICTATOR is

A person exercising absolute power, esp. a ruler who has absolute, unrestricted control in a government without hereditary succession.

He is somewhat a Dictator but one that doesn’t feed off it’s people. He didn’t torture and abuse his people. Robbing them of everyone wealth they had. Instead, he made them richer, ensuring proper education and making both the economy and country stable making it a successful nation.

Unlike the Western society, the Eastern society always need a strong leadership to steer the course of it’s nation. The countries in Asean that went on to develop were mainly Singapore, Malaysia and Indonesia.  And who were their leaders during that period? It’s none other than M.M. Lee Kuan Yew, Tan Sri Dr. Mahatir Mohamad and Haji Muhamad Suharto.

Whats the similarity between the 3? They had absolute power over their country and used their might to  steer the path of the country. Asean countries need an Authoritarian. One who can lead their country to success.

Instead of hating the man and disgracing him, let’s just allow bygones be bygones. Remember for what he has done, both good and bad. How this can be used as a learning point for future leaders. Learn his success in managing and building a rich and powerful nation and yet learn from his failures of corruption.

Fai @ ilovelookinggood