Mantiri debacle reflects perception gap

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.