Rizal Sukma, Jakarta – Reading the warnings by TNI Chief Gen. Djoko Santoso last week reminded me of the days of the New Order rule. During that era, especially when the general elections were approaching, military generals routinely warned the people of possible threats to the nation's stability and security.

They often told us that certain elements of society would try to sabotage the elections, undermine political order and disturb development. The people were then assured that the military would take action against any such threat in order to safeguard national stability and development.

Last week, to the surprise of many, Gen. Santoso warned the nation that the upcoming general elections would be fraught with potential vulnerabilities and threats that could "disturb national stability".

He then went on to list a number of indicators of potential threats. They are, among others, too many political parties; a long campaign period; the accumulation of political problems; and too many candidates for president and vice president (Kompas, Feb. 25, 2009).

We, as a nation, of course need such warnings about the political situation in the country. However, they should not come from military generals.

Making an assessment about the internal political situation in public is a political act. Men in uniform are not supposed to make such political statements. Whether or not the remarks were meant for public consumption, the fact remains that the warnings were widely reported by the media.

As member of parliament Abdillah Toha correctly pointed out, such public statements create the impression that the TNI is not yet willing to fully withdraw from politics. Responses from other members of parliament also questioned the TNI's authority to make such political statements (Kompas, Feb. 26, 2009).

The problem, however, goes beyond whether or not the TNI has the authority to make such political assessments. It raises a number of questions regarding the TNI's commitment to, and understanding of, the essence of democracy.

For instance, it is really difficult to understand why too many candidates for president and vice president should be considered a possible threat to national stability.

Surely we do not want the right to contest the upcoming presidential elections to be given only to President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono and former president Megawati Soekarnoputri. The people have the right to have more candidates and more choices.

Democracy guarantees that every single citizen – except an active soldier – has the right to dream to become president of this country, and try to fulfill that dream by becoming a candidate.

Every single citizen – except an active soldier – is entitled to entertain the aspiration to contest the elections. No one, not even the mighty TNI, can limit that right that is guaranteed by the Constitution. Of course we cannot have everyone actually contest the presidential election.

That is why we have an elections law, which regulates who can actually contest the elections, under what conditions and requirements, and through what procedures. So let the law limit the number of candidates we have. Too many or too few candidates should not be seen as a threat.

It is equally puzzling why the large number of political parties is also seen as a potential threat. Surely we do not want to go back to the New Order era when the government only allowed three political parties to exist. The 1999 and 2004 elections took place relatively peacefully despite the fact we had more than 40 and 20 parties respectively.

Until today, we have not heard the 38 political parties fighting each other and creating disturbances. Even if they do, let the police deal with it.

More importantly, the natural and political selection, through the imposition of electoral and parliamentary thresholds, will reduce the number of political parties in the future. What we need now is just a little bit of patience. Let democracy mature itself, and it is a process.

Finally, the accumulation of political problems could indeed potentially undermine national stability. The government needs to be warned about the negative impacts this problem could have on national stability. But when such warnings came from the TNI, it sounds like criticism of the government's failure to resolve the problems and let the problems accumulate.

The TNI should not get into the habit of criticizing the government legitimately elected by the people. Let the people themselves do it.

Despite the problematic nature of the warnings, it does not mean the TNI is not entitled to any political views. The question here is how to channel the views through appropriate mechanisms and procedures. One such mechanism is through the National Security Council (NSC) provided for in Law No. 3/2002 on State Defense.

The problem is, however, the government has not yet formed the council. If that is the case, the government is equally to blame. So until the NSC is formed, brace yourself for more political statements from the generals!

[The writer is executive director at the Centre for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS).]