Part 1 of 2 : How to make Asia-Pacific peaceful

Part 1 of 2 : How to make Asia-Pacific peaceful

Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono, Coordinating Minister for Politics and Security,
Jakarta

The Iraqi war is now behind us, and the members of the
Security Council are back working together with greater consensus
than before.

But the Iraqi issue still has a lot of troubling question
marks. No one can say with certainty what actors exactly are
behind the string of attacks against the coalition forces, the UN
office and Iraqis. And no one can precisely predict if these
daily attacks are part of a longer term security picture in Iraq
or whether they will end next month.

We all want to see Iraq evolve into a stable, peaceful,
prosperous and sovereign nation -- there is no question about
that. But we must also ask: What happens if that does not
transpire?

If the peace cannot be won in Iraq, and if the political and
security situations worsen for a longer period of time, we will
see serious implications not only for Iraq but also for the
Middle East and beyond.

This will apply to Indonesia as there is a high degree of
public attention here over what goes on in Iraq. I suppose that
it will impact also on the political landscape in the U.S., where
the political establishment will be gearing up for elections in
November next year. Therefore, we still cannot check off Iraq
from our strategic outlook for 2004.

If any of us were asked five years ago what would the primary
threat to our national security national, most likely the answer
would be anything but terrorism. But today terrorism, which has
evolved into a global menace which indiscriminately target
innocent civilians, has become a clear and present danger to our
national security and to the well-being of our citizens. The Bali
bombs exploded in Indonesian territory but it killed citizens of
22 countries, just like the Sept. 11 attacks he the U.S. killed
citizens from 70 countries.

The war against terror -- especially in its more sophisticated
form -- is new for many of us. But one unique feature in the
fight against terror is that it is opening up strategic
opportunities. The emerging intelligence and counter-terrorism
cooperation between the U.S. -- China is a case in point. Indeed,
this region has never seen so much counter-terrorism activities
as we have seen in the last 2 years or so.

And in that process, something significant is happening:
Namely, the emergence of a new security culture which compels all
of us, save none, to work together to fight terror, irrespective
of whether you are Indonesian, Filipino, Russian, Chinese,
American, Japanese, Australian or what have you. This emerging
"cooperate with all" security culture is not necessarily
inevitable or something to be taken for granted. Hence, we should
nurture it carefully. After all, in the war against terror --
where no nation can go it alone no matter how strong and powerful
-- we are all partners, we are all strategic partners, we are all
in it for the long haul.

But apart from the strategic opportunies it creates, we must
also see to it that our fight against terrorism does not lead to
new strategic tensions or aggravate existing ones. If this
happens, the terrorists will benefit. So the question that we
need to ponder is: How do we handle the war on terrorism in ways
which expand opportunities for strategic cooperation and without
creating new strategic tensions.

A pertinent feature our international environment is that
throughout the Islamic world, there is a battle for the soul of
Islam between nations and within nations. We see it in the
capital cities, in the Universities, in the streets, in the
hamlets, in the mosques. We see it also in Indonesia. How these
battles find political and social expressions will determine the
political landscape of the region, and also its strategic
outlook. Given their demographics, Northeast Asia will probably
be less affected by this trend than Southeast Asia, South Asia
and the Middle-East.

But the twist and turns within Islamic communities -- where
ever they may be -- will resonate internationally. Remember: In
the early 1990s, many of us could not have cared less what
happened in Afghanistan when it fell to the Taliban, until Sept.
11 happened, or until we realized that a number of future
terrorists were trained in that country.

This growing restlessness within the Islamic communities will
continue to be fueled by what happens in the Arab-Israeli
conflict. It is sad that the "road map" sponsored by the U.S.,
EU, Russia and the UN has not made any significant mileage, and
indeed at the present moment it seems to be running out of steam.

But we cannot let the situation slip away: The international
community must continue to accord the highest priority to the
resolution of the Arab-Israeli conflict. The establishment of a
viable, independent and sovereign Palestinian state -- sooner
rather than later -- would be a historic event that would be
hugely welcomed by the Islamic communities.

That is why we must recognize the long-term strategic
importance of promoting inter-faith dialogue and to efforts to
bridge between the Islamic world and the west. When President
Bush met with President Megawati in Bali on Oct. 22, we
facilitated a special meeting between President Bush and
Indonesia's religious leaders, and I think every participant of
that event agreed that it turned out to be a very constructive
meeting of the minds. The policy input from CSCAP on how to build
bridges between the Islamic world and the west will be of great
interest to us.

The article is an abridged version of the minister's keynote
speech at the General Conference of the Council for Security
Cooperation in the Asia Pacific (CSCAP) in Jakarta on Dec. 7.