Neighborly tempers
Neighborly tempers
For four decades, the amity between members of the Association
of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) has been the bedrock of the
region's vibrancy. ASEAN leaders became "cronies", with their
personal bonds ensuing much given-and-take within relationships,
allowing disagreements to be shelved far from the fire of
conflict.
But the contours of the relationships that we thought were so
strong remain subject to personal ambitions, over-sensitivity and
national zealousness.
It turns out that the ASEAN community that we thought was so
solid is in fact sated with nervous niceties and cagey evasions.
How else can one explain the brouhaha over Thai Prime Minister
Thaksin Shinawatra's remarks concerning religious militants in
his country being trained in Malaysia and Indonesia. Both the
remarks, and the ensuing reaction, were completely unnecessary.
From the outset the Thai prime minister should not have
childishly responded with threats of a walk-out upon hearing that
the issue of the deaths of dozens of detainees in Tak Bai,
southern Thailand could be raised during last months ASEAN Summit
in Vientiane.
If Thaksin had simply briefed the summit for a few minutes on
his government's inquiry into the matter, there is little doubt
that the meeting would have come out with a statement of regional
support for Thailand's efforts to resolve the matter.
Instead, the Thai leader has since stoked even more
controversy by saying that Thai militants in Yala, Pattani and
Narathiwat provinces were trained in neighboring Malaysia and
brainwashed by Indonesian militants.
Even if these accusations were true, it makes little sense to
make statements in such a finger pointing manner, as if to say
'you are the cause of all my troubles'.
Diplomatic channels would have been a much more appropriate
way of conveying these concerns, and intelligence exchanges would
have been more effective in stemming acts of terror, if indeed it
was Thaksin's intent to alert his neighbors that terrorists were
exploiting their backyards.
If not, then we can only conclude that Thaksin was playing on
his neighbors ire for a wholly unrelated domestic agenda. It is
very unfortunate indeed when good neighborliness is sacrificed
upon the alter of domestic political interest, especially when
the issues concerned have little to do with the neighbor in the
first place.
Prime Minister Thaksin needs reminding that even his own
investigating committee concluded there was major wrongdoing in
the way authorities handled the protesters in Tak Bai.
The somewhat fierce reaction of Indonesian officials to
Thaksin's comments was understandable, but rather unnecessary.
They should know -- even better than Thaksin himself -- that
this vast archipelago has been used for years as a training
ground for terrorists. One only has to look at the numerous
deadly attacks here as evidence. Thus whenever anyone makes any
statement about terrorism and Indonesia, at the very least there
is probably a grain of truth in it.
Our officials should also know that Indonesia's security
apparatus was in a state of shambles during the late 1990s and
2000, thus allowing much covert activity to go unchecked.
However, the most important part of Thaksin's statement was
what he did not say: He did not say that the Indonesian
government was sponsoring or purposely allowing these activities
to take place, neither did he say that the Indonesian people were
supporting terrorist elements.
A simple, terse response from Indonesian officials would have
sufficed, and would not have inflamed the situation further.
Instead, our senior officials allowed themselves to be
manipulated by a man desperate for domestic political support.
The saddest part of this whole affair is that amidst all the
angry diplomatic exchanges, not a word has been said about
justice for the 85 people who died in the tragedy.