New strategies for RI diplomacy

By Aleksius Jemadu

BANDUNG (JP): Time and again Indonesia has been a vulnerable target of international criticism for its human rights record. Most recently media reports on the mysterious disappearance of political activists are believed to have tarnished the government's reputation abroad.

There is a growing concern that the use of repressive measures to silence opposition groups could lead to the deterioration of Indonesia's diplomatic clout in the eyes of the international community.

No one can deny that the problem of human rights has become one source of contention between developing and developed countries.

The Indonesian case has been made more complicated by the fact that it is very much dependent on Western countries and international financial institutions to solve its economic crisis. Such dependence will obviously weaken the government's bargaining position vis a vis its Western counterparts.

Post-Cold War international political and economic regimes seem to favor the interests and values of the Western world. The primacy of economic liberalism as a perspective in contemporary international political economies tends to strengthen and perpetuate the superiority of Western industrial countries over the rest of the world. These countries are more prepared and have a higher capacity to compete at the global level due to their industrial bases and mastery of high technology.

For developing countries like Indonesia to improve their human rights records as demanded by Western leaders it is not only a question of political willingness but also of systemic capacity. It is unfair to ask developing countries to achieve economic equality and political democratization simultaneously in a short period of time.

Sometimes they have to make trade-offs between different policy priorities. More established economic and political systems in the Western world have greater flexibility in accommodating the ever-rising expectations of their citizens. They can do this through the mechanism of the welfare state.

Developing countries can convince their Western counterparts by establishing a comprehensive strategy with clear targets and timeframes to deal with the complexity of their human rights problems. Unfortunately, up till now, the Indonesian government has not developed such a strategy. To be sure, some concrete steps have been made but each of them tends to be independent of the others.

The establishment of the National Commission on Human Rights, for instance, has not been followed by steps to make the minority political parties, the United Development Party and the Indonesian Democratic Party more independent.

As far as a transition from authoritarian rule to a democratic political system which respects human rights is concerned, the South Korean model provides a good example for Indonesia. South Korea has been pretty consistent in implementing comprehensive political reform toward establishing a more humane relationship between the governor and the governed.

It should come as no surprise that Indonesia has always taken a defensive position in responding to international criticism on its human rights record. Western leaders and human rights activists want to see commitment and real action. Defense mechanisms alone may never lead them into believing that the government is serious about protecting the human rights of its citizens.

Defensive diplomacy can easily lead us into an attitude of self-righteousness. It tends to justify national policies by referring to a rigid and narrow understanding of state sovereignty. In this increasingly interdependent world more and more nations are required to develop a new concept of sovereignty. New literature on international relations has introduced concepts like "reasonable sovereignty", "world citizenship", "human governance" and "common heritage" among others.

The problem of East Timor has become a complicated issue in Indonesian diplomacy. No one can deny that the Indonesian government has done its best to emancipate the East Timorese people from their previous backwardness through economic development. Over the last two decades the government has allocated millions of U.S. dollars to develop this province. However, a permanent solution to this dispute at the international level has been as remote as ever.

Thus, there is something more than just an allocation of development funds. The main issue is how to win the hearts of the East Timorese. This is a challenge that the government should face. If we fail to do this, then we would confront two stumbling blocks at the same time: contentious East Timorese and a dissatisfied international community. The prime casualty of such failure would be Indonesia's international reputation and credibility.

Last but not least, the global movement toward democratization will require us to protect the human rights of our citizens. Our success in this particular issue will determine the quality of our diplomacy abroad. This is precisely the reason why Indonesia needs a more comprehensive strategy in managing its human rights issues.

The establishment of such a strategy will enable Indonesia to produce more congruence between its diplomacy and domestic policies. Conversely, the absence of such a strategy could make Indonesian diplomacy even more vulnerable no matter how diligent its diplomats might be.

The writer is the head of the school of international relations at the University of Parahyangan, Bandung. He is also a researcher at the Parahyangan Center for International Studies at the same university.