Pragmatism should be the mantra for Indonesia in the New Asian-

Pragmatism should be the mantra for Indonesia in the New Asian-
African Strategic Partnership

Philips Jusario Vermonte
Jakarta

Much has been written about the Asian-African Summit that will
adopt the new strategic partnership between countries of the two
continents. Some have delineated pessimism while others shared
positive comments on the question of where this new initiative is
heading. However, very rarely do we speak about what it is in the
new strategic partnership that matches Indonesia's interests --
whether Indonesia's active involvement in forming such a new
strategic partnership is consistent with the basic principles of
Indonesia's foreign policy. Another thing that demands
explanation is the difference between Indonesia's recent
initiative in bringing countries of the two continents closer and
the Asia-Africa Conference of 1955.

It is very interesting to see how, in the past two or three
years, Indonesia has become much more active in the foreign
policy arena. In Southeast Asia, for example, Indonesia has been
very active in finding ways to strengthen the Association of
Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) while also chairing the
association. Indonesia's proposal to build an ASEAN Security
Community has been adopted. The proposal epitomizes Indonesia's
new activism in foreign policy at a regional level. Having been
preoccupied with domestic problems since 1998, Indonesia's
proposal struck a chord with the Southeast Asian countries for,
with such a proposal, Indonesia would push ASEAN forward, with
new commitments for political and security cooperation. After
all, Indonesia will and should always perceive ASEAN as its
corner stone of diplomacy and as a platform from where it can
assert its leadership role in the region.

One paramount factor that shapes Indonesia's foreign policy is
the country's struggle to attain and defend its independence.
Understandably, Indonesia's foreign policy has a strong
commitment to anti-colonialism and, to a considerable extent,
nationalism. George Kahin once wrote that Indonesia's foreign
policy had been heavily affected by domestic politics in line
with attempts to cultivate advantages from external resources at
no expense to its independence.

As an example, we witnessed Sukarno's radical foreign policy
manifested in several forms. Sukarno opposed the formation of
Malaysia, a federation that he perceived as the neo-colonialist
British attempt to interfere in Southeast Asia. He also called
for the so-termed New Emerging Forces (NEFO) to challenge the
imperialist Old Established Forces (OLDEFOS). He went further
when he proposed the establishment of the so-called "Jakarta-
Phnom Penh-Beijing-Pyongyang Axis" to reinforce the NEFO's stand.
Clearly, this radical face of Indonesia's foreign policy was
influenced by feelings of anti-colonialism and nationalism.

Meanwhile, as Sukarno's successor, Soeharto's basic objective
in his early years in power was to restore Indonesia's
debilitated economy as a result of Sukarno's radical and
high-profile policy. Soeharto devoted his regime to restoring
Indonesia's economic confidence. This forced Soeharto to be very
pragmatic in receiving support from international resources in
Indonesia's development. After a decade in power, Soeharto became
more outward-looking as he felt confident that he had
strengthened the Indonesian economy and held decisive control
over domestic politics. Indonesia, for example, provided US$10
million to the African National Congress in 1990 apparently as
part of an attempt to enhance its leadership in the Non-Aligned
Movement, which was dominated by African countries. It proved to
be very successful as Indonesia obtained the chairmanship of the
movement in 1991.

In fact, the debates between pragmatism and idealism date back
to the early year of the country's independence. Speaking in
front of the provisional parliament in 1948, Mohammad Hatta, who
formulated the basic principle of Indonesia's foreign policy,
stated that "the policy of the republic must be resolved in the
light of its own interests and should be executed in consonance
and facts it has to face". This sort of policy statement implies
that Indonesia should conduct its foreign policy pragmatically,
to serve the country's own interest.

In the context of the Asian-African Summit, pragmatism is
still the mantra for Indonesia. Not only in the economic sphere,
but also in the political sphere, from where output is more
intangible. In the political field, there is a lot that can be
learned from African countries. The African Union, for example,
has established a regional mechanism to nurture and protect the
democratic political systems of its member states, through a
"peer-group assessment". Indonesia, therefore, in line with its
own proposal for an ASEAN Security Community, can persuade other
members of ASEAN to accept democracy and openness as a norm and
to develop similar mechanisms in the region, without dwelling too
much in non-interference rhetoric. By doing so, we are not only
protecting our own democracy, but also promoting a democratic
norm in the region. In the end, this could ensure peace and
stability in the region.

As the Kantian perspective puts it, that democracies do not
wage war against each other. In other words, Indonesia should
cultivate advantages from this new strategic partnership and go
beyond the romanticism of the 1955 conference in "enhancing
solidarity" between Asia and Africa.

The writer is a researcher at the Centre for Strategic and
International Studies (CSIS). He can be reached at
pjvermonte@csis.or.id.