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.