Greater self-confidence and the need for cogent foreign policy approach: Outlook for 2006

Bantarto Bandoro Jakarta

A free and active (proactive) foreign policy has characterized Indonesia since its independence. This basic policy has shown a remarkable degree of resilience and adaptability. It will remain so in the future.

When Susilo came into power one year ago, he not only reiterated the importance of that basic policy for our foreign relations, but also inherited internal as well as external conditions in which our foreign policy needs to be adjusted.

The foreign policy challenges that Indonesia, under Susilo, face are quite immense, particularly as we try to improve our image abroad and experience enormous transformations in the global system .

Susilo, who appeared to take a direct role in foreign policy execution, seems to have been able to grasp the essence of our foreign relations, particularly when the country was facing external and internal pressures to move faster in its democratization process, economic recovery and fight against terrorism.

We are confronted with three options: to be part of, follow or lead the change. We surely cannot only be a follower, nor stand idly by, in the changed world. The country should be able to lead on certain issues in international relations.

Because we want to be part of the changes, in a way that benefits the country, and lead on certain issues, at least regionally, Susilo convinced the public of the importance of international links for the solution of our domestic problems and the promotion of the country's national interests.

It was an Indonesian idea that participation in the East Asian Summit should be enlarged to include India, Australia and New Zealand. A series of strategic regional policies has also been tabled by Indonesia, some of which have been realized through concrete action plans, such as the ASEAN Security Community.

The success of our democratic process has, at least for now, been quite instrumental in moving toward a more satisfactory foreign policy agenda, namely greater confidence in being a prominent, if not key player, at a regional and global level. This confidence will shape the content and direction of our foreign policy.

On a bilateral level, we saw the government give first, if not highest priority, to developing friendly and mutually beneficial relations with all our neighbors.

At the same time, Indonesia is also stepping up significantly its engagement with major powers. Indonesia's relationship with the U.S., for example, is changing in response to the dynamics operating in the two countries, as well as regionally and globally, particularly the fight against global terrorism.

In just one year, our relationship with the U.S. has developed significantly at many levels.

The lifting of the arms embargo by the U.S. government was seen as a clear path toward the normalization of bilateral relations between the two countries, particularly in the realm of the military.

One should and will not see our relation with the U.S. in the context of any other country or regional equation or even alliance system, nor is the relationship going to be at the expense of any other relationship valued by this country. Meaning that the maintenance of Indonesia's relations with Japan, China, Russia and other major countries in Europe is as important as our relations with the U.S.

So, how then should we frame a progressive foreign policy for 2006 and where should we start? Given the perceived gains -- politically as well as economically and strategically -- the country received from the changed environment, it is not wrong to assume that the profile mentioned above has, to a certain degree, contributed to the success of our foreign policy. Such success may have began with our top leaders' comprehensive understanding of the particular challenges of the day.

The year 2006, and perhaps beyond, will see even more severe challenges faced by our foreign policy as our immediate region in particular moves into an integrated region, exemplified by the East Asian Community and ASEAN Community.

Free trade areas formed by ASEAN-China, ASEAN-Japan and ASEAN- India will soon be in place. Moreover, terrorism is a real threat and a present danger that we must confront and defeat. Thus, our foreign policy will succeed or fail according to how well the country copes with this era's diverse security and economic challenges.

Given the major policy initiatives Indonesia has taken recently toward its immediate region, Asia, it is not wrong to suggest that the sub-region, Southeast and Northeast Asia in particular, has been and will continue to be the central focus of, and arena for, our international diplomacy. The consequences for Indonesia in the years ahead are to design some sort of Asian strategy, one that offers programs and strategic direction as to how our foreign policy should deal with every day as well as unexpected political events that might occur in the region of Asia.

Next year we will also see more intensive diplomatic interaction and transactions among the countries in the Asian region due to their commitment to creating a kind of regional pool for peace and prosperity. As an influential member of ASEAN, Indonesia is committed to playing a part in such a process. But Indonesian foreign policy should not be "too regionalistic" in a way that ignores other major regional security-related issues that affect our foreign policy, such as the environment, terrorism, drug trafficking and people smuggling, to mention a few.

Thus, what we need perhaps is a considered and reasoned approach -- an approach that might evolve into a kind of a doctrine -- to help our diplomats navigate the country's foreign policy in a much more challenging and globalized world. The question is what do we need a doctrine for?

A doctrine not only gives overall direction to our foreign policy, but it also helps establish basic foreign policy priorities, particularly when we are in need of long-term certainty and stability in our economic development and in maintaining our international role. Susilo is quite visionary in this matter, suggesting that the country should play an active and catalytic role if Indonesia is to maintain its independence and diplomatic gains.

A doctrine, if it is ever to be of any value, could help shape and direct the allocation of resources. It would also signal to our neighboring countries, to our legislative members and public at home, where our policies are heading, what they will entail, and what can be expected in the future regarding Indonesia's international role. A doctrine thus offers strategic clarity.

With its new profile and intention to be in the lead of certain international issues, it is especially important for Indonesia to have a cogent foreign policy approach. Indonesia also needs constant adjustment to reflect the realities of today and tomorrow's challenges.

A clear-sighted view of the country's national interests is therefore needed if Indonesia is to successfully navigate new regional security and economic issues, while also addressing its relations with other parts of the globe. The regional and global complexities of the 21st century demand strategic, over-the- horizon Indonesian thinking. This will, of course, require creative and bold diplomacy.

The writer is the director of scientific infrastructure and publications, and the chief editor of The Indonesian Quarterly, at the Centre for Strategic and International Studies, Jakarta. He is also a lecturer in the International Relations Graduate Program at the School of Social and Political Sciences, the University of Indonesia. He can be reached at bandoro@csis.or.id.