Mantiri debacle reflects perception gap
As the dust settles on the case of Lt. Gen. Herman Mantiri's appointment as Indonesia's ambassador to Canberra, it is time that leaders of both countries make a sincere reassessment of each other's and their own values. The Jakarta Post's Australia correspondent Dewi Anggraeni takes a look at the controversy.
MELBOURNE (JP): "If Indonesia and Australia are such good friends, how could the appointment of an ambassador blow up into a major controversy?" ask some cynics in Australia.
The fact is, diplomatic disputes can erupt over any issue that touches upon interpretations and perceptions of two different peoples. So, the events leading to retraction of the appointment of Lt. Gen. Herman Mantiri as Indonesian ambassador to Australia are but one example.
It appears that the government in Indonesia underestimated the intensity of feelings in the Australian community on issues relating to East Timor. In fact, East Timor is an issue that has not, and it seems will not, go away, despite diplomatic efforts and increasing trade between the two countries.
It is mainly because of East Timor that many Australians have grotesquely negative impressions of Indonesia. These come to the surface every now and then in letters to the editors of newspapers and magazines, on radio talkback programs, in question time after public lectures, and in social conversation. When it became known that the ambassador designate for Australia was a senior military officer who had been quoted as "condoning" the Dili shootings, there was pronounced outrage in the community.
If organizations like the Australian East Timor Association registered strong protests, that was to be expected. However, varying degrees of anger and disappointment have been expressed by many people besides East Timor lobby groups. Even those who had rarely made public comment concerning East Timor were disappointed, because they felt that, by appointing Gen. Mantiri, Indonesia was showing contempt towards Australia. Obviously they thought that the authorities in Indonesia were well and accurately informed about public sentiment concerning East Timor in Australia. And appointing Gen. Mantiri was therefore interpreted as a statement along the lines of: "We know how you feel, but we don't care. If we think a person is suitable, we are not worried about what you think".
These were of course unrealistic presumptions, considering that, apparently, even the Australian government was taken by surprise. The proposal that Gen. Mantiri be appointed ambassador had been mooted long before it was made public. On the ABC television program The 7:30 Report Foreign Minister Senator Gareth Evans told interviewer Paul Lyneham that he had expressed concern about the proposal and that he believed that the concern had been registered with the decision makers in Indonesia.
The way Senator Evans worded the government's concern could not, then, have been strong and clear enough for the authorities in Indonesia to understand, because the appointment went ahead. Confronted with this fact, Senator Evans then hoped that a proper explanation and an expression of regret by the general regarding the statement he made in 1992 would diffuse the tension in Australia. The explanation was slow in coming, the regret was never expressed, and the situation deteriorated rapidly. Strong protests came from both sides of the parliament. Senator Evans' reputation and standing were on the line.
Having always maintained that his style of diplomacy was more dignified than, superior to the "drum beating" style of some groups, Senator Evans now risked being proven ineffective. Unfortunately for him, he had been accused of just that after failing to stop the French conducting nuclear tests in the Pacific - again, an unrealistic expectation.
For that reason, the news of the cancellation of the appointment must have been a welcome relief for Senator Evans and the rest of the government.
Federal Senator Julian McGauran, of the National Party, Victoria, dismissed the claim that the decision reflected Senator Evan's success in lobbying his counterpart, Mr. Ali Alatas. He was emphatic that the cancellation was not the fruit of Senator Evans' intense lobbying, but had come as result of the Australian public's continuous pressure. Whether Senator McGauran's remark is accurate or not, one thing become obvious. The Australian public, as voters, has the power to pressure its government to take certain actions even when the government is initially reluctant to do so.
As things stand now, the decision by the Indonesian government to withdraw the appointment is, as Senator Evans puts it, helpful, and in the best interests of both countries. General Mantiri's presence here would only provide a focus for lobby groups in staging protests and make life unpleasant for the general.
If Indonesia and Australia are really good friends, they will both let the dust settle, inspect the damage, reassess each other's and their own respective values and then go on with the business of bilateral cooperation, in trade and everything else.