Indonesia's bilateral relations: Down but not out
Indonesia's bilateral relations: Down but not out
Bantarto Bandoro
Are bilateral relations important for a country beset by multidimensional national problems, like Indonesia? The answer is definitely yes; they are as important as any other form of international cooperation. But why do bilateral relations matter so much for Indonesia? This question has no doubt been posed by those who would like to share their thoughts on how Indonesia has managed its bilateral relations at a time when the country is facing not only tremendous international pressure to speed up its moves against international terrorism, but also the necessity to improve its image abroad.
Issues such as stalled economic development, internal security, terrorism, human rights violations, regional violence, to mention but a few, have indeed affected Indonesia's external relations. But it is bilateral relations that have been most deliberated domestically, with people curious about the way Indonesia attempts to defend its national interests and international position given the dramatic changes in the country's internal and external environment. It has also been during such deliberation that certain sentiments have emerged, either those linked with nationalism or a certain religion. Public perception colored by such considerations has resulted in extreme, sometime radical views of Indonesia's bilateral partners. Some have at times even suggested that diplomatic relations with some countries be severed.
The emergence of the Megawati government is a positive sign that reform and democracy can flourish in the country. Though many were at the outset skeptical about the way Megawati managed national problems, the public seems to appreciate some of the policies Megawati has initiated during the first year of her administration. On the foreign policy front, it is clearly stated in the program of the Gotong Royong Cabinet. The message is that Indonesia wishes to be seen by the region and the world as a country that remains stable, secure and capable of addressing its domestic problems. It is within this context that the Indonesian foreign service is called upon to play an active role in restoring the image of the country as well as defending the country's territorial integrity.
Bilateral and multilateral mechanisms have been and will continue to be the main venue in which Indonesia is to achieve and secure its national and international interests. In extending and implementing its agenda of foreign policy, it is only natural that Indonesia will encounter problems. However, such problems can always be settled through those mechanisms. Foreign minister Hassan Wirayuda continues to stress the importance of such mechanisms, stating that one mechanism should not be geared at the expense of another.
There are many global and multilateral issues confronting the government such as terrorism, the environment, labor and human rights. These are the types of issues that have impacted upon Indonesia's bilateral relations with countries such as the United States, Australia, Singapore and Malaysia in the past year. The country's bilateral relations with those countries have experienced ups and downs over the years, and at times have almost reached breaking point. Accusations by some of these countries that Indonesia had taken no action in regard to terrorism, for example, prompted members of the legislature and ministers to decry the allegations.
The issue of terrorism could become a cementing factor in our bilateral relations, but it could also be a factor that could fracture bilateral relations. This is exactly what has happened to Indonesia's bilateral relations with Singapore, the United States and to a certain extent Australia. On this front, Indonesia has been the main target of criticism by the three countries, which argue that our country has been a safe haven for terrorists. Inconsistencies in Indonesia's reaction to foreign critics saw local public figures speak out as individuals, thus causing further harm to Indonesia's bilateral relations. Before the Sept. 11, 2001 tragedy, Indonesia's bilateral relations with these three countries were relatively stable. After the tragedy, no country in the world, including Indonesia, could deny that it was an act of terror. Indonesia then joined the world struggle against global terrorism.
Why, then, did this turmoil happen between Indonesia and the three countries? The first factor is that Indonesia appeared unconcerned about what the leaders of these countries said about Indonesia and the issue of terrorism. But Indonesia's concern was seemingly tinged with political interests and reflected the complex game of Indonesian politics and the competition between different parties.
The second factor has something to do with a wider sentiment that concerns Indonesia's perceptions of the three countries. In the case of Singapore, some Indonesians feel that Singaporeans, rather than empathizing with Indonesia in its recent years of economic difficulty, had benefited at their expense. In the case of the U.S., Indonesians saw it as applying double standards in its policies toward Indonesia and a tendency to define Indonesia's conduct in U.S. terms. Not only this, but many here consider the U.S. too self-satisfied and see its preference for unilateralism as imperialism. In the case of Australia, many here perceive the country as being arrogant and having failed to appreciate the political sensitivities of Indonesia. The turmoil is also attributed to competitiveness in their respective aspirations for regional leadership roles.
The third factor is related to the way Indonesia wished to restore its dignity and to maintain unity and integrity. It is within this context that the public here felt it was being dictated to by foreign countries that had gone beyond the limits of tolerance in their assessment of the course of our development. Fourth, for a long time, the Indonesian public did not quite view issues such as human rights, reform and democracy in the same way as did those countries, perhaps with the exception of Singapore. This discrepancy in perception indeed has served as a constraining factor in the development of our bilateral relations.
We would say then that during 2002 the issue of terrorism saw Indonesia's bilateral relations with those three countries deteriorate, going from strained to nearly shattered. Our bilateral relations were down, but not completely out. Serious observation reveals that terrorism was not the only cause. Such an issue only served to complicate matters already in existence emanating from our own domestic setting. The spat over cynical commentaries by the leaders of those countries are not an isolated affair. This is just another swing in what has become quite unstable and incident-driven relations. This should be of concern as Indonesia's bilateral relations with Australia, Singapore and the U. S. affect stability and security in the region.
After the variety of incidents of the past year, it has become evident that Indonesia's relations with some of those countries have reached a low ebb. Whether they will remain this way for some time and deteriorate further depends to a great extent on efforts by the political leaders of both sides to sustain the already recognized strategic importance of their relations for the region as a whole. This would mean that in whichever way they use to solve whatever issues they face must not be pursued at the expense of their bilateral relations.
For Indonesia in particular, the full awareness of our political leaders of the human consequences of international problems such terrorism and human rights violations is imperative if Indonesia is to be seen as an integral part of the international community in combating terrorism and respecting the principles of human rights. Because foreign criticism and pressure are inevitable, it is also a necessary for our leaders to manage such external imperatives in such a way that would not prompt a reaction from the public at large.
It has always been the wish of our government that our bilateral relations be freed from irritants. Yet in reality, clearly it is not possible for us avoid such irritants, particularly when we have already become a major target of foreign criticism. The Bali tragedy and its aftermath have made our bilateral relations with certain countries, particularly with Australia, to suffer further. Significantly, the bombings did not stir up nationalist anti-Western sentiment as the mood seemed to have swung to condemning the act of terror. It was perhaps because, in spite of the occasional irritants, security experts from Indonesia and Australia, plus from other countries, decided to collaborate to investigate the bombings.
The series of incidents during 2002 has impacted seriously on our bilateral relations, particularly with Australia, the U.S. and Singapore. Whatever the specific course and timing, the relationship between Indonesia and the three countries will inevitably survive and eventually improve. With such high confidence, it is expected that in the future our bilateral relations will further mature so that a single issue will not severely affect the entirety of those relations.
By sustaining and continuously acknowledging the strategic character of our bilateral relations, we can address more effectively specific international issues, no matter how thorny and sensitive the issues are likely to be. A more stable and cooperative bilateral relationship is much needed, but how can this be achieved? Increased dialog is an essential requirement. To make the most of the opportunities, finger-pointing should be avoided. Our bilateral relations with those three countries will certainly improve, but tension may continue as we entertain more complex international problems. The daunting challenges of the Megawati government is to meet such complex problems and secure and improve our bilateral relations on the basis of equal partnership and mutual respect.