RI foreign policy proves durable<\/p>\n
By Rizal Sukma<\/p>\n
This is the first of two articles on Indonesia's foreign
\npolicy which was first inducted on Sept. 2, 1948.<\/p>\n
JAKARTA (JP): Forty-nine years ago today, Indonesia's first
\nprime minister Mohammad Hatta laid down the foundations of
\nIndonesia's foreign policy.<\/p>\n
At the time, Hatta had to respond to the differing demands of
\ncontending political forces about the status of Indonesia in
\nworld politics. These demands came amid the growing rivalry
\nbetween two opposing blocs led by the United States and the
\nformer Soviet Union.<\/p>\n
Hatta's cabinet was faced with strong pressure from leftist
\npolitical forces to align the newly born republic with the Soviet
\ncamp. But Hatta was bound to resist this pressure.<\/p>\n
Faced with the urgent need to define Indonesia's international
\nidentity, amid this intense domestic political rivalry, he
\noutlined the basic principles of Indonesia's foreign policy to
\nthe Central Indonesian National Committee (Komite Nasional
\nIndonesia Pusat). These principles became the substance of an
\nactive and independent policy (bebas-aktif).<\/p>\n
Did the fighting Indonesian people have no other course of
\naction open to them other than to choose between being pro-
\nRussian or pro-American? Is there no other position that can be
\ntaken in the pursuit of our national ideas?<\/p>\n
The government is of the opinion that Indonesia should not be
\na passive participant in international politics but that it
\nshould be an active agent entitled to determine its own
\nstandpoint with the right to fight for its own goal -- the goal
\nof a fully independent Indonesia.<\/p>\n
This position was taken with two important objectives in mind.
\nFirst, to the outside world, it constituted an identification of
\nIndonesia's place and position in the international system. It
\nregistered the rejection by Indonesia's government of a
\ncommitment to either bloc and the rivalry between the two
\nsuperpowers.<\/p>\n
Second, it was intended to mitigate domestic rivalry between
\nthe competing elite. Through an independent position in world
\npolitics, Hatta sought to prevent ideological rivalry between
\nWashington and Moscow from aggravating acute political
\ndifferences among the country's political elite.<\/p>\n
In other words, the principle of bebas-aktif grew out of the
\nneed of Indonesia's government to cultivate national unity by
\nmaking its foreign policy serve that domestic objective.
\nThe promulgation of the principle was closely affected by the
\nobjective condition of both international and domestic politics
\nat that time.<\/p>\n
Since its formulation in 1948, the implementation of the
\npolicy has been replete with various nuances. During the 52 years
\nsince Indonesia achieved independence, its foreign policy has
\nundergone a number of significant changes and the world in which
\nthe principle was implemented has also changed.<\/p>\n
What does bebas-aktif mean for the New Order and has it also
\nundergone a change in the last 20 years?<\/p>\n
According to Hatta, the bebas-aktif foreign policy comprises
\nfour fundamental premises. First, the conduct of Indonesia's
\nforeign policy should be based on an ideological foundation,
\nnamely the state's Pancasila (Five Principles).<\/p>\n
Second, foreign policy should be aimed at safeguarding
\nnational interests as defined in the 1945 Constitution.<\/p>\n
Third, the pursuit of national interest would be best served
\nthrough an independent policy.<\/p>\n
Finally, Indonesia's foreign policy should be conducted
\npragmatically, that is, it \"should be resolved in the light of
\nits own interests and should be executed in consonance with the
\nsituations and facts it has to face\".<\/p>\n
Hatta also firmly believed that Indonesia's objectives and
\nnational interests would be best served through a strong
\ncommitment to the framework he designed.<\/p>\n
This would serve three immediate tasks facing Indonesia after
\nindependence:<\/p>\n
a. safeguarding national independence, sovereignty, and
\nsecurity<\/p>\n
b. maintaining internal consolidation<\/p>\n
c. safeguarding economic interests<\/p>\n
More importantly, the bebas-aktif foreign policy, according to
\nHatta, has three significant characteristics: anti-colonialism,
\nindependence and pragmatism.<\/p>\n
Despite such a clear conceptualization, the term soon proved
\ndifficult to accurately define and operate.<\/p>\n
Even though successive Indonesian governments reiterated their
\ncommitment to the principle, their opinions differed with regard
\nto what bebas-aktif should truly mean and how actual
\nimplementation of the principle should be carried out.<\/p>\n
An expert on Indonesia's foreign policy, Franklin Weinstein,
\nobserves that from 1950 until the time he wrote about the policy,
\nin 1976, the principle of bebas-aktif had at least five meanings.<\/p>\n
During the parliamentary democracy period in the 1950s, the
\npolicy assumed two meanings. First, in the early 1950s it was
\ndefined as a policy which precluded the government from entering
\ninto any international agreement which would align Indonesia with
\neither opposing bloc. In other words, Indonesia should stay out
\nof a pact. However, such a position was not meant to preclude
\nIndonesia from being active in establishing world peace.<\/p>\n
Second, in the mid-1950s, the definition of the policy was
\nbroadened to include the obligation of establishing a balance in
\nIndonesia's relations with the two blocs.<\/p>\n
When Indonesia entered the period of guided democracy in 1959,
\nthe principle of bebas-aktif acquired its third and fourth
\nmeanings.<\/p>\n
In the early 1960s, president Sukarno extended its meaning to
\ninclude a balance in foreign economic relations so that Indonesia
\ndid not lean toward the West or the East.<\/p>\n
By the mid-1960s, as Sukarno sought to radicalize domestic and
\nforeign policy, bebas-aktif was defined in terms of Indonesia's
\nability to lead an international movement of the developing world
\nagainst neo-imperialism.<\/p>\n
The fifth meaning of bebas-aktif found its expression in the
\nforeign policy of the New Order. Weinstein argues that the New
\nOrder attempted to combine the meanings of bebas-aktif from
\nprevious periods to justify the course of the foreign policy it
\nintended to pursue.<\/p>\n
Thus, he found that the pronouncement of the New Order's
\nforeign policy contained the determination to avoid dependence on
\nforeign powers; the return of the 1950s \"no pacts\"
\ninterpretation; the reiteration of commitment to non-alignment;
\ncontinued adherence to the principle of anti-colonialism and neo-
\nimperialism; the need to blend policy with flexibility and
\npragmatism; and the aspiration to play a leading role in the
\nSoutheast Asian region.<\/p>\n
The writer is a researcher at the Centre for Strategic and
\nInternational Studies, Jakarta.<\/p>\n
Window: Hatta also firmly believed that Indonesia's objectives
\nand national interests would be best served through a strong
\ncommitment to the framework he designed.<\/p>",
"url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/ri-foreign-policy-proves-durable-1447893297",
"image": ""
},
"sponsor": "Okusi Associates",
"sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com"
}