Economic growth ranging from 7% to 10% was the normal annual GDP growth rate of Indonesia over a period of 30 years, from 1968 to 1998. It was the time when Indonesia was dubbed as part of Tiger Cubs Economies before its economy collapsed in 1998.
But, as you may already know, the quality of the growth was terrible due to chronic corruption and it benefited the cronies only and excluded common people from economic participation.
After Asian Crisis 1998, slowly but sure Indonesia managed to improve its quality of economic development despite slower growth. This can be seen by better inflation rates, better equality in income distribution, a more peaceful and socially cohesive in a multi ethnic society, and significant drop in corruption.
I think the point in economic development is not about how a country charts impressive economic growth but, rather, how the benefits of the growth will trickle down to everyone else.
Personally, I prefer 5% growth rate with better social conditions over 9% growth rate gone to the elites only.
7% GDP growth average for 30 years before 1998 was not bad.
The crash proved that it was not sustainable.
7% quality growth is better than 5% quality growth. At this rate Indonesia would still be middle income mid-century.
Look at China now, they are far ahead of Indonesia now and the gap is growing. Indonesia was richer even as recently as 2008 in living standards.