Institution of APEC inevitable, Alatas says

Institution of APEC inevitable, Alatas says

JAKARTA (JP): Amidst growing concern over the formalization of
the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) forum, Minister of
Foreign Affairs Ali Alatas yesterday admitted that APEC's
institutionalization was inevitable.

"APEC, like it or not, has already undergone
institutionalization in small stages," Alatas said here
yesterday.

Alatas acknowledged that it was not really the
institutionalization of APEC that Indonesia and other countries
opposed but the pace of the process.

"It is unavoidable but what we don't want is for the
institutionalization to happen too rapidly," he said.

APEC groups Australia, Canada, China, Hong Kong, Japan, South
Korea, Mexico, New Zealand, Papua New Guinea, Taiwan and the
United States along with members of the Association of South East
Asian Nations (ASEAN) -- Thailand, Malaysia, Singapore, Brunei,
the Philippines and Indonesia.

From the forum's conception in 1989, the ASEAN countries have
reacted cautiously fearing that it might dilute the Association.

Such was the nascent anxiety towards APEC. A year later, in
their meeting in Kuching, Malaysia, the ASEAN members declared
that the forum must remain a loose consultative forum.

Among the most vocal critics is Malaysia, who displayed its
aversion to the institutionalization of the forum when Prime
Minister Mahathir Mohamad abstained from attending the inaugural
APEC economic leaders meeting on Blake Island, Seattle, last
year.

Acceptance

According to Alatas there is general acceptance that some
degree of institutionalization will occur, pointing to the
establishment of an APEC secretariat in Singapore as an example.

"When we formed the secretariat everyone agreed, including
Malaysia," he remarked.

Alatas continued his examples by noting the various committees
formed by the APEC Senior Officials Meeting as an indelible proof
of the gradual process. He further cited the formation of the
Committee for Trade and Investment as an example.

He also stressed that it was the rapidity of the whole process
which not only Malaysia opposed, but also Indonesia.

"Malaysia is not alone, none of us want it (too quickly)," he
said.

Nevertheless it should be noted that it took tremendous
persuasion during two Senior Officials Meetings before Malaysia
would accept the transformation of the ad-hoc group on economic
trends and issues into a new committee.

Concurring with Alatas, Dewi Fortuna Anwar, head of the
regional and international affairs division at the Indonesian
Institute of Sciences (LIPI), said yesterday that to function
optimally every organization requires some form of
institutionalization.

"The question is how strict it will be," Dewi said.

Proposal

The issue of institutionalization has intensified lately in
response to Indonesia's reported 11-point proposal to adopt a
deadline for trade liberalization during the second economic
leaders meeting at Bogor Presidential Palace on Nov. 15.

On Tuesday Malaysian International Trade and Industry
Minister, Rafidah Aziz, reportedly called the deadline
"presumptuous" and that she would not support moves to
institutionalize trade liberalization within APEC.

Indonesia has forwarded an 11-point proposal calling for
trade liberalization to begin next year, with a deadline of no
later than 2020.

"It is very surprising," Dewi Fortuna Anwar replied when asked
by The Jakarta Post to comment on Indonesia's proposal.

In Dewi's opinion such an aggressive stance signified
confidence but at the same time raised questions over Indonesia's
domestic readiness to cope with such an ambitious idea.

She explained her concern as resulting from the fact that
Indonesia itself may find it difficult to open up its guarded
market.

"Domestically we don't have any free trade," she said adding
that the proposal itself might very well be designed to address
the inefficient monopoly of Indonesia's economy.

"So by engaging in international cooperation (such as APEC) we
are actually aiming for a restructuring of our domestic market,"
she said.

The eminent political scientist also felt that should a
proposal for trade liberalization be adopted, the decision would
be non-binding in nature.

"I'm very sure that there won't be a decision to form a
mechanism where countries are forced to open their markets," Dewi
maintained. (mds)

Milestone -- Page 4

Free trade -- Page 8