Revisiting Indonesia-U.S. relations

Revisiting Indonesia-U.S. relations

Tony Agus Ardie, President of KIKAS

Recent times have seen a profusion of developments
which could substantially influence the state of relationships
between Indonesia and the United States.
Some were originated at the Indonesian side: the so-
called 'sweeping' of American hotel guests in Solo, anti-U.S
demonstrations, call for boycott of American branded products,
the Bali bombing, abolishment of free visa facility for U.S.
citizens.
Some others came from the U.S. side: warnings for American
citizens not to visit Indonesia, new limitations for imports of
Indonesian products, the war in Iraq. Directly or indirectly,
most have the potentials to constrain or even worsen relations.
Regardless of the developments, however, the fundamentals
of Indonesia-U.S. relations have remained largely unchanged.
Indonesia, the world's fourth most populous country with
more than 210 million people, is geopolitically pivotal to peace
and stability in Southeast Asia. As the nation with the largest
Moslem population, its position has become even more crucial in
the present global constellation.
It has the potential either to become a bridge between
the U.S. and other Islamic peoples, or an obstruction towards
better relations. Indonesia is also richly endowed with a vast
variety of natural resources for American industries.
The United States, as the world's largest economy, the
biggest source of technology and the greatest influence on the
global financial market, the International Monetary Fund (IMF)
and the World Bank, plays an important role in supporting
Indonesia's efforts to solve its economic crisis.
As the most powerful democracy it could also assist
Indonesia in coping with the painful process of transition from
an authoritarian, centralized government into a more democratic
and decentralized state.
These fundamentals are strong reasons for both sides to
work for closer relations. However, this is not reflected in the
changing reality. The gap is widening-not closing-for various
reasons, e.g. domestic politics, differences in national
interests and priorities.
Actually, the very same reasons are also arguments for
striving toward good, sustainable relations. A stronger, more
stable Indonesia-in political as well as economic terms-would be
more beneficial for U.S. interests in many aspects, including in
implementing its war on terrorism.
A more basic reason for this gap is information
disparity: the lack of knowledge, thus of understanding and
empathy, on each side about the other.
Basic knowledge about Indonesia is negligible in the U.S.
Most Americans have very little idea about Indonesia,
geographically and otherwise. Bali is still more known than the
whole country. American text and reference books still put the
wrong date about Indonesia's independence day and disregard its
revolution. Yet an incident in any small Indonesian town would be
interpreted as if the whole country is unsafe.
Distortion could bring dire consequences when it comes to
complex analyses of the country. Complications in the reforms
undertaken by Indonesia since 1998 are to be expected considering
its enormous dimensions and speed. But it often prompts many U.S.
politicians and analysts to be fixated with the daily turmoil of
events, raucous demonstrations, corruption cases or security
problems, neglecting substantial progress.
This often results in overly pessimistic assessment of
Indonesia's future, overlooking the medium and long term
perspectives after all this agonizing learning process.
True, structural impediments such as the lack of trust in
the judicial system, excesses in the initial process of
transferring power to district-level administrations, virtually
bankrupt big corporations and low investor confidence have been a
turnoff to new investment.
However, these problems are being tackled with great
assistance from the World Bank, the IMF and the international
creditor consortium, the Consultative Group on Indonesia (CGI),
of which the United States has been a loyal donor member since
1967.

Progress has been made, as can be noted from the strengthening
macroeconomic and political stability.

The most positive development is that Indonesian national
resilience has passed the toughest test over the past five years
of political turbulence and economic debacle. Such progress,
however, is seldom reported by the media and hardly known in the
U.S.

To be fair, similar distortions concerning the U.S. also occur
in Indonesia. Despite admiration for American products, popular
culture and lifestyles, Indonesian public understanding of the
U.S. is superficial at best. Their image is filled with negative
stereotypes, prejudices and skepticism. The U.S. is in variably
described by the country's media as an arrogant power whose
actions bring far-reaching consequences unfair to Indonesia.
When the U.S. issues travel notices to dissuade Americans from
coming to Indonesia, it is also discouraging visitors from other
lands and thus affecting the tourism industry extensively.
U.S. trade pressure to import and consume American products is
contrasted to its tight control of Indonesian imports. New rules,
such as anti- bio-terrorism inspection, add burdens to Indonesian
exporters at US$250 per container box.
The widespread image is its own self-interest, shown in the
decline in purchase contracts for Indonesian's manufactured
goods, the withdrawal of investments and the relocation of
activities to other countries, while simultaneously expecting
Indonesian support for U.S. interests.
These actions are neither unusual nor unreasonable in
international practice of doing business. Nevertheless, they do
not contribute to the accomplishment of understanding and trust
with the wider population.
It does not matter that such sanctions may in fact be directed
at big economic players. But the ultimate impact will be felt by
the grassroots who may arrive at simplified conclusions, e.g.
that U.S. actions are the cause of their tough lot, declining job
opportunities and increasing the already high rate of
unemployment.
In the public perception, such acts show a lack of compassion for
the already tough lot of the general public. As the majority is
composed of the same Moslems that the U.S. supposedly like to
befriend, this is also viewed as a lack of sensitivity and
comprehension regarding Indonesia's Moslems' social situation.
Clearly, relationship between any two countries can only be
improved if it is based on sufficient knowledge and mutually
favorable attitudes. These include adequate regard and respect,
high credibility, and trust between each other.
With current advancing distrust, communications efforts should be
shifted to nonverbal, practical actions-which could speak much
louder than words and statement, as the saying goes. Such action
should begin in an area of mutual concerns to both peoples. This
is employment opportunity.
Indonesia's unemployment and underemployment today are estimated
at a total of 40 million, and the number keeps rising by 2.5
million annually, particularly in the lower classes in the Moslem
community.
Notwithstanding the contributions of American giants in
Indonesia's development, the action should change to a broader
and bigger American role in empowering Indonesian small and
medium-size enterprises (SMEs) to enter the global market,
including the U.S.
After all, the American small business development scheme under
the Small Business Act is one of the best-managed programs in
promoting business incubation.
The choice of SMEs is even more appropriate as it is the business
sector that is closest to the general community and has
accomplished a lot to overcome unemployment since the crisis.
When many big national companies collapsed, more than 95 percent
of the SMEs were able to survive. Of this figure, 31 percent
succeeded in restructuring their organizations while 64 percent
others expanded operations and passed the crisis with flying
colors, thus capable of providing jobs for 64.3 million people.
The U.S. model has been tested by pioneering SME empowerment
efforts in Yogyakarta, involving the community's three pillars -
the local administration, committed private entrepreneurs and
Gadjah Mada University - which are now attracting support of the
Vienna-based United Nations Industrial Development Organization.
With its long experience in community-based development projects
in various provinces in Indonesia, the United States Agency for
International Development could play a role in SME empowerment as
well.
Such action programs will extend and upgrade the present
relations between the United States and Indonesia into a new,
people-to-people based diplomacy, which facilitates and improves
the official relationship that in the past was hampered by people
vs. people misunderstanding and prejudice.

*KIKAS is the U.S. Committee of the Indonesian Chamber of
Commerce and Industry (Kadin).

-----------30-------