'Knowledge revolution' transforms the world

By Hilman Adil

JAKARTA (JP): In foreign policy, the primary task of the policymaker is to articulate the country's external interests and order them in some scheme of relative importance.

They are, among others, first, self-preservation of physical integrity or unity. Second, independence or the relative freedom from interference in what a country regards as its internal affairs.

These are two external interests that Indonesian foreign policy will increasingly have to deal with in the near future.

The Indonesian sovereign state is facing increasing challenges. First, can the present political system withstand challenges to democratic government and the rule of law?

Second, can any social consensus survive in the face of ethnic or communal divisions, like in Aceh, Irian Jaya and Maluku?

Third, the growing social and economic disparities caused by the monetary crisis and rising violence as a result of the breakdown of law.

Fourth, concerns about the future definition of a national identity posed by the threat of disintegration.

These concerns have led to uncertainty about the direction which Indonesia will be taking, and doubts whether the institutions, processes, concepts and myths that sustained the infant Republic and nation-building efforts in the formative years are still relevant.

The evolving strategic and operational agenda, in light of the diminishing conventional external threat and the changed structure of international politics, enabling a "unipolar" world and the "knowledge revolution" to emerge, has rendered the traditional security concept (ketahanan nasional) obsolete.

Indonesian foreign policy-making has changed radically in the past few years. There was East Timor, the Asian economic crisis of 1997 to 1999 and the economic uncertainties of globalization, to name but a few.

But there is also a more subtle, and much less understood phenomenon -- a profound normative shift in the relations between nation-states. This essentially means a change in the previous norm of "expected and required" behavior at a particular time in the society of states.

These international norms did not change much for 300 years after the Treaty of Westphalia (1648). Exceptions were the addition of an antislavery norm in the 19th century and an anti- imperial and colonial norm since the early 20th century .

The change in international norms has increased rapidly, especially in the past decade.

Instances in which new or revised norms have become evident include the rights of national governments in relation to minority groups, especially human rights, although the latter is not new.

For example, the United States' Declaration of Independence briefly defines human rights as "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness". It is the changed structure of international politics that enabled the concept to be treated as a norm which could be attributed to a "unipolar" world with the U.S. as paramount power.

This does not necessarily mean that this norm can only be enforced against weak states. In a military sense this might be true, but in globalization pressures of international consensus can also be effectively applied to major powers still dependent on international financial institutions.

Indonesia's future policies would have to be in the context of U.S. military superiority and its economic, cultural and diplomatic dominance (the latter two termed "soft power").

If Vice President Al Gore becomes president that policy line will be continued, although most probably with more pressure for the observance of environmental norms and human rights.

If Governor George W. Bush wins the race, changes will probably be marginal. But as a member of the Republican Party it would be probably be easier for him than for Al Gore to get some policies through Congress, especially if both the Senate and the House of Representatives have a Republican majority.

The present global structure will most likely be determined by the U.S. as the "unipolar" power, at least for the next three or four decades. This also means that Western influence on international norms will almost certainly continue to be an irritant to many non-Western countries, including Indonesia.

Another contentious issue which might affect interstate relations is government action violating international norms. These new norms often deal with matters that used to be defined "essentially within the jurisdiction of a sovereign state".

"The knowledge revolution" based on new technologies is potentially far more transformatory in its long-term effects than the "unipolar" phenomena. All its consequences are unpredictable, but the least so is its ability to redistribute power, both domestically and internationally.

That redistribution of power is currently most apparent in Western democracies. The world of Internet and e-mail is more likely to change society and the distribution of power within it, empowering dissidents, especially ethnic minorities and the economically disadvantaged.

The "knowledge revolution" has facilitated non-governmental organizations in challenging prevailing norms, which proved to be effective in the actions against the World Trade Organization in Seattle.

The basis of NGOs is not the nation, still less the government. In fact, it is the individual. NGO's reject the concept of nations, nationalism, national interests and especially national sovereignty. The concept assumes that humanity is one great society, in which its members are citizens of the "cosmopolis" and are entitled to the same rights, regardless of the views of respective governments.

Finally, in view of the prolonged serious crisis, the unipolar world and the "knowledge revolution", we cannot expect a more assertive foreign policy in the near future.

The writer is a research professor at the National Institute of Sciences (LIPI) in Jakarta.