Indonesia little known in Australia

Indonesia little known in Australia

By Rob Goodfellow

WOLLONGONG, New South Wales, Australia (JP): Given the
importance placed on the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation summit
by Australian Prime Minister Paul Keating it is surprising that
most Australians still appear to know little or nothing about our
closest Asian neighbor, Indonesia.

A survey by this author, the first of this kind as far as I
know, looks at some misconceptions held by Australians about
Indonesia and suggests that there is some hope for optimism in
the attitudes of the slightly more "Asia aware" younger
generation.

The survey asked one hundred Australian men and women four
basic questions: 1. What is the first thing that comes into your
mind when I say the word Indonesia? 2. Who is the President of
Indonesia. 3.What is Indonesia's capital? 4. Do you think that
Indonesia poses a potential military threat to Australia?

It was conducted recently in this multicultural city of
300,000 people, about 50 kilometers to the south of Sydney.

The first fifty interviews were obtained at random from a
group whose minimum age was fifty years. The remaining data was
collected by asking the same questions of university students
younger than thirty years of age. A comparison between these
groups represents what might be considered either traditional or
contemporary Australian attitudes towards Indonesia.

Question one attracted an extraordinary variety of responses
from the older generation. Twenty people answered "people", ten
said "foreign". Of the remainder the following responses were
identified: "houses on stilts", "Indonesians", "Asians", "World
War II", "political conflict", "war", "poverty" and "poor
people", "jungle", "boat people", "food", "another country",
"colored", "black people" and "blacks". One person said that he
didn't want to answer because "the less they (the Indonesians)
know about us (the Australians) the better". One person simply
blurted our "war! war! war" and then refused to answer any more
questions. One man exclaimed, bagus! ("good" in Indonesian). The
man said that he had been a soldier fighting the Japanese in
Kalimantan during World War II. He told me that the Australian
Army High Command had issued the infantry with language
instruction books which he had "studied for hours" in his fox
hole while waiting for combat. When I asked him whether he
thought learning Indonesian was a good thing he answered, "better
than getting your bloody head shot off".

The answers to questions two and three were significant
because they demonstrated an appalling lack of general knowledge
about Indonesia. Only five respondents where able to tell me who
the President was. Only four were able to answer correctly that
the capital of Indonesia was Jakarta. Of the remainder a great
range of unusual answers were identified. The President was
believed to be either "Tito" or "President cicada" (a flying
insect). Ten respondents answered that the President was
"Sukarno". One man asked "wasn't he killed, wasn't he speared or
something?" One person answered "Suhatri" and one "Sumatra" which
were good guesses.

Question three attracted a number of interesting wrong answers.
To the question what is the capital of Indonesia, ten respondents
answered "Batavia", one said "Pakistan", two said "Bali".

The fourth question, which asked whether the respondent
believed that Indonesia posed a potential military threat,
produced the most interesting answers. In this group forty six
out of fifty respondents believed that Indonesia would at some
time in the future be at war with Australia.

The reasons given why not included: Indonesia is a poor
country and that Indonesians were a "peaceful people". Only one
respondent claimed not to have an opinion, and one respondent
answered, "I hope not".

Of the other forty six, thirty answered negatively that
Indonesia was "over populated" and was "looking at Australia as a
future colony". The remainder answered as follows: That Indonesia
had a "powerful and expansionist military", that it was a "war-
like country", that "Indonesia had more soldiers" (than
Australia), that the Indonesian people "get carried away", that
Indonesia could "take the lot in ten minutes if they wanted to",
that "you can't trust darkies, colored people or blacks", that
"we fought the Japs and next we will have to fight the Indos",
that "they (the Indonesians) will be pushed into it", that "they
are looking for open country" that they are "getting closer" or
"coming down", that "Australia has a weak defense force", for
"natural reasons", that the Indonesians were "sneaky", that "you
couldn't trust them", that there are "too many of them", because
of "communism", because they are "easily manipulated", because
Indonesia has "nuclear", "better" or "more weapons", and finally
because "they breed too quick" or "like rabbits".

This clearly demonstrates what can be identified as a
traditional Australian view of Indonesia. This is characterized
by an appalling lack of general knowledge about our closest Asian
neighbor. It also illustrated a clear perception of Indonesia as
dangerous, desperately over-populated and foreign. It also
confirmed the widely held belief that Indonesia is a potential
military threat, with forty six out of fifty respondents
indicating that Australia and Indonesia would at some time in the
future be at war with each other.

The remaining data was collected by asking the same questions
of university students younger that thirty years. The answers
from this group be seen as more contemporary, although not as
different as the Australian architects of economic integration
with Southeast Asia would obviously like to see.

Like the first target group, question one, which sought a
response to the question: what is the first thing that comes into
your mind when I say the word "Indonesia", attracted an
extraordinary variety of responses. These included: "invasion",
"trouble", "batik", "South Pacific", "food", "Irian Jaya",
"Nias", "country above us/another country", "tropical",
"islands", "blue water", "war", "Moslems", "Jakarta",
"overpopulated", "undemocratic", "culture", "poverty", "palms",
"surf", "Elle (the Body Mcpherson) calendar", "East Timor or
Timor", "north of Australia" and "travel". "Chinese", "Chinese
people", "spicy food", "overseas students", "overseas", "black
people" and "temples" were mentioned twice each. The words
"people" and "Asia" were mentioned three times each, while not
surprisingly "Bali" was given as the first impression of seven
respondents.

The second question which sought an answer to the question:
Who is the President of Indonesia attracted only five correct
responses from university educated young men and women. A number
of imaginative wrong responses were also identified. These
included: "Sumato", "Suwono", "Marcos", "Sukarno" and "Chairman
Mao".

To the question: What is the capital of Indonesia, again only
five (although not exactly the same five who answered the
previously question correctly) could give the correct response.
Erroneous replies included: "Phuket", "Sumatra", "Rangoon",
"Taiwan", "Malaysia", "Beijing", "Calcutta", and "Yogyakarta".
"Java" and "Kuala Lumpur" were given as responses on two
occasions each.

Again the final question asked: Does Indonesia pose a
potential military threat? Of the fifty respondents thirty two
answered "no" and sixteen answered "yes". Two claimed to have no
opinion.

Of those students who answered "yes", the following
explanations were given: "It is only a matter of time",
"Indonesia has a 'huge', 'large' or 'enormous population'",
"overpopulation" and "population pressure", "its their
competitive nature", "militant Islam", "inadequate Australian
defense capabilities", "lots of turbulence", "East Timor
demonstrates Indonesia's aggressive tendencies", "the Army
Reserve told me so", "they are too close", "its a question of
numbers", "they have a potential to create problems" and finally,
"I read it in the Year of Living Dangerously". This data also
demonstrated a disturbing lack of basic general knowledge about
Australia's geographically closest northern neighbor, a
particular concern given that these same university students will
one day produce many of our future business and political
leaders.

Forty one respondents, or eighty two percent of university
students sampled, could not tell me who is Indonesia's head of
state (not to mention Southeast Asian's longest serving political
leader, Present Soeharto). Further, thirty eight respondents, or
seventy two percent of the sample, were not able to tell me what
is the capital of Indonesia.

Concerning the final question, which asked whether the
respondent believed that Indonesia posed a present or potential
military threat, a significantly high proportion, that is thirty two
respondents or sixty four percent of the second sample, as opposed
to twelve percent in group one, believed that Indonesia posed no
military threat whatsoever.

The most striking similarity between the attitudes shown in
both the older generation and the university students was that
both groups exhibited a lack of basic knowledge about Indonesia.
The most significant difference was that the first sample
overwhelmingly (ninety four percent) believed that Indonesia and
Australia would one day be at war with each in contrast to thirty
two percent in the university student sample. Clearly, although
the younger generation share their elders lack of basic general
knowledge on Indonesia, they have deviated by their more
sympathetic view of Indonesia as a peaceful neighbor.

Stereotypical views, like those exposed in these interviews
prejudice Australia's ability to communicate honestly and
constructively with our Asian neighbors, in particular Indonesia.
Perhaps this situation has up until the present inhibited the
development of more durable bilateral relations between our two
nations.

Clearly these incorrect and often insulting generalizations
constitute a major barrier to Australians understanding the
character of contemporary Indonesian society. Commonly held
beliefs that Indonesians are "sneaky", "that you couldn't trust
them", that there are "too many of them", "because they are
easily manipulated", "because Indonesia has 'nuclear, better or
more weapons'", because "they breed too quick" or "like rabbits"
are not consistent with Prime Minister Keating's APEC vision.

Rob Goodfellow is a PhD student at the University of
Wollongong New South Wales, Australia and Secretary of the
Wollongong Branch of the Australian Labor Party.

Window A: Incorrect and often insulting generalizations constitute
a major barrier to Australians understanding the character of
contemporary Indonesian society.