JP/3/DJATI

Behind the occasional strain between neighbors

J. Soedjati Djiwandono Political Analyst Jakarta

Geographic proximity does not ensure easy relations between neighboring countries. On the contrary, it may precisely be a hindrance to good and friendly relations. Take a look at relations between India and Pakistan, Japan and China, Japan and South Korea, China and Russia, or between Japan and Russia.

Likewise, commonalities and similarities in historical backgrounds and cultural traditions that often relate to geographic proximity do not necessarily contribute to smooth relations. In fact, similarities and differences are often of little relevance to friendly relations between neighbors, unless they are of complementary nature in terms of their national interests.

The present analysis will focus on the case of Indonesia's bilateral relations with Australia, Malaysia, and Singapore. There is nothing new about that, except to the extent that it has recently assumed a more serious dimension.

There has been a constant problem between Malaysia and Indonesia on the flow of immigrants from Indonesia to Malaysia, legal as well as illegal, in search of a better life. Since the economic crisis in 1997, however, the problem has become worse. Increasing numbers of Indonesian immigrants of either status have been returned, not to say deported, to Indonesia than ever before.

Indeed, if in the past, particularly since Sukarno's policy against Malaysia in the early 1960's, Malaysia has a lingering perception of Indonesia as potential source of threat to its security. Now if not in military or expansionist terms, since the worsening crisis in 1997, Indonesia remains a potential threat to the security of its neighbors. One can imagine the possible flow of "boat people" from Indonesia. The increase of immigrants, legal and illegal, is its manifestation.

As regards Indonesia's relations with Australia, the strong opposition expressed by Speaker of the House of Representatives (DPR) Akbar Tandjung and Speaker of the People's Consultative Assembly (MPR) Amien Rais to the recent visit of the Australian Prime Minister John Howard reflected, again, how complex relations between the two countries had been. And the boisterous reaction in Indonesia to the remark by Senior Minister Lee Kuan Yew that Indonesia is a nest of terrorists has reflected the sporadic strains in the relations between the two neighbors.

The question of the truth or falsity of Lee's remark has become irrelevant. Emotion has dominated the controversy over the issue.

Indeed, geographic proximity has tended to give rise to undue expectations. Consciously or otherwise, Indonesians tend to expect Australia to understand Indonesia better than the United States and, therefore, to be more tolerant and less critical towards Indonesia.

Thus Australia's attitude or policy that is negative in the eyes of Indonesia would tend to be resented more than a similar attitude or policy adopted by the United States. In fact, despite the differences, there are more similarities between Australia and the U.S, something Indonesians seem to ignore or could not care less about.

Geographic proximity also tends to create certain misperceptions. Because of its sheer size in terms of its territory and population, Indonesia is often perceived by certain quarters in Australia as a potential source of threat to their security, even if in the vague expression of a "threat from the North", which may well refer to China.

Officially, Indonesia often expresses its resentment, although at the same time such a perception may have somewhat "ego massaging" effect on Indonesians.

As regards Singapore, there is often a perception in Indonesia that Singapore is "little China". Its large Chinese population, as part of the entire overseas Chinese population of Southeast Asia, are often described as a potential "fifth column" for China in the future. That such a perception is wrong on historical ground -- i.e. contrary to the original idea in the Spanish civil war in the mid 1930s -- is either overlooked or never known.

It is often said that Singapore seems to be beset with a besieged mentality, like Israel. Indonesians do not seem to appreciate this. Thus they do not seem to understand why Singapore as well as Malaysia seem cautious towards Indonesia, perceiving it as a potential source of threat to their security, even that of the region.

Towards the end of Soeharto's rule, for example, Senior Minister Lee Kuan Yew often made the point that the stability of the region had been linked to the personal leadership of president Soeharto. He seemed to have been worried lest Soeharto's successor might be one who would be one not as committed as Soeharto had been to ASEAN.

That cautious attitude, however, is not without foundation. It is certainly based on past experience, particularly as related to the confrontation policy of Sukarno, and the invasion and, if not directly impacting to ASEAN, the annexation of East Timor by Indonesia under Soeharto. Even so, when the issue of East Timor was first discussed in the United Nations, the resentment of Indonesia, Singapore abstained from a resolution that seemed to favour Indonesia's stand.

There is also a lingering prejudice in Indonesia that Singapore's prosperity has been at the expense of Indonesia. This, as well as the cry of "intervention," is often brought to the surface again whenever Indonesians feel offended by Singapore such as Lee Kuan Yew's remark.

As regards Malaysia, in the past, probably to give a sense of having a "big brother" in the face of China before Malaysia opened diplomatic relations with that Asian giant, Malaysia was keen on the idea of "Malay solidarity" or "brotherhood" (Rumpun Melayu), as a basis for Malaysian-Indonesian relations. However, such an idea did not last long. Probably with the opening of diplomatic relations between Malaysia and China in the early 1970s and the strengthening of ASEAN, the idea of Rumpun Melayu was after all no longer necessary nor relevant.

More importantly, in Indonesia the idea was losing support. Indonesians of non-Malay stock and those who racially may well be Malays but not Muslims began to feel less and less comfortable with it. In Malaysia, a Malay is by constitution a Muslim. That is not the case in Indonesia.