Abdurrahman criticized for being undiplomatic

Abdurrahman criticized for being undiplomatic

SINGAPORE: Indonesian President Abdurrahman Wahid has gathered an impressive list of descriptions for one so new in tenure: Impetuous, erratic, unpredictable, confusing. These are what his own people are saying, among them his advisers, the political classes, the media.

Singaporeans tend to show more forbearance.

They accept that he has a frightfully difficult job balancing primal forces in his sprawling country. He is also regarded kindly as a humanist. They want him to succeed.

Singapore has a vested interest in his political fortunes -- this much is known. But neither the perceived shortcomings nor sympathetic consideration for the man could have prepared Singaporeans for the ferocity of his weekend attack on the Republic.

This was unjustified and underhand, not what would be expected of the leader of a country whose fate can influence all of South- east Asia. President Abdurrahman must know that Singaporeans are incensed and mystified. They had never thought him capable of such distemper. What could have made him do it?

The context was a dialog with fellow Indonesians in Singapore which took place after the ASEAN meetings last week. Abdurrahman had met Senior Minister Lee Kuan Yew and Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad in the course of the week.

His apparent annoyance with Lee for not supporting his idea of including East Timor and Papua New Guinea in ASEAN would, in normal diplomatic dealings, be taken in its stride. Win some, lose some.

Abdurrahman's wish could even find fulfillment some day as an ASEAN decision, regardless of what Lee thinks. The President crossed the line of propriety, however, when he suggested that Singapore was in some way disdainful of Malays, implying the Republic cared little about Indonesia and Malaysia except for the advantage it could extract from them.

The record of Singapore's economic and diplomatic exchanges with these two hugely important neighbors is open to examination. It disproves conclusively Abdurrahman's assertion. Their well- being cannot be wholly divorced from each other's.

The reference to Malays was particularly ill-judged, as the Singapore Government has lately been engaged in a sombre dialogue with the Malay intelligentsia on the role of Malays on the national political agenda.

Had Abdurrahman been made aware of this? Most egregious, the President came uncomfortably close to being provocative when he suggested that water supply from Malaysia and Indonesia could be cut, just to make a point. This is the ultimate indiscretion, whatever the nuance. Singaporeans are not amused when jokes or threats are made about water.

What are Singaporeans to make of the remarks? The impulse would be strong to regard them as the tactless musings of a man at ease in a homey atmosphere. (The President's session was held at the Indonesian embassy).

But it is sensible never to take anything for granted. If he was playing to the domestic gallery to divert attention from his considerable troubles, Singapore could properly feel aggrieved at having been used.

Indonesian opinion has been largely critical of Abdurrahman -- for being undiplomatic. For a more accurate divination, an important distinction should be made. If Indonesian legislators and commentators were faulting their President in toto, Singaporeans would feel a bit better. If they dressed him down merely for the way he conveyed his thoughts but did not dispute the substance of his remarks, Singapore has some deep thinking to do.

-- The Straits Times/Asia News Network