New perspective needed in Australian-Indonesian ties
New perspective needed in Australian-Indonesian ties
By Siswo Pramono
CANBERRA (JP): How many Australians would agree with Pauline
Hanson that Australia should stop sending aid to Indonesia
because the people there had burned Australian flags? In 1999,
Australians and Indonesians burned each other's flags. It is
bizarre, however, that relations between the two countries, about
220 million people in total, are reduced to flag-burning
business.
In the past two decades, Indonesian-Australian relations have
suffered many crises, with the worst being at the turn of the
20th century.
With any incident, narrow-minded nationalism can be inflicted
to worsen the friction. In times of crisis, nationalism serves as
an irrational, blind attachment that seizes every aspect of life.
An enduring Indonesian-Australian relationship must be based on a
new perspective, capitalizing on accommodation while abandoning
this narrow-minded nationalism.
Australia is in the process of nation building. It is a
"Western country in Asia", confused on where to stand. It is a
democratic state frustrated by protracted reconciliation with its
aboriginal community. And it is a society with shifting
affections from British monarchy to republicanism.
This anxiety has led to the quest for an Australian identity,
which has heightened nationalism. The growing jingoistic
attitudes are seen in "patriotic" commercials of Australian
products, the great parade of the Sydney Olympics, the victorious
East Timor mission and the centenary anniversary of federation.
Indonesia, too, is in the process of nation building. From
Sabang to Merauke there is no such thing called "Indonesia" but a
bunch of different ethnic, racial, religious, languages and local
histories, united by colonialism.
It was born with nationalism as the driving force of its
delivery. As disintegration and acute economic crisis now
challenge the unitary state, many invoke nationalism as an
escape.
Indonesia is becoming touchy in its foreign relations. It
cries for international help while it becomes so sensitive that
at anytime, an offer of aid can be considered foreign
intervention. Narrow-minded nationalism can be counterproductive
to Indonesian foreign policy.
It emphasizes a degrading dichotomous approach.
One side is treated as superior, while the other is viewed as
weak, dependent or unimportant. Many Australians have the
illusion that Australia is the only power in the region that
should right the wrong that has been done by Indonesia. And many
Indonesians consider Australians as patronizing white colonizers
imposing their will by taking advantage of Indonesia's
weaknesses.
Both sides are wrong and should learn to treat each other with
respect.
Ironically, Australia and Indonesia are communities obsessed
with the rhetoric of tolerance and accommodation of differences.
Interethnic relations, such as among white and nonwhite and the
indigens in Australia, or among different ethnic groups in
Indonesia, are always strained.
"Multiculturalism" has always been a topic of public discourse
in Australia, as is "unity in diversity" in Indonesia. But when
it comes to bilateral relations, narrow-minded nationalism
overrides this much talked about tolerance and accommodation.
Promotion of human rights is among the main issues of
Australian politics. The Howard government has been a target of
fierce criticism for its "bad" handling of reconciliation with
the aboriginal community.
And Pauline Hanson's One Nation Party has already asserted an
antireconciliation approach. Ill treatment of illegal immigrants,
which triggered riots recently in the Woomera detention center,
have also raised concerns of human rights abuse.
Australian human rights foreign policy counterbalances what it
fails to achieve back home. In a way, the human rights issue
occupies a central place in Australian party politics. It will
contribute to the success or failure of the current coalition
government in the next election.
Many human rights issues in Indonesia have been and will
always be on the Australian agenda. Domestication of foreign
issues in party politics is reflected in various parliamentary
debates. Last year, during question time in the Australian
Parliament, foreign policy issues occupied considerable time in
discussing conflicts in East Timor and West Timor, Maluku and
Irian Jaya.
While both countries now use democracy as the denominator of
bilateral relations, it should not be taken for granted that they
always share the same values. This does not mean that each has to
compromise the values it believes in.
This means that bilateral relations will flourish when both
parties accept and respect the differences and fail when they
deny and suppress these.
Indonesia, for quite some time, will be the weak side of the
bilateral relations. Political reform is not an overnight
process. Nonetheless, many Indonesians share the belief that they
will and they must survive the test.
Australian critics must be patient with Indonesia and respect
the sacrifices made by Indonesians to attain a better future.
Australia should thus show more courtesy and accommodation to
Indonesia. This is not a kind of altruism, but a nurturing of a
long-term common interest of both sides.
It is a necessity for Australia to help Indonesia so that
democratization proceeds on track.
The next five years of the Indonesian-Australian relationship
cannot escape the domestication of Indonesian issues in
Australian party politics. At anytime, narrow-minded nationalism
is a ready vehicle for politicians of both sides to appeal for
public support at the expense of bilateral ties.
To avoid another crash, both Australia and Indonesia must
focus on confidence building measures by relying more on
accommodation and repressing possible recurrence of narrow-minded
nationalism.
Arizal Effendi, the former Indonesian envoy to Australia, once
stated, "it takes two to tango". Thus, the old ties must proceed
with a new perspective in sight.
The writer is a postgraduate student of political science at
the Australian National University in Canberra.