Behind occasional strains between neighbors

Behind occasional strains between neighbors

J. Soedjati Djiwandono, Political Analyst, Jakarta

Geographic proximity does not ensure easy relations between
neighboring countries. On the contrary, it may precisely be a
hindrance to good and friendly relations. Take a look at
relations between India and Pakistan, Japan and China, Japan and
South Korea, China and Russia, or between Japan and Russia.

Likewise, commonalities and similarities in historical
backgrounds and cultural traditions that often relate to
geographic proximity do not necessarily contribute to smooth
relations. In fact, similarities and differences are often of
little relevance to friendly relations between neighbors, unless
they are of complementary nature in terms of their national
interests.

The present analysis will focus on the case of Indonesia's
bilateral relations with Australia, Malaysia, and Singapore.
There is nothing new about that, except to the extent that it has
recently assumed a more serious dimension.

There has been a constant problem between Malaysia and
Indonesia on the flow of immigrants from Indonesia to Malaysia,
legal as well as illegal, in search of a better life. Since the
economic crisis in 1997, however, the problem has become worse.
Increasing numbers of Indonesian immigrants of either status have
been returned, not to say deported, to Indonesia than ever
before.

Indeed, if in the past, particularly since Sukarno's policy
against Malaysia in the early 1960's, Malaysia has a lingering
perception of Indonesia as potential source of threat to its
security. Now if not in military or expansionist terms, since the
worsening crisis in 1997, Indonesia remains a potential threat to
the security of its neighbors. One can imagine the possible flow
of "boat people" from Indonesia. The increase of immigrants,
legal and illegal, is its manifestation.

As regards Indonesia's relations with Australia, the strong
opposition expressed by Speaker of the House of Representatives
(DPR) Akbar Tandjung and Speaker of the People's Consultative
Assembly (MPR) Amien Rais to the recent visit of the Australian
Prime Minister John Howard reflected, again, how complex
relations between the two countries had been. And the boisterous
reaction in Indonesia to the remark by Senior Minister Lee Kuan
Yew that Indonesia is a nest of terrorists has reflected the
sporadic strains in the relations between the two neighbors.

The question of the truth or falsity of Lee's remark has
become irrelevant. Emotion has dominated the controversy over the
issue.

Indeed, geographic proximity has tended to give rise to undue
expectations. Consciously or otherwise, Indonesians tend to
expect Australia to understand Indonesia better than the United
States and, therefore, to be more tolerant and less critical
towards Indonesia.

Thus Australia's attitude or policy that is negative in the
eyes of Indonesia would tend to be resented more than a similar
attitude or policy adopted by the United States. In fact, despite
the differences, there are more similarities between Australia
and the U.S, something Indonesians seem to ignore or could not
care less about.

Geographic proximity also tends to create certain
misperceptions. Because of its sheer size in terms of its
territory and population, Indonesia is often perceived by certain
quarters in Australia as a potential source of threat to their
security, even if in the vague expression of a "threat from the
North", which may well refer to China.

Officially, Indonesia often expresses its resentment, although
at the same time such a perception may have somewhat "ego
massaging" effect on Indonesians.

As regards Singapore, there is often a perception in Indonesia
that Singapore is "little China". Its large Chinese population,
as part of the entire overseas Chinese population of Southeast
Asia, are often described as a potential "fifth column" for China
in the future. That such a perception is wrong on historical
ground -- i.e. contrary to the original idea in the Spanish civil
war in the mid 1930s -- is either overlooked or never known.

It is often said that Singapore seems to be beset with a
besieged mentality, like Israel. Indonesians do not seem to
appreciate this. Thus they do not seem to understand why
Singapore as well as Malaysia seem cautious towards Indonesia,
perceiving it as a potential source of threat to their security,
even that of the region.

Towards the end of Soeharto's rule, for example, Senior
Minister Lee Kuan Yew often made the point that the stability of
the region had been linked to the personal leadership of
president Soeharto. He seemed to have been worried lest
Soeharto's successor might be one who would be one not as
committed as Soeharto had been to ASEAN.

That cautious attitude, however, is not without foundation. It
is certainly based on past experience, particularly as related to
the confrontation policy of Sukarno, and the invasion and, if not
directly impacting to ASEAN, the annexation of East Timor by
Indonesia under Soeharto. Even so, when the issue of East Timor
was first discussed in the United Nations, the resentment of
Indonesia, Singapore abstained from a resolution that seemed to
favour Indonesia's stand.

There is also a lingering prejudice in Indonesia that
Singapore's prosperity has been at the expense of Indonesia.
This, as well as the cry of "intervention," is often brought to
the surface again whenever Indonesians feel offended by Singapore
such as Lee Kuan Yew's remark.

As regards Malaysia, in the past, probably to give a sense of
having a "big brother" in the face of China before Malaysia
opened diplomatic relations with that Asian giant, Malaysia was
keen on the idea of "Malay solidarity" or "brotherhood" (Rumpun
Melayu), as a basis for Malaysian-Indonesian relations. However,
such an idea did not last long. Probably with the opening of
diplomatic relations between Malaysia and China in the early
1970s and the strengthening of ASEAN, the idea of Rumpun Melayu
was after all no longer necessary nor relevant.

More importantly, in Indonesia the idea was losing support.
Indonesians of non-Malay stock and those who racially may well be
Malays but not Muslims began to feel less and less comfortable
with it. In Malaysia, a Malay is by constitution a Muslim. That
is not the case in Indonesia.