Diplomatic gaffe

Diplomatic gaffe

The Indonesian government's decision to withdraw the
nomination of Lt. General (Ret.) Mantiri as Indonesia's next
Ambassador to Australia is a wise and right one, though a little
too late. The brouhaha preceding the withdrawal may have slowly
died down, but it has suddenly presented an ugly contortion on
the otherwise broad smiling face which has marked the
increasingly closer relations between the two neighboring
countries.

Under the Vienna Convention on diplomatic Relations of 1963,
the receiving government may refuse a nominated ambassador
without giving the reasons. But the rejection is normally
notified to the sending government in a strictly confidential
way. This business of nomination, from the start to the decision
of the receiving government on the nominated ambassador should be
handled or managed with utmost care.

I presume that the unnecessary hubbub surrounding the
rejection has been caused by the clumsy handling or management of
the matter somewhere along the line. We should not look for a
scapegoat, however. We all know that the selection of ambassadors
is a difficult and many times sensitive business because
candidates may be equally good but the one selected may be
unacceptable to the receiving government. Therefore, the
selection of nominees should be made with utmost care,
particularly when it concerns persons with antecedents of
supposedly politically sensitive nature.

Australian newspapers may have benefited from the "diplomatic
incident". Certain elements, for whatever reasons, may wish the
bilateral relations to sour, and the so-called anti-integration
groups chuckle with pleasure. Hopefully, the incident won't
damage the growing and increasingly closer relations of the two
countries. Australia is so far the largest foreign investor in
Indonesia, its value amounting to US$3.4 billion. The Timor Gap
Agreement of 1991, should be an auspicious symbol not only of
mutually beneficial partnership, but also of mutual trust. It
certainly should attest to the sincere desire of both sides to
build a strong and more sustained foundation for rich and lasting
cooperation based on mutual respect.

Clumsily or not, to suggest publicly that a person nominated
for ambassadorship apologize for words he uttered as the
condition for accepting to his nomination is indeed very
undiplomatic, and very regrettable. The words uttered concerned
an incident, though regrettable, in a town of a province which
Australia recognizes as part of Indonesia.

The demand for apology could be construed as interference in a
the domestic affairs of Indonesia. This affair put in question,
if not in doubt, the consistency and sincerity of the policy of
Australia as regards East Timor.

It is always good to remember that the untimely and premature
"leakage" of the names of persons nominated for ambassadorship
should be avoided. Non-sensical, far-fetched? I do not think so.
The seemingly innocent "leakage" can sometimes spell disaster.

SOEGIO

Jakarta