Rational basis of RI's international diplomacy

Bantarto Bandoro, Editor, 'The Indonesian Quarterly' Centre for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), Jakarta, bandoro@csis.or.id

The year 2003 has seen many diplomatic initiatives from the government, that clearly reflect the continued importance of improving Indonesia's image and its international position, as well as widening the country's spectrum of diplomacy.

For those inside the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in particular, these initiatives were the practical consequence of restructuring, that stressed the balance between the regional and global approach to Indonesia's international problems. The country's international diplomacy is therefore executed within the framework of such an approach.

Others tend to see such initiatives from a wider but specific perspective. These initiatives are aimed not only at garnering international support for Indonesia's territorial integration, but also aimed at restoring our economic stability. More foreign investors and alternative external sources are sought for our long-term development, particularly when we are no longer part of the IMF program.

We saw that for the most part of 2003, we were the host of major international meetings (bilateral and multilateral). Our President and other high-ranking political leaders were also present, so many times, at important international conferences abroad. It is through such means that we aired the need to solve problems collectively and peacefully, based on respect for each nation's sovereignty.

All this manifests in a national and international responsibility, that we, as member of an international society, must carry out. The establishment of a secure and peaceful world must always be the core concern of our policies.

Though President Megawati Soekarnoputri's policies were often criticized by the public, her international contacts and policies to some extent reflected that, for the good of the country, she put national interests first.

According to this concept, the fundamental standard of conduct that the President and her chief diplomats adhered to in their foreign policies last year, were again in the interests of the nation, and specifically, national integrity.

In spite of this, many still believe that Megawati lacks political instinct. For example, she showed great interest in commemorating Sukarno's Afro-Asian Conference of 1955 by preparing for a major 50th anniversary celebration in 2005 -- suggesting that she intends to remain in office even after 2004.

She also thought that good-will diplomacy would solve the Korean peninsula problem, sending her special envoy, Nana Sutresna, to both North and South Korea, forgetting the fact that even the US had so far been unable to solve the problem. Her special envoy, Ali Alatas, was also dispatched to Myanmar, hoping for a change in Myanmar policy, regarding the detained pro- democracy leader at the time, when ASEAN as an institution had failed to do the same thing.

Though Megawati's initiatives in these two matters appeared diplomatically insignificant, she should be given credit at least for appearing to possess the idea, that it is better to hold talks rather than to engage in confrontation, in solving international problems.

If the substance, the objectives and the execution of the foreign policy of the current government are thoroughly observed, generally one will notice that rationalism seems to have been the basis of our conduct of international diplomacy. This reflects a very intense diplomatic and commercial intercourse, between us and other independent states, based on mutual respect and concord.

However, in several cases, some observed the reality that Megawati rarely initiates, and does not seek advice from other sources. Therefore the foreign ministry under Hassan Wirajuda is probably as strong as it has ever been. A career diplomat, Wirajuda concentrates full-time on foreign policy.

The year 2003 may have been the busiest year yet for the foreign ministry, as it attempted to revitalize the performance of the country's foreign policy and adjust itself to the changed domestic and international millieu. The resurgence of a more active foreign policy, thanks to the efforts of the minister and his colleagues at the foreign ministry, has signaled Indonesia's full readiness and willingness to reassert herself, both regionally and internationally.

We, however, should not feel too overly complacent with our current achievements, if any, given that we continue to be vulnerable to any turbulence coming from inside the country, particularly during the elections this year. This means that the execution of a more proactive foreign policy is unlikely to produce positive outcomes and gear the country toward a more credible international standing, unless our political and security situation, as well as our economic performance, improve. An inward-looking Indonesia, when confronted by profound domestic problems, must be avoided.

This would mean that an active, visionary, foreign policy, and the continuity and coherence of diplomatic efforts, would be a major contributing factor in enabling the country to enhance its independence, sovereignty and international bargaining position. As a result Indonesia could enter the next phase of the century with restored national pride, and a firmly ensured place in the still-turbulent world politics.

A major challenge for the next government is to make the best use of such favorable conditions. It is therefore important for the new leaders of Indonesia to be highly alert to the country's external environment. Under these circumstances, an active, innovative and rational foreign policy are imperative, if Indonesia is to safeguard what it has already achieved in its international diplomacy.