On diplomacy

I would like to refer to the article of Graham Gerard Ong published in The Jakarta Post, March 9 -- Diplomacy can calm troubled sea (from The Straits Times), regarding the "Ambalat" dispute between Indonesia and Malaysia. I would like to point out that there are some important facts that Ong seems unaware of, or fails to consider: * Before Petronas awarded the Ambalat block to Shell on Feb. 16, according to the Indonesian Department of Foreign Affairs, the government had several times asked the Malaysian government to discuss the Sulawesi sea dispute in a diplomatic manner. Each time, they did not receive a positive response.

This meant Indonesia had actually tried to solve the dispute earlier through diplomacy. Furthermore, the Malaysian authorities had also committed an act of provocation by detaining and beating several Indonesian workers that were working to built a lighthouse in Karang Unarang, claiming they were trespassing onto Malaysian territory; an area that is actually Indonesian territory.

Facing this situation, it is natural for any sovereign country including Indonesia, to act to protect its territory and its citizens by any means necessary. Considering these facts, it is unfair to regard Indonesia's moves, especially those of the Navy, as "gunboat diplomacy". * There is an element of truth in saying that the Indonesian move has diminished its credibility as the initiator of the ASEAN Security Community and contradicts fundamental ASEAN principles. However, there are also other bilateral disputes that could be regarded as not-in-line with any ASEAN mechanisms or principles, such as the water dispute between Singapore and Malaysia and the border dispute between Thailand and Myanmar.

Therefore, we can conclude that there is an institutional weakness in ASEAN that makes it difficult for the organization to cope with bilateral conflict among its members. This is not the responsibility of Indonesia alone but the responsibility of all ASEAN members. * Last, but not least, I would like to point out that the article is undermined by the speculative conclusion of the writer, which is based on unsound facts and unrelated variables, such as relating Indonesia's response to the dispute to a domestic power struggle within the Indonesian Military, or his suggestion that these recent events will tarnish President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono's international credibility. Ong should produce valid evidence to back these claims up, otherwise they are just speculation.

Finally, without any intention to sound "jingoistic" or like a "narrow-minded" nationalist, I hope this letter will help the writer to perceive the issue more proportionally and objectively.

VITTO RAFAEL TAHAR, Jakarta