Government's ignorance of regional haze problem

The former administration became miffed when neighboring countries complained about the haze caused by fires in Indonesia, and the current administration is no better, writes regional analyst Rizal Sukma, director of studies at the Centre for Strategic International Studies in Jakarta.

JAKARTA (JP): Indonesia is really unfortunate. While the republic's international image has been seriously undermined by stalled democratization, an endless power struggle and protracted ethnic and religious conflicts, that image is now being further damaged by the return of the haze.

Coverage of the issue in the Indonesian media gives the impression that the problem is Indonesia's alone. Yet as the smoke from forest fires in Kalimantan and Sumatra spreads and envelopes Malaysia, Singapore and southern Thailand, one cannot fail to notice that the problem is far from an internal matter.

Repeated occurrences of haze in Indonesia pose a serious security problem to the region, albeit in the nontraditional sense. During similar incidents in 1997 and 1998, it was estimated that the region, especially the affected countries, suffered economic losses of about US$9.3 billion.

Simon Tay, an expert from Singapore, put the number as high as $20 billion. He recently wrote in The Strait Times daily that the haze in 1997 and 1998 affected between 20 million and 70 million people and caused considerable health problems, particularly respiratory related diseases.

The relevance and severity of this type of threat to regional security -- especially in terms of its harm to people's well- being, or human security -- is clearly evident when one considers the fact that the problem of haze is not new to the region.

Indeed, it is not new at all to the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN). There have been several efforts by ASEAN to address this issue. The association acknowledged the need to cooperate on the issue of transboundary pollution as early as 1990, when it adopted the Kuala Lumpur Accord on Environment and Development on June 19 of that year.

The 4th ASEAN Summit in January 1992 also urged member countries to continue to enhance environmental cooperation, particularly on the issue of transboundary pollution and forest fires.

In October 1994, during an informal ASEAN Ministerial Meeting on the Environment, member countries also agreed to improve this cooperation, develop an early warning and response system and to improve the capacity of member countries to deal with the problem. In June 1995, ASEAN agreed to adopt its Cooperation Plan on Transboundary Pollution, which outlined concrete measures and activities to be taken by individual countries. In December 1997, there was even a special ministerial meeting which produced the regional Haze Action Plan.

Yet forest fires and the havoc they create continue to haunt the region. All the agreements reached have proven ineffective in preventing the problem. And here in Indonesia, there is a serious problem in recognizing the magnitude of the haze issue as a regional security problem.

The government of former president B.J. Habibie was clearly annoyed when its neighbors raised the issue. Responding to complaints about the haze by Singapore, a minister close to Habibie said: "Singapore has also been enjoying the emission of oxygen from Indonesian forests."

Under President Abdurrahman Wahid, the problem is no less serious. State Minister of Forestry Marzuki Usman simply stated that "we don't have a clear blueprint of how to cope with the problem. We will start to prepare it".

For our neighbors, such an honest statement might raise serious questions regarding our commitment to combating the problem, especially when the return of the haze was predicted in a meeting of ASEAN environmental ministers in Phnom Penh in May this year.

It is indeed difficult to disagree with Tay, who wrote in the above daily: "The laws and administration at the center of the country, Indonesia, are unable to effectively address the issue."

However, this unfortunate situation cannot be separated from Indonesia's larger problem of the reduced capacity of the state, both in economic and political terms.

As Indonesia continues to be preoccupied with serious domestic problems, it is likely that this sort of nonconventional security problem will continue to be a source of trouble for regional security. Political problems are clearly pushing concerns over environmental issues even lower down the national agenda. The marginalization of such issues clearly poses a security problem for our neighbors, especially Malaysia and Singapore.

One cannot but continue to warn the government that serious attention must be paid to growing environmental problems such as the fires. There is also the need for concerted action among ASEAN member states to tell the Indonesian government (again) that the problems are not Indonesia's alone.

However, criticizing and calling on Indonesia to simply fight the problem will not result in a positive response. Serious attention by other ASEAN states should also be given in concrete forms of assistance. And Indonesia should not see its neighbors' complaints as a form of interference. It should see them as the legitimate concerns of friends who not only also suffer from the problem, but also expect greater "sympathy" in the form of concrete action.

If Jakarta does not respond adequately to such concerns, Indonesia's image will only worsen.