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