Myanmar's bugging scandal

Myanmar's bugging scandal

House of Commission I revealed that a joint investigation to
beef up national security by the (foreign affairs) National
Intelligence Agency, the State Code Institution and the Foreign
Ministry had found a bugging device in Indonesia's ambassador
office in Yangon. The junta frantically denied, but the Foreign
Ministry insisted that "the findings of our team in Yangon gave
us strong reason to believe that bugging was done" (The Jakarta
Post, 13 July).

Indonesia had reasons to stick to guns on the charge, given
the fact that the report was the technical result of a joint
investigation of our credible state institutions which was made
public by the powerful House of Commission I. It is absurd that
the state institutions ever intended to fabricate allegations to
play around by discrediting Myanmar, as stated in the junta's
typically accusatory statement.

Four things are obvious: Firstly, the scandal indicates the
cheating nature of the junta's attitude, which is not surprising.
Secondly, it indicates the junta's lack of appreciation towards
Indonesia's efforts in helping the country back into
international folds. Thirdly, the junta might have felt
increasingly nervous over the "democratization fever" that
Indonesia is undergoing. Fourthly, the junta has increasingly
become the "thorn in the flesh" for ASEAN and bilateral relation
between the two countries.

As official diplomatic protest has been lodged, Indonesia
should not lose patience. The scandal can become an impetus for
Indonesia to strengthen efforts to help the people of Myanmar who
endure their life under the gunpoint of the junta. It is
justifiable that pressing the junta too hard may throw the
country onto the lap of China, but given its records the latter
might always be pragmatic in treating the junta.

Nonetheless, the prospect to have a pariah state leading ASEAN
in 2006 is unthinkable and skipping Myanmar's turn should be the
last resort. Efforts to help Myanmar should continue and should
not be impeded by the ASEAN non-interference attitude. The
attitude needs to be applied discriminately. It is like when our
neighbor is trapped in a burning house, we have more than just
practical obligation to offer assistance.

For example, with ASEAN spirit, Indonesia can send its special
envoy with military background to meet Than Shew and his junta
and politely explain that military's deep involvement in politics
can be very destructive. That the Indonesian military voluntarily
followed democratic constitutional reform is a dear lesson for
the junta.

At the diplomatic level, however, pressure to force
the junta to release Aung San Suu Kyi and undergo substantive reforms
should not be lessened.

ALPHA AMIRRACHMAN, Vice Director, Public Sphere Institute, Sydney