Dewi Anggraeni
\nJournalist
\nMelbourne<\/p>\n
Indonesia is not the only country where state departments
\nappear not to speak to one another. However this inter-
\ndepartmental autism became acutely obvious when the government
\nannounced the presidential decree to revoke the 60-day, free on-
\narrival visa policy to 48 countries, including Australia, the
\nNetherlands, the USA and other Western European countries,
\nnotably where most of Indonesia's much-needed tourists come from.<\/p>\n
The country's tourism is reeling from the successive blows of
\nthe Bali bombing, the 2003 Gulf War and the Severe Acute
\nRespiratory Syndrome (SARS), bringing a number of related
\nindustries floundering downward as well. There is no doubt they
\nneed this decree like a hole in the head.<\/p>\n
People may disapprove of allowing the country's economy to be
\nso dependent on tourism, yet in these times of macroeconomic
\nslumping, tourism has played an important role in keeping some
\nsectors going. The hospitality industry is one of the most labor-
\nintensive sectors, and it involves a wide network of supporting
\nbusinesses, from supplier manufacturers, distribution sub-
\nnetworks, to various service industries.<\/p>\n
Revoking the visa-free facility may, on paper, project a
\npossible jump in revenues for the Immigration Department -- that
\nis, of course assuming the number of tourists remains the same.
\nHowever, it is unrealistic to expect this to happen.<\/p>\n
The costs of the new visa will certainly make holiday-makers
\nfrom many countries where tourists come from, think twice. Most
\nholiday-makers are ordinary wage-earners who have worked hard
\nduring the year and need somewhere stress-free, inexpensive and
\nhopefully welcoming, to spend some time to unwind.<\/p>\n
Indonesia is not the only such place offering such a holiday,
\nso, faced with the additional expenditure of a visa, they are
\nlikely to turn to other holiday spots, such as Thailand, where
\nthe tourism business receives coordinated attention from the
\ngovernment, Singapore or any of the Pacific nations, where the
\nnatural surroundings are still pristine.<\/p>\n
The Minister for Justice and Human Rights Yusril Ihza Mahendra
\nmentioned national security as a reason, saying that a few
\nforeign activists supporting separatist movements had misused
\ntheir visas. Ironically, this assumption implies that law
\nenforcers in this country are so powerless that a handful of
\nforeigners who may not even speak Indonesian can threaten
\nnational security during their 60-day stay, but somehow would be
\ndeterred if they had to pay US$40 for 30 days.<\/p>\n
Another reason expressed is national pride. Countries who do
\nnot reciprocate on the visa-free facility with Indonesia are
\nequated with those who do not respect Indonesia.<\/p>\n
This is a moot point. There may indeed be some lack of respect
\nfor Indonesia in Australia and Japan, just as there may be in
\nSingapore and Hong Kong, however is this lack of respect a reason
\nfor these countries to reciprocate or not to reciprocate with
\nIndonesia on a visa-free arrangement?<\/p>\n
Does it mean that Singapore, Hong Kong, Turkey or Chile, which
\nare among those who do extend free visas to Indonesian visitors,
\nrespect Indonesia more so than Australia, the Netherlands,
\nBelgium and Japan, who require visitors from Indonesia to pay for
\na visa in advance?<\/p>\n
Curiously, this revocation of the visa-free facility also
\naffects the government's desperate attempts to try to attract
\nforeign investment into the country to help inject life into the
\neconomy. National pride, it seems, does not come into the
\nequation here.<\/p>\n
Instead, the picture painted is that one arm of the government
\nis trying to encourage anyone with capital to come and park it in
\nIndonesia while another arm is waving away those who are already
\nbringing revenue into the country. Worse still, as Bali, SARS and
\nIraq hit, slowing the flow of revenue significantly, instead of
\ntaking measures to improve the situation, an obstruction is set
\nup to slow it all down further.<\/p>\n
If there is any thought that the measures would screen out
\nsome visitors in such a way that only those who spend a lot would
\ncome, and the country's tourism would thus be rescued, just one
\nlook around might bring some enlightenment.<\/p>\n
It is the budget travelers who keep tourism alive in many
\ncountries. The big-spenders fly in, spend, an average of five
\ndays in five-star hotels, play golf with other tourists, go for
\nshopping sprees in fashionable centers and plazas, and fly out.
\nThe budget travelers on the other hand usually stay longer,
\nfrequent ordinary businesses and retail outlets, thus getting to
\nknow the locals better.<\/p>\n
Of course, it can always be argued that the government is
\nentitled to impose visa fees on any country it chooses, whatever
\nthe basis for consideration. But with the ailing economy, and the
\nexisting tourism industry in need of boosting rather than
\ndismissing, is this the right time?<\/p>",
"url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/dewi-anggraeni-1447899208",
"image": ""
},
"sponsor": "Okusi Associates",
"sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com"
}