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.