印尼骚乱背后，谁在博弈？

Group 1 - The article discusses the increasing dissatisfaction among the Indonesian public towards the government under President Prabowo, particularly in the context of economic policies and social inequality [9][10][11] - President Prabowo aims for an 8% GDP growth while not expanding the fiscal deficit, which has led to tensions among the elite and dissatisfaction among vulnerable groups due to past corruption and inequality [10][11] - A specific policy example is the provision of free lunches for pregnant women and students, which has faced criticism for not including university students and teachers, highlighting the challenges of political support during economic downturns [11][12] Group 2 - The article draws historical parallels between current events and past political turmoil in Indonesia, specifically referencing the events of 1965 and 1998, which were also characterized by elite power struggles masked as public dissent [14][15][16] - The 1965 incident involved the military's rise to power following the assassination of army generals, while the 1998 protests were initially student-led but escalated into broader ethnic violence and political upheaval [15][16][17] - The article emphasizes that the underlying causes of these events often relate to economic downturns and the internal conflicts among Indonesia's elite, rather than solely external influences [14][15][18] Group 3 - The current political landscape in Indonesia is described as having three main factions, with President Prabowo caught between opposition forces and internal elite conflicts, particularly with former President Jokowi [19][20][21] - The article suggests that the outcome of these struggles will depend on who can control the state's security apparatus, which is crucial for maintaining order [22][23] - Potential scenarios include Prabowo consolidating power by weakening Jokowi's influence or a prolonged period of instability, but the author believes that the ultimate outcome will likely not lead to chaos due to the vested interests of powerful families in maintaining stability [23]