Peed off, mate!

As an Australian resident in Jakarta, I was shocked when my wife told me, after our two-hour wait at the embassy merely to submit her visa application, that she felt humiliated by the process nurtured by the Australian Embassy, and by, one must presume, the Australian government.

My wife majored in Oceanography at one of Indonesia's top five universities, comes from a highly respectable family, has won two significant awards in her career as a journalist -- second prize in AOL-Time Warner's Henry Luce Awards and first in the Hong Kong Foreign Correspondents Award for reporting on human rights -- is a consultant to the government and the mother of our two (Australian) children.

That she felt humiliated by the process demanded by the Australian Immigration Service perhaps reflects Indonesian attitudes. I cannot, unfortunately, help but also reflect on what this process and the policy behind it says about the Australian government's attitude toward its Asian neighbors.

I have discussed this mindset with a former senior Australian government official in Jakarta, who told me that he believed Australia's attitude toward Asia reflected an unconscious stand of the John Howard government that is intrinsically racist. We can all understand the need for strict security measures in the wake of the Sept. 11 attacks, yet it is difficult to understand why the Australian government cannot realize that it would be more beneficial to the nation if it took a more cordial and balanced attitude toward countries in the region and the citizens of those countries.

Is it too much to ask the immigration section of the Australian Embassy to provide a special window for families? In our case, my wife has visited Australia a number of times, has never thought of overstaying her visa, which, after all, when one finally gets one, is sufficiently generous in its provision of time. Yet even the requirement to pay a (non-refundable) fee of around A$60 for a visa when Australians visiting Indonesia pay nothing raises the question of whether this arrangement is fair.

When we return to Australia, we inevitably spend money. Money spent on accommodation, travel, gifts for friends and expenditure on everyday things contributes to the Australian economy. Why then should legitimate visitors, people who have every right to claim permanent residence, be submitted to the cattle market that is the immigration section at the Australian Embassy? I can only conclude that this is an insult to Asians, and Indonesians in particular.

KEITH LOVEARD

Jakarta