International criticism keeps RI diplomats on their toes

International criticism keeps RI diplomats on their toes

By Meidyatama Suryodiningrat

JAKARTA (JP): The international arena was not too kind to
Indonesia in 1996. More than previous years, it was the target of
increasing criticism from abroad.

Aside from the incessant issue of East Timor, international
censure ran the gamut from human rights violations, suppression
of political freedom to indigenous rights in Irian Jaya.

As the country's first line of defense, the Ministry of
Foreign Affairs has had its hands full.

While admirable in light of the overwhelming circumstances,
its performance has often been reactionary and its responses less
than adequate to the barrage of criticisms from foreign media,
interest groups and governments.

As if an indication of things to come, January began badly for
Indonesia when only after a week into the year, separatist rebels
in Irian Jaya kidnapped several young scientists, including six
Europeans, who were conducting research.

While abductions there are common, the kidnapping of
foreigners quickly brought international attention to the
separatist demands of the kidnappers.

It seemed some foreign governments forgot that Irian Jaya has
been an integral part of the country since a 1969 plebiscite
under the supervision of the United Nations, later endorsed by UN
Resolution 2504 (XXIV).

European Parliament President Klaus Hansch sent a letter
inviting the separatist leaders to send a delegation and address
the European Parliament on human rights, cultural identity and
environmental concerns in Irian Jaya.

Indonesian Minister of Foreign Affairs Ali Alatas strongly
condemned the European response, describing it as "a blatant act
of interference in the internal affairs of Indonesia".

Things did not stop there as the Irish parliament soon after
adopted a resolution on Irian Jaya which expressed deep concern
that the 1969 "Act of Free Choice" was not a genuine expression
of self-determination.

While the crisis ended with all foreign hostages freed, the
danger of other separatist movements further tarnishing
Indonesia's image loomed ominously.

International relations expert Juwono Sudarsono warned that
methods used by separatist groups were highly effective in
gaining the international spotlight.

"I think we have to get used to it because in the era of
information globalization, any local claim can be brought before
international opinion," said Juwono, who is vice governor of the
National Resilience Institute.

Bombardment

Further reproach came as the government was condemned for its
alleged involvement in helping to oust Indonesian Democratic
Party chairperson Megawati Soekarnoputri.

Such was the bombardment of attention, that even during press
briefings at the ministerial meeting of the Association of
Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) here in July, Alatas, who really
had nothing whatsoever to do with the turmoil, was several times
faced with hard questions posed by international journalists.

There seemed to be no moment of solace, as two days after the
ASEAN meeting the infamous July 27th incident and the ensuing
riots occurred.

Jakarta was strongly criticized for its handling of the
affair.

White House Chief of Staff Leon Panetta revealed that
Washington had protested the crackdown on Megawati's supporters,
while the deputy head of mission at the Dutch Embassy in Jakarta,
Dick Den Haas, speaking as a European Union representative,
expressed concern to the government over human rights issues
relating to those detained in the riots.

Indonesia's charge d'affaires in London was also contacted by
the British foreign office over the issue.

The Indonesian foreign ministry is often left with a big
headache in having to defend these domestic issues which it
really has no control over.

International relations observer Jusuf Wanandi warned that in
this era of globalization, domestic politics has to take into
account foreign factors. "A balance must be struck in
implementing domestic politics with international interests."

A constant bombardment of criticism of Indonesia left the
foreign ministry on the defensive, and understandably little time
to pursue its own policies.

ASEAN

In areas where the foreign ministry seems to have full
control, it continues to remain rather indifferent.

Jakarta and other ASEAN members have brushed aside
international concerns on Myanmar's record on human rights and
suppression of prodemocracy movements.

Yangon is very likely to be admitted next year into the
regional grouping which currently comprises Brunei, Indonesia,
Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore, Thailand and Vietnam.

ASEAN has accepted Yangon with open arms and pursued a policy
of constructive engagement. Even though this policy has shown
marginal results, analysts have lambasted ASEAN's ability to turn
a blind eye to the political suppression.

Knowing he already had the backing of ASEAN behind him,
Myanmar foreign minister Ohn Gyaw while in Jakarta in July, when
asked, replied confidently that Yangon's definition of human
rights consisted merely of food, shelter and clothing.

When questioned on Myanmar's membership, Alatas argued that
politics and democratization has never been a prerequisite for
admission in any international organization.

International affairs expert Soedjati Djiwandono, when asked
whether Jakarta should take a harder line with Yangon, bluntly
replied: "Who are we to criticize them?"

Consistency seems to be the catchword in Indonesian foreign
policy, and Jakarta's commitment to ASEAN as one of the
cornerstones of its foreign policy was evident as it hosted the
ASEAN ministerial meeting and an informal summit.

The three decade old spirit of ASEAN prevailed as Indonesia
and Malaysia agreed to submit the dispute over Sipadan and
Ligitan islands to the International Court of Justice in The
Hague.

If it were between two other countries outside ASEAN, such an
emotional dispute would erupt into tension. The ASEAN spirit
helped quell such feelings between Jakarta and Kuala Lumpur.

The ASEAN ministerial meeting here in July was an important
event since it was proceeded by a meeting of the ASEAN Regional
Forum (ARF) and the Post Ministerial Conference.

The ARF, a political security forum of 18 countries, manifests
ASEAN's long-term desire to establish a regional mechanism for
maintaining peace and security in the region. It was also
important because it brought together high level delegations from
the U.S. and the European Union face-to-face with Myanmar.

Unfortunately, it did not result in a significant breakthrough
or in a better understanding of each other in areas concerning
social issues.

In fact, during the informal summit on Nov. 30, ASEAN leaders
strongly warned the European Union against bringing up
"extraneous issues", such as those relating to human rights and
East Timor, in the cooperation framework of the two groupings.

High-level meetings between Asia and western countries were
held several times this year. The biggest one was the Asia-Europe
Meeting in Bangkok in March. To Asia's insistence, talks focused
on economic cooperation, and political issues were left on the
fringes mainly for media consumption.

There was also the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation leaders
meeting in Manila in November. Again, here the priority was
nonpolitical areas.

While these meeting reflect the growing importance of
Indonesia and other ASEAN states vis-a-vis major world powers,
the true depth of their influence is still debatable considering
the EU's defiance to stay away from extraneous issues.

ASEAN's year-old nuclear weapons free zone treaty also wanes
as nuclear powers continue to refuse to sign the protocol of the
treaty. This forced ASEAN's working group, headed by Indonesia,
to engage in wordplay in the treaty's protocol to satisfy the
demands of the nuclear states.

Australia

Wordplay is a major part of diplomacy and this was evident
when Australian Prime Minister John Howard arrived in Jakarta.

Howard's predecessor Paul Keating had a very close
relationship with Soeharto and had no qualms about Indonesia
being the most important country to Australia. Many people
wondered whether Howard's ascendancy would signify a weakening of
relations.

Relations have not soured though, and both Howard and his
foreign minister Alexander Downer made it a point to come to
Indonesia on their first overseas trip. No longer the most
important, they were careful in describing Indonesia as "of
fundamental importance" to Australia.

A rather testy episode soon erupted when Canberra nominated
Miles Kupa as ambassador to Indonesia. Jakarta strongly
questioned the choice since Kupa was a known critic of Soeharto.
The nomination was promptly withdrawn and Canberra admitted it
had bungled the selection.

On relations with other countries Indonesia remained largely
consistent.

Despite growing economic ties with Taiwan, Jakarta maintained
its "one China" policy. It remained adamant on this even though
Taiwan's foreign minister John Chang visited in September.

"We remain consistent in our policy of recognizing only the
People's Republic of China and its government ... Mr. John Chang
was here yesterday in his individual capacity on a private
visit," Alatas said a day after the visit.

Toward Israel, Indonesia again remained steadfast in its
position of refusing to establish diplomatic relations. This
stance was reiterated when Indonesia hosted the Organization of
Islamic Conference a fortnight ago.

As a nation made up of over 80 percent Moslems, Indonesia has
paid great attention to the Organization of Islamic Conference,
despite the fact that as an organization it has remained for the
most part toothless in the international arena.

The brightest accomplishment in Indonesian foreign policy this
year has to be the successful brokerage of the Moro peace
agreement in the Philippines. Several years in the making, it was
initialed here in August and formally signed in September.

The significance of this achievement should not be
underestimated as Indonesia's finest diplomats were able to bring
an end to 25 years of civil war.

The most quiet exit however was Indonesia's end of its two-
year tenure in the United Nations Security Council. Much was made
when Indonesia was voted into the council, unfortunately little
has been heard since.

International relations researcher Kusnanto Anggoro of the
Centre for Strategic and International Studies described
Indonesia's term as run-of-the-mill. "I didn't see it fight for
any specific issues," he candidly remarked.

1997

So what were the lessons in 1996?

Almost everyone, from analysts, legislators to Alatas himself
have repeatedly stressed the need to improve the quality of
diplomats.

Everyone of Indonesia's envoys must be a spokesperson eloquent
enough to respond to international criticism from abroad.

"We're not anticipative enough and are only responsive,"
Kusnanto said. Nevertheless he admitted that "implementing a
proactive foreign policy is not easy", pointing to the need for
good human resources and more importantly, strong
interdepartmental coordination.

It seems the trend set in 1996 will continue into 1997.

Foreign policy will increasingly be tugged by factional
tensions at the local, national, regional and international
level.

At the local level there are demands for democratization,
labor rights and separatism; the national level will be
highlighted by the different interests of the foreign policy-
making establishment which in Indonesia comprises the military,
the state secretary's office and the foreign ministry; at the
regional level there is the network of APEC, ASEAN and the WTO
which must be pursued; and at the international level there is a
need to heed global flows which include environmental issues to
human rights.

So even if Indonesia does not advocate to be as high profile
in foreign policy as previous years, the local, regional and
international factors will likely cast the spotlight on Indonesia
in 1997 anyway.