Indonesia's bilateral relations: Down but not out<\/p>\n
Bantarto Bandoro<\/p>\n
Are bilateral relations important for a country beset by
\nmultidimensional national problems, like Indonesia? The answer is
\ndefinitely yes; they are as important as any other form of
\ninternational cooperation. But why do bilateral relations matter
\nso much for Indonesia? This question has no doubt been posed by
\nthose who would like to share their thoughts on how Indonesia has
\nmanaged its bilateral relations at a time when the country is
\nfacing not only tremendous international pressure to speed up its
\nmoves against international terrorism, but also the necessity to
\nimprove its image abroad.<\/p>\n
Issues such as stalled economic development, internal
\nsecurity, terrorism, human rights violations, regional violence,
\nto mention but a few, have indeed affected Indonesia's external
\nrelations. But it is bilateral relations that have been most
\ndeliberated domestically, with people curious about the way
\nIndonesia attempts to defend its national interests and
\ninternational position given the dramatic changes in the
\ncountry's internal and external environment. It has also been
\nduring such deliberation that certain sentiments have emerged,
\neither those linked with nationalism or a certain religion.
\nPublic perception colored by such considerations has resulted in
\nextreme, sometime radical views of Indonesia's bilateral
\npartners. Some have at times even suggested that diplomatic
\nrelations with some countries be severed.<\/p>\n
The emergence of the Megawati government is a positive sign
\nthat reform and democracy can flourish in the country. Though
\nmany were at the outset skeptical about the way Megawati managed
\nnational problems, the public seems to appreciate some of the
\npolicies Megawati has initiated during the first year of her
\nadministration. On the foreign policy front, it is clearly stated
\nin the program of the Gotong Royong Cabinet. The message is that
\nIndonesia wishes to be seen by the region and the world as a
\ncountry that remains stable, secure and capable of addressing its
\ndomestic problems. It is within this context that the Indonesian
\nforeign service is called upon to play an active role in
\nrestoring the image of the country as well as defending the
\ncountry's territorial integrity.<\/p>\n
Bilateral and multilateral mechanisms have been and will
\ncontinue to be the main venue in which Indonesia is to achieve
\nand secure its national and international interests. In extending
\nand implementing its agenda of foreign policy, it is only natural
\nthat Indonesia will encounter problems. However, such problems
\ncan always be settled through those mechanisms. Foreign minister
\nHassan Wirayuda continues to stress the importance of such
\nmechanisms, stating that one mechanism should not be geared at
\nthe expense of another.<\/p>\n
There are many global and multilateral issues confronting the
\ngovernment such as terrorism, the environment, labor and human
\nrights. These are the types of issues that have impacted upon
\nIndonesia's bilateral relations with countries such as the United
\nStates, Australia, Singapore and Malaysia in the past year. The
\ncountry's bilateral relations with those countries have
\nexperienced ups and downs over the years, and at times have
\nalmost reached breaking point. Accusations by some of these
\ncountries that Indonesia had taken no action in regard to
\nterrorism, for example, prompted members of the legislature and
\nministers to decry the allegations.<\/p>\n
The issue of terrorism could become a cementing factor in our
\nbilateral relations, but it could also be a factor that could
\nfracture bilateral relations. This is exactly what has happened
\nto Indonesia's bilateral relations with Singapore, the United
\nStates and to a certain extent Australia. On this front,
\nIndonesia has been the main target of criticism by the three
\ncountries, which argue that our country has been a safe haven for
\nterrorists. Inconsistencies in Indonesia's reaction to foreign
\ncritics saw local public figures speak out as individuals, thus
\ncausing further harm to Indonesia's bilateral relations. Before
\nthe Sept. 11, 2001 tragedy, Indonesia's bilateral relations with
\nthese three countries were relatively stable. After the tragedy,
\nno country in the world, including Indonesia, could deny that it
\nwas an act of terror. Indonesia then joined the world struggle
\nagainst global terrorism.<\/p>\n
Why, then, did this turmoil happen between Indonesia and the
\nthree countries? The first factor is that Indonesia appeared
\nunconcerned about what the leaders of these countries said about
\nIndonesia and the issue of terrorism. But Indonesia's concern was
\nseemingly tinged with political interests and reflected the
\ncomplex game of Indonesian politics and the competition between
\ndifferent parties.<\/p>\n
The second factor has something to do with a wider sentiment
\nthat concerns Indonesia's perceptions of the three countries. In
\nthe case of Singapore, some Indonesians feel that Singaporeans,
\nrather than empathizing with Indonesia in its recent years of
\neconomic difficulty, had benefited at their expense. In the case
\nof the U.S., Indonesians saw it as applying double standards in
\nits policies toward Indonesia and a tendency to define
\nIndonesia's conduct in U.S. terms. Not only this, but many here
\nconsider the U.S. too self-satisfied and see its preference for
\nunilateralism as imperialism. In the case of Australia, many here
\nperceive the country as being arrogant and having failed to
\nappreciate the political sensitivities of Indonesia. The turmoil
\nis also attributed to competitiveness in their respective
\naspirations for regional leadership roles.<\/p>\n
The third factor is related to the way Indonesia wished to
\nrestore its dignity and to maintain unity and integrity. It is
\nwithin this context that the public here felt it was being
\ndictated to by foreign countries that had gone beyond the limits
\nof tolerance in their assessment of the course of our
\ndevelopment. Fourth, for a long time, the Indonesian public did
\nnot quite view issues such as human rights, reform and democracy
\nin the same way as did those countries, perhaps with the
\nexception of Singapore. This discrepancy in perception indeed has
\nserved as a constraining factor in the development of our
\nbilateral relations.<\/p>\n
We would say then that during 2002 the issue of terrorism saw
\nIndonesia's bilateral relations with those three countries
\ndeteriorate, going from strained to nearly shattered. Our
\nbilateral relations were down, but not completely out. Serious
\nobservation reveals that terrorism was not the only cause. Such
\nan issue only served to complicate matters already in existence
\nemanating from our own domestic setting. The spat over cynical
\ncommentaries by the leaders of those countries are not an
\nisolated affair. This is just another swing in what has become
\nquite unstable and incident-driven relations. This should be of
\nconcern as Indonesia's bilateral relations with Australia,
\nSingapore and the U. S. affect stability and security in the
\nregion.<\/p>\n
After the variety of incidents of the past year, it has become
\nevident that Indonesia's relations with some of those countries
\nhave reached a low ebb. Whether they will remain this way for
\nsome time and deteriorate further depends to a great extent on
\nefforts by the political leaders of both sides to sustain the
\nalready recognized strategic importance of their relations for
\nthe region as a whole. This would mean that in whichever way they
\nuse to solve whatever issues they face must not be pursued at the
\nexpense of their bilateral relations.<\/p>\n
For Indonesia in particular, the full awareness of our
\npolitical leaders of the human consequences of international
\nproblems such terrorism and human rights violations is imperative
\nif Indonesia is to be seen as an integral part of the
\ninternational community in combating terrorism and respecting the
\nprinciples of human rights. Because foreign criticism and
\npressure are inevitable, it is also a necessary for our leaders
\nto manage such external imperatives in such a way that would not
\nprompt a reaction from the public at large.<\/p>\n
It has always been the wish of our government that our
\nbilateral relations be freed from irritants. Yet in reality,
\nclearly it is not possible for us avoid such irritants,
\nparticularly when we have already become a major target of
\nforeign criticism. The Bali tragedy and its aftermath have made
\nour bilateral relations with certain countries, particularly with
\nAustralia, to suffer further. Significantly, the bombings did not
\nstir up nationalist anti-Western sentiment as the mood seemed to
\nhave swung to condemning the act of terror. It was perhaps
\nbecause, in spite of the occasional irritants, security experts
\nfrom Indonesia and Australia, plus from other countries, decided
\nto collaborate to investigate the bombings.<\/p>\n
The series of incidents during 2002 has impacted seriously on
\nour bilateral relations, particularly with Australia, the U.S.
\nand Singapore. Whatever the specific course and timing, the
\nrelationship between Indonesia and the three countries will
\ninevitably survive and eventually improve. With such high
\nconfidence, it is expected that in the future our bilateral
\nrelations will further mature so that a single issue will not
\nseverely affect the entirety of those relations.<\/p>\n
By sustaining and continuously acknowledging the strategic
\ncharacter of our bilateral relations, we can address more
\neffectively specific international issues, no matter how thorny
\nand sensitive the issues are likely to be. A more stable and
\ncooperative bilateral relationship is much needed, but how can
\nthis be achieved? Increased dialog is an essential requirement.
\nTo make the most of the opportunities, finger-pointing should be
\navoided. Our bilateral relations with those three countries will
\ncertainly improve, but tension may continue as we entertain more
\ncomplex international problems. The daunting challenges of the
\nMegawati government is to meet such complex problems and secure
\nand improve our bilateral relations on the basis of equal
\npartnership and mutual respect.<\/p>",
"url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/indonesias-bilateral-relations-down-but-not-out-1447893297",
"image": ""
},
"sponsor": "Okusi Associates",
"sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com"
}