Downturn in Indonesia-U.S. relations?

The following is the second of two articles based on a presentation given at a discussion on ties between Indonesia and the U.S., by Prof. Dr. Hasjim Djalal, M.A.. He has been Ambassador-at-Large for the Law of the Sea/Maritime Affairs since 1994 and teaches international law and relations at Padjadjaran University, Bandung. The discussion was organized by the Golkar party on Nov. 1 in Jakarta.

JAKARTA: It should be Indonesia's policy to seek cooperation with the United States so as to ensure peace, stability and cooperation in Southeast Asia. It should be a major component of Indonesian diplomacy in Washington and Canberra to cultivate a feeling that the stability, progress and unity of Indonesia is in the best interests of the U.S. and Australia.

Now, let us also look at the nature of relations between Indonesia and the U.S. in other areas. Ideologically, there should not be many problems. Even during the height of the Cold War relations between Indonesia and the U.S. were not bad despite some difficulties during president Sukarno's time.

Cooperation in the areas of trade, the economy, culture, technology, education and even military training went smoothly. Ironically, since the move towards democracy in Indonesia, relations seem to have become more contentious.

This is unfortunate, especially given the high level of respect for President Abdurrahman Wahid in the U.S., perhaps even more so than in Indonesia. Basically, both countries are pursuing democracy, although the technical nature and mechanisms of the democratic processes in both countries are different given their respective cultural backgrounds.

In addition, the peoples of the U.S. have come from across the world and tens of thousands of immigrants are still coming each year. What is most significant is that the U.S. is basically a continental country while Indonesia is an archipelagic country.

As a nation state, however, the U.S. is much older than Indonesia and therefore has had much more experience. As the U.S. achieved stability and cohesion long before us, it is incumbent upon the U.S. to be more understanding of Indonesian problems than the other way around.

It should be more tolerant of Indonesian criticisms of its policies. Yet what is happening now is that Indonesians seem to be more tolerant towards the U.S., whether regarding its policies towards its minorities or its position as a global power.

Meanwhile, the U.S., no matter how well intentioned, seems to show less tolerance towards Indonesia, whether regarding the process of moving towards democracy, its progress in achieving better protection for human rights and the environment, and in bringing about good governance, its efforts to overcome the economic and social crisis or its attempts to achieve a better balance in the civil-military relationship.

While the U.S. is dependent upon the goodwill and cooperation of Indonesia in maritime geostrategic terms, Indonesia is basically dependent upon the U.S. for aid, trade, technical assistance, tourism and markets.

This situation should actually lead to mutual understanding, respect and cooperation. The U.S. plays very significant roles in the United Nations, the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank, and in various other global and regional organizations.

Dispensing with the U.S. in these organizations would be more detrimental to Indonesia than to the U.S.

For years Indonesia has been garnering support and cooperation from various other international organizations and groups such as in the Non-Aligned Movement, the Organization of the Islamic Conference and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations.

However, cooperation with the U.S. cannot be ignored, mainly because of the close relations between the U.S. and the member countries of the above organizations.

Indonesia also needs the U.S. more in the fields of science and technology -- the gap between the two in these fields is widening by the day. In fact, Indonesia should have learned by now that many of its problems lately has been, to some extent, due to its inability to comprehend the impact of globalization on ideas, science and technology.

Relations between the two countries should therefore be complementary and friendly. There has been some misunderstanding and animosity but the two sides must grow to appreciate the importance of their relationship. What appears to be the problem at the moment is that they have different ways of expressing this appreciation.

The U.S. is perhaps too overbearing and unmindful of Indonesia's problems while the latter is maybe too sensitive, both because of its simultaneous fear of and overdependence on the U.S.

Indonesia has been unable to avail of its significant maritime geostrategic position in its relations with the U.S., while the latter has never been reluctant to display its economic, military, political and technological might.

For the purpose of fostering better relations, some suggestions might be useful here:

1. The two countries should begin to examine their relations in earnest. If there is not one already, an independent Institute of Indonesian-U.S. Relations should be established in both countries with the support of their respective governments, to enable a continuous intellectual and realistic assessment of their ties, with recommendations being made whenever necessary.

2. More and better dialogs should be held between the Indonesian House of Representatives and the U.S. Congress -- which is understood to play a significant role in U.S. foreign policy. It is also generally felt that quite a substantial number of Senators and Congressmen are not well-versed in Indonesian political, economic and strategic requirements, and vice versa.

The Indonesian House of Representatives should also establish, if it has not already done so, a committee or a study group to handle our relations with the U.S. in an intellectual, realistic, ongoing and reasonable manner.