Indonesian foreign policy is in total disarray

Indonesian foreign policy is in total disarray

It is hard to find a pattern in foreign policy nowadays,
writes political analyst J. Soedjati Djiwandono.

JAKARTA (JP): Shortly after his election, President
Abdurrahman Wahid went on his first foreign tour to visit
primarily the majority of Southeast Asian capitals.

Soon, however, the President pondered the possibility of
forging an Asian triangular alliance with India and China. But
such a triangular alliance would only invite problems from the
start because of the delicate relations between India and
Pakistan, and between India and China.

Then for a time there were signs that he was inclined toward
orientation to the Middle East. What used to be designated as the
"cornerstone" of Indonesia's foreign policy seems to have been
abandoned. In fact, preoccupation with the prolonged
multidimensional crisis in the country, foreign policy seems to
have been put on the back burner.

Indeed, it is unfashionable and perhaps controversial nowadays
to talk about Soeharto's rule in a favorable light. However, if
there was any success in Soeharto's policy, it was in the field
of foreign policy, particularly with respect to Southeast Asia.

Soeharto was the man who brought an end to Sukarno's
adventurous confrontation policy against Malaysia. This finally
led to the establishment of the Association of Southeast Asian
Nations (ASEAN).

With or without Soeharto, Indonesia's strategic interest is
immediately linked to that of its neighbors, not only in the
region of ASEAN proper, but also Australia and Papua New Guinea.

Indonesia has been treated more or less first among equals
within ASEAN. Lee Kuan Yew of Singapore said publicly on
occasions that the regional stability of Southeast Asia was
primarily due to the leadership of president Soeharto. This
explained the concern among ASEAN leaders, notably Lee Kuan Yew
himself, over the issue of leadership succession years before
president Soeharto's resignation.

Yet, the visit by Lee Kuan Yew to Malaysia earlier this year,
the first in a decade, seems to have been of significance loss to
Indonesian leaders. Singapore will continue to depend on
Malaysia, perhaps now more than ever, particularly for a clean
water supply.

Did Lee Kuan Yew's visit signify that Indonesia was no longer
seen as the pivot of regional security in Southeast Asia, and no
longer first among equals?

Indeed, whoever happens to be president, Indonesia will be a
key to regional stability. The region will not really care much
about how democratic or undemocratic the leader in power might be
at any given moment, as long as the country is not perceived as a
source of threat to regional security.

President Sukarno probably managed to create the image of
national unity in Indonesia and the impression that he was in
full control of the country. But his personal and expansionist
ambition as perceived by the region created fear of Indonesia
being a serious source of threat to regional peace.

Now the whole world sees President Abdurrahman as the most
democratically elected leader in Indonesia since independence, at
least by Indonesian standards with a fundamentally defective
constitution. In times of trouble like now, when Indonesia may
become a source of threat to the security of its neighbors
because of possible spillovers of its domestic problems, it
should turn above all to its neighbors and strengthen its
relations and cooperation with them.

Yet the present government does not seem to care much about
the security concerns of our neighbors.

There seems to be no direction in Indonesia's foreign policy
under the current government, particularly with a foreign
minister of seemingly questionable competence.

And with the President's growling at Singapore and its
leaders, particularly Lee Kuan Yew and Goh Chok Tong, the
President simply blew it all. That he did it while still in
Singapore, though within the Indonesian Embassy compound,
indicates his lack of discretion and statesmanship as president
of a big nation.

Goh Chok Tong's suggestion on the use of English as the
official language for ASEAN is most sensible in the present
system of globalization. But Abdurrahman, or Gus Dur, saw the
proposal as a disregard of Indonesia. His alternative offer of
Arabic stretches one's imagination too far.

His impulsive remark on what he regarded as Singapore's
contemptuous attitude toward the Malays is virtually racist and
clearly unfounded. Goh Chok Tong, the President argued, made
mention of Brunei, Malaysia and Thailand, but not Indonesia. But
the President ignored the fact that Brunei and Malaysia are
Malay.

His accusation of Singapore's manipulation of its neighbors
was just an indication of envy, jealousy and an inferiority
complex. And his threat of joining Malaysia in controlling the
flow of clean water to Singapore was a joke, when even in Jakarta
the government is incapable of providing clean drinking water for
its own population.

Moreover, Singapore's apparent attention to relations with
Japan, China and South Korea, which irritated the President, was
only appropriate since the summit was one of ASEAN+3, i.e. those
three East Asian countries.

Did not the President know what he was doing in Singapore?

His suggestion of including East Timor (and Papua New Guinea)
in ASEAN did not seem to have been well-considered, and ignores
Indonesia's own bungling in the territory, whereas together with
Portugal, Australia and the United Nations, it should assist in
preparing the East Timorese for viable statehood.

His criticism of Singapore's defense arrangement with
Australia and New Zealand without consulting Indonesia only
indicated his disregard for its historical background.

The President may well continue to be his own foreign
minister, especially now that day-to-day running of government
has been entrusted to the Vice President. However, his foreign
policy does not indicate a pattern, and the foreign minister
looks more like his personal escort. Foreign policy is simply in
disarray.

During his foreign visits the President has focused his
diplomacy on inviting foreign investment by assuring his hosts,
echoed by many Indonesian political and business leaders, that
despite the crisis Indonesia remains promising for investment.

It remains safe also for foreign tourists. In this age of
modern information and communication technology, however, it is
not that easy to convince foreigners of a picture of Alice in
Wonderland out of crisis-stricken Indonesia, where even many of
its own citizens continue to live in uncertainty and fear.

In the face of the threat of national disintegration, he has
also appealed to his hosts for their continued respect for
Indonesia's integrity as a unitary state, refraining from
supporting separatist movements simmering in some provinces.

This has led to a new style of Indonesia's foreign policy
characterized by nationalistic jingoism aimed at rejecting
"foreign interference" in Indonesia's domestic affairs, a
defensive mechanism and a sign of a lack of self-confidence.

Indeed, respect for territorial integrity is an accepted
principle of normal relations among nations. But it does not
concern the issue of whether a nation is a unitary or federal
state, or even whether it should split into smaller states, as
long as peace and stability continue to prevail with no violence
resulting in gross violations of human rights.

These would be the kind of "domestic affairs" that are today
the concern of humankind, and thus the international community,
which may well lead to "humanitarian intervention".

The paradigm of world politics is changing. In the old days of
the Cold War, security was understood primarily in terms of
states. Intervention was thus understood primarily in military
terms. Now security is increasingly understood in human terms
(human security).

Indonesia must enhance its credibility and respectability by
putting its own house in order. Foreign policy begins at home.