Part 2 of 2: Sovereignty can't be shelved

J. Soedjati Djiwandono, Jakarta

By contrast, the Malaysian leader has been so cocky that he has lost his sympathy for his largest neighbor, which is still struggling with a large number of domestic problems. He has been treating Indonesia's illegal migrant workers in a less than humane way. And compared to Western countries, as well as Japan, Malaysia's infringement on and claim to what is rightly under Indonesia's sovereignty as an archipelagic nation, a status recognized by the International Law of the Sea Convention, Malaysia has not been that sympathetic with Indonesia, shows that the neighboring country lacks empathy for Indonesia, which is still struggling to overcome the bitter aftermath of the tsunami disaster, the most tragic calamity that country has ever suffered.

Many Indonesians are enchanted by the Malaysian terms used to describe Indonesia, such as negeri jiran ("next-door neighbor", serumpun (of the same ethnic stock) and seagama (of the same religion -- Muslim), not realizing that the last two terms are contrary to the Indonesian concept of nationhood. Indeed, mainly because of its economic success and a lack of understanding about other important aspects of the country, many Muslims in Indonesia tend to look up to Malaysia as a model to emulate.

Because of their Islamic aspirations, many of them tend to ignore Indonesia's Youth Pledge of 1928, which declared that Indonesia's young generation were determined to have one nation, the Indonesian nation, one fatherland, Indonesia, and one language, the Indonesian language, never "one ethnicity" nor "one religion", a pledge that perhaps Malaysians fail to understand. By contrast, we never hear the term "Malaysian nation". And it is indeed doubtful if, in theoretical terms, we can call Malaysia a "nation state".

In fact, in terms of anthropology and in the context of the language family tree, I may well be a Malay, although I am a non- Muslim. But in Malaysia, a Malay is by definition a Muslim. A Chinese is called a Malay only after he embraces Islam.

This commentary is not a recommendation for war. But any form of peaceful solution to the present conflict over Ambalat must begin with Malaysia abandoning its unilateral claim to sovereignty over Ambalat. Then we can begin to talk about cooperation. This is essential.

It is to be noted that Indonesia consists of around 17 thousand islands, only about four thousand of which are inhabited. And thousands of these uninhabited islands are even as yet unnamed. For Indonesia to give way at this stage would render itself more vulnerable in the future to the threat of another infringement on its sovereignty.

Indonesia at the moment is very weak, especially with the threat of national disintegration hanging over it and with a new leader weak in leadership and lacking in competence. But one positive implication of this crisis may well be that it will help strengthen our national unity and inculcate a greater awareness of the value of our national identity. I am not thinking in terms of chauvinism, but patriotism. More than the Malaysians, Indonesians are mostly acutely aware and proud of their long and bitter struggle for sovereignty and independence from colonialism.

Malaysia may be thinking of the possibility of depending on the assistance of the other member states of the FPDA (Five Power Defense Arrangement) in the event of an armed conflict with Indonesia. But anyone with a sound mind should be aware of the likelihood that to let the current crisis between Malaysia and Indonesia degenerate into a major war would certainly create serious instability in the whole of Southeast Asia, and indeed ultimately the whole world.

Thus it would be too costly to let the current confrontation over Ambalat to escalate by providing support for Malaysia in its daring, reckless and irresponsible adventure. But sovereignty is the life and identity of a nation state.

The writer is a political analyst.