Image building, human rights in an emerging democracy

Image building, human rights in an emerging democracy

Benny YP Siahaan, Jakarta

The common question addressed to a state undergoing a
democratic transition is how long the transition is to continue
and last. The answer to this of course is not simple.

Indonesia has undergone a dramatic change after the fall of
the Soeharto regime in 1998. However, some of us, especially
human rights activists, are impatient to see the transition
completed, since, perhaps we think it can be done overnight.

Therefore it is assumed that for those activists talking and
blaming are cheap. The recent case of a human rights activist and
a member the General Elections Commission (KPU) who was allegedly
involved in a corruption case, if proven to be true, would
corroborate that assumption.

Nevertheless, amid the positive progress, it must be admitted
that there have been some fouls also especially with regard to
human rights. However, it must be remembered that in human rights
matters no countries in the world are perfect. According to David
Forsythe (2000), a noted human rights scholar, even countries
that currently are seen as human rights champions have no
relative and historical background given historical facts such as
slavery and racial segregation, racist immigration laws, anti-
Semitism etc.

However, in the past decades those countries have been more
advanced and skillful in manipulating international human rights
politics and thus transforming their image from human rights
violators into human rights champions

But some activists are just blindfolded by this situation or
are afraid of criticizing them as this may affect their financial
resources.

For Indonesia, human rights is not an alien concept especially
in the earlier stage of the Republic. However, human rights
issues became a sensitive issue for Indonesia, especially under
the Soeharto administration (1966-1998). In this period the
diplomacy of Indonesia in human rights terms may be characterized
as defensive.

Indeed, the rise of human rights politics in the past two
decades poses a puzzle both to leaders and scholars of
international relations. Indonesia so far has joined several
international human rights conventions either as a party or a
signatory.

Although these efforts are perceived by some as an initial
genuine effort to protect and promote human rights at the
national level, many have also called the efforts hollow.
However, this is not a strange thing since in human rights
politics pointing the finger, blaming and shaming has become a
ritual.

Reports are usually full of blaming and shaming of other
countries. So far, China is one of the few countries which has
dared to challenge this practice by annually publishing a book on
the human rights situation in a particular country.

Despite the blame-game, Indonesia should address the issues
that have so far become an easy target for human rights
violations accusations. In this regard separatism in Aceh and
Papua has been quite a conundrum for Indonesia. However, with the
lessons taken from more than two decades of a heavy-handed policy
to address separatism in Aceh and Papua and the loss of East
Timor, the government has learned the benefits and liabilities of
oppressing the Papuans and Acehnese.

On the accusation that the government is hostile to foreign
and domestic NGOs critical of Indonesia's human rights record, if
we want to criticize, but we convey it in a proper and
constructive way, I believe the people or authorities we
criticize will listen soon or later. However, if we do it in a
hostile way, the result will usually be counter-productive. Sadly
those international human rights NGOs like Tapol, Amnesty
International or Human Rights Watch prefer to choose the latter
approach.

With regards to Aceh, apart from the government's efforts to
discourage the separatist sentiment among the Acehnese, for the
time being Indonesia could take a rest for a while. None of the
major powers would give consent to the independence of Aceh.

However, the government would be misguided if it is of the
opinion that most foreign countries, especially the U.S. and
other Western countries, are generally opposed to separatism.
East Timor's breakaway from Indonesia is the best example of how
fluid the position of countries toward separatism is.

Coming back to promotion and protection of human rights issues
nationally, the hardest task is to bring awareness to the
officials who in performing their job have high chances of
abusing human rights, such as the police and the military. After
more than 30 years of being the security machine of an
authoritarian regime, it will take time to change their mind set
to appreciate human rights. Thus, it is our job to educate them
not only the government.

Image building is important for Indonesia at present. Indeed,
as Peter van Ham rightly pointed out in his famous article in
Foreign Affairs magazine (2001) that the notion of "brand state"
or image and reputation of a country is very important in
determining the future of a country. In this regard, Indonesia is
going in the right direction, if all components of society, both
government and civil society support it.

The writer is an Indonesian diplomat and an alumnus of Tsukuba
University in Japan. The views reflected in this article are his
own.