RI, S'pore: Understanding and being understood

Jusuf Wanandi, Centre for Strategic and International Studies Jakarta and Simon SC Tay, Singapore Institute of International Affairs, Singapore

Indonesians have been angered by Senior Minister Lee Kuan Yew's remarks that there are terrorist networks in their country. Most Singaporeans, however, do not understand why. American leaders have made similar statements previously and most analysts agree that such connections do exist.

To many observers, the present and urgent need is for practical cooperation between the countries, both bilaterally and together with others in the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN). For this, military and security agencies need to talk, behind closed doors if necessary, and work closely together. High-level politics need not be involved and should not, worse, be an obstacle.

Why then this turmoil between neighbors?

The first answer is that Indonesians care what SM Lee says. His last visit to Jakarta, almost one year ago, was well received and Indonesians know the international community often looks to him for readings of the region. Therefore the Senior Minister's opinion, while sincerely held, would have a negative impact on perceptions about security and stability in Indonesia.

Rather than joining in the chorus of criticisms, many Indonesians might have hoped in fact that SM Lee might help articulate to the international community some of the constraints that they face. They have expected that if there were critical problems between the two countries, these should first be dealt with between official channels or through personal contacts.

The second reason for the Indonesian reaction is that the statement has unwittingly played a part in the complex game of Indonesian politics and the contest between different parties. The accusation of inaction undermines the credibility of President Megawati Soekarnoputri's government. In all likelihood it was for this reason, as well as to try to preempt further criticism, that ministers within the present administration began the response to SM Lee's statement. But it backfired, because their statements were ambiguous and was made used of by others immediately.

Others have joined in for their own reasons. The Islamic groups have gained influence and do not see President Megawati as one of them. They see this as another opportunity to mount pressure on the present administration and test its responsiveness to their political demands.

The third factor is a wider sentiment that concerns Indonesia perceptions of Singapore. Some Indonesians resent Singapore's economic success because they believe that it has been built on the back of Indonesian exports and resources. Some also believe Singaporean businesses have been too cosy with the Indonesian conglomerates that were Soeharto cronies. Still others feel that Singaporeans, rather than suffering and sympathizing with Indonesia in its recent years of difficulty, have benefited at their expense. On the other hand Singapore lacking deep understanding of Indonesia's catharsis, has been bewildered about Indonesia's incapability to stop the instabilities and are very worried of Indonesia's future".

This, rightly or wrongly, is the context of the complaints and furor over SM Lee's comments. It is, moreover, a context that explains many of the other swings in Indonesia-Singapore relations.

For the spate over SM Lee's comments is not an isolated affair. This is just another swing in what has become quite an unstable and incident driven relationship. This should be of concern as Indonesian-Singapore bilateral ties were once a key pillar for both countries, as well as for ASEAN.

No matter whatever other criticisms there are, under former president Soeharto, the tension and suspicion between the two countries gave way to relations that were stable, cooperative, and even warm.

In contrast, since the fall of Soeharto, two succeeding presidents have directly specifically and strongly criticized Singapore. President B.J. Habibie notoriously singled out the island as a "red dot". President Abdurahman Wahid talked about joining with Malaysia to cut off water to Singapore.

Personal idiosyncrasies were a factor in both these outcries. However, the incidents cannot be fully discounted on that basis. They were responding to a wider sentiment in Indonesia, as are the present voices protesting SM Lee's comments.

It is for this reason that the late Michael Leifer, an astute observer of the region, suggested that Indonesia-Singapore relations show a sense of return to the past, akin to the tense period of konfrontasi under president Sukarno.

The Centre for Strategic and International Studies and the Singapore Institute of International Affairs are both founding members of the network of ASEAN-Institutes of Strategic and International Studies (ASEAN-ISIS).