When Indonesians elect their Members of Parliament (MPs) on Wednesday and a new President three months later on July 9, their decisions will have an impact on the wider region. Given Indonesia’s pivotal position in South-east Asia, this is to be expected.

However, understanding the full implications of their electoral choices will not be easy, as there are two “known unknowns” in the country’s latest power transition. The first concerns the new Parliament. The second is about the new President. Until and unless the picture becomes clearer towards the end of the year, a new government clouded by these twin ambiguities could mean quite a testy time ahead for the region.

Known unknown 1: What type of Parliament?

In the post-Reformasi era, the Indonesian Parliament has become increasingly independent of the presidency, at times even prone to chest-thumping, as if to make up for the three decades of authoritarian rule under Suharto.

In the last Parliament, such a posture had come at the expense of Indonesia’s neighbours.

The Association of Southeast Asian Nations’ (ASEAN) failure to push through a proposed regionwide anti-haze law was partly due to this. The legislature dragged its feet and refused to ratify the ASEAN Agreement on Transboundary Haze Pollution, even though all other ASEAN members had done so. Underlying this inclination was a Parliament that would not want to be seen as dictated by other countries, reflecting an increasing nationalistic pride.

Will the new legislature be even more independent-minded and assertive, such that the next President will have a difficult time entering into national agreements with other countries?

Will the haze pollution agreement be ratified by Indonesia, so ASEAN can implement its haze-fighting strategy?

There is a larger question behind this growing nationalism: What will be the attitude of the new Parliament towards the regional and international order? Will it be a team player or will it be prone to ignoring the outside world?

Just as importantly, will the new crop of MPs understand and appreciate the critical importance of regional and global concerns that affect not only Indonesians, but also the wider South-east Asia?

These are not trivial questions given the region’s growing stress, such as from climate change and its multi-dimensional impact, as well as from growing regional volatility.

An increasingly nationalistic legislature mirrors the underlying currents in Indonesian society. Singapore felt a direct impact when elements within the Indonesian defence establishment asserted their pride in Konfrontasi-era national heroes — Usman Hj Mohd Ali and Harun Said — whom Singapore regards as terrorists for their bombing of MacDonald House in 1965. Will the new MPs manage this trend or ride on it?

Known unknown 2: What type of President?

Notwithstanding his huge popularity, there is, paradoxically, not much known about the front-running presidential aspirant. In a growing democracy such as Indonesia, an independent-minded Parliament calls for a strong President to be on top.

Otherwise, he will be overwhelmed by the legislature. Under such circumstances, it is difficult to be a strong leader, as he will not be able to get legislative support for his policies. This will not be good news for the wider region.

It is to avoid a weak presidency that the major Indonesian political parties are aiming to secure victory big enough so they can form the government on their own; or if they must, to forge a ruling coalition with the smallest number of partners. In the past, coalition-building in support of the ruling party had often led to unstable government.

So which of the current presidential aspirants have the necessary qualities to be that strong leader?

A slate of serious contenders have emerged — Joko Widodo (“Jokowi”), Aburizal Bakrie, Prabowo Subianto and Wiranto. Dark horses may surface after the parliamentary election results are out. But of the current slate, Mr Widodo has stood out as the most popular in opinion polls, with Mr Bakrie, Mr Prabowo and Mr Wiranto trailing by significant margins.

While Mr Widodo with his fresh face is a clear favourite, riding on Indonesia’s populist politics, voices are beginning to emerge, probing for the substance of his leadership.

They ask: What does Mr Widodo really stand for? What is his ideology? What is his attitude towards existential and strategic issues of nation-building and Indonesia’s place in the international order? Does he have what it takes to be a leader who can stride on the regional and global stage to advance Indonesia’s role as an emerging regional power?

Indeed, some are suggesting that should he emerge as President, he will be relying on his deputy to do the heavy lifting. However, if he has to depend on his right-hand man to do his job, it begs the question as to where then lies his leadership.

While Mr Bakrie and Mr Prabowo are not as popular, they are known quantities. Mr Bakrie is a proven business leader — in fact, one of the richest in Indonesia — who has earned his stripes in Cabinet as well. Mr Prabowo, as controversial as he is, is seen and projects himself as a decisive and strong leader, having been a special forces general in the past. Up to this point, Mr Bakrie and Mr Prabowo have offered clear manifestos of what they stand for.

Mr Widodo has been basking in his popularity. Yet, there is much about him that we do not really know. To be fair, he may well have what it takes to be President. He may well also turn out to be what Indonesia needs.

But he has to start articulating his vision, platform, strategies and programmes, so he can be fairly judged. Otherwise, the next five years will not necessarily be clearer for Indonesia — or for the region.

About the author

Yang Razali Kassim is a Senior Fellow with the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies (RSIS), Nanyang Technological University.

This opinion first appeared in RSIS Commentaries.