Rowing between cliffs: RI and post-Sept.11

Rowing between cliffs: RI and post-Sept.11

Siswo Pramono
PhD Graduate Student in Political Science
and International Relations
School of Social Science
The Australian National University
Canberra

The U.S.-led "war on terror" is not a war between the West and
Islam. However being a country with the largest Muslim population
in the world, Indonesia cannot escape the impact of this war.

As the U.S.-led invasion in Afghanistan failed to apprehend
Osama bin Laden, the hunt for groups and persons suspected to
have links with al-Qaeda began in Indonesia, Malaysia, Singapore
and the (Southern) Philippines. By then Southeast Asia was
considered by U.S. strategists as the "second front" of the war
on terror.

Such a campaign has resulted in the arrests of some Indonesian
citizens and leaders of militant groups. Not many of the cases
could be brought to trial, reportedly because of lack of
evidence. This "second front" of war on terror then moved from
Southeast Asia to the Gulf.

The Gulf, for the U.S., represents a two-fold issue. The issue
of dismantling the Iraqi weapon of mass destruction has been
lingering for the last four years. But the decision to topple
Saddam Hussein was made just about six months ago. If the U.S.
proceeds with its project of regime change in Iraq, Indonesia
must prepare itself for another impact of war on terror.

Indonesia must, again, row between cliffs: Between principle
and practical policy; between domestic and international
pressures.

There is a contention between the UN Charter's principle of
peaceful means of conflict resolution and the U.S. realpolitik.
While Indonesia must help promote such a principle, it cannot
escape the political reality of the UN Security Council.

The position of each permanent member of the Council is
ambivalent. The United Kingdom, despite domestic opposition, will
likely join, albeit in a limited term, the U.S. war with Iraq.
And the French would not likely challenge U.S. determination.

Russia will prioritize establishing better relations, economic
and otherwise, with the U.S. and the West, then to protect Iraq.
Besides, Russia has faced the acute problem of Muslim insurgency
in Chechnya.

China, too, despite the rift with the U.S. over Taiwan, would
unlikely take an antagonistic position, at least for two reasons.
China has been bothered by the issue of Muslim insurgency in some
of its regions. And the U.S. has encircled China with its current
engagements in Afghanistan, India, Pakistan, and South East Asia.

As such, the U.S. might wage war against Iraq without worrying
much about the formal position of the UN Security Council.

The Arab states are now more united than before in resisting
the U.S. strike on Iraq. But the major powers in Asia-Pacific
region, notably Australia and Japan, will likely take sides with
the U.S. Indonesia must carefully take this new global balance
into consideration before positioning itself in the post-Sept. 11
political reality.

The Indonesian government will also face mounting pressure at
home. Domestic politics will compel the government to assert its
political position regarding the U.S. project of regime change in
Iraq. Experience during the U.S.-led invasion in Afghanistan
proved how difficult this was.

The government must anticipate the worst case scenario in
accordance with the principles of democracy and the rule of law.
While debates about U.S. foreign policy on Iraq represents a
healthy public discourse, any attempt to intimidate expatriates
(e.g. sweeping against U.S. citizens) or threaten foreign
institutions in Indonesia must be prevented.

While harsh criticisms against U.S. policy on Iraq (or anti-
American expressions) issued by militant groups or individuals
must not be considered as crime, "hate crime" (e.g. against
particular nationality, religion, race, etc.) must be dealt with
according to the law.

Radical ideas, religious and otherwise, must be allowed as far
as they are expressed within the corridor of democracy and
provided that they are not materialized in a way that violates
the law.

President Megawati Soekarnoputri's diplomacy during the U.S.-
led invasion in Afghanistan was effective and thus this strategy
can be employed again to mitigate the impact in Indonesia of the
U.S. confrontation policy towards Iraq. The strategy must
reconcile principle with practical policy; and hence accommodate
both the international and domestic pressures.

Indonesia must press on peaceful ways in dismantling Iraq's
weapons of mass destruction. Such a solution will save millions
of Iraqi people and promote stability in the Gulf and beyond.

This principle, however, must be implemented in a practical
policy, taking into account our efforts to survive the multi-
dimensional crisis. The diplomacy must reconcile Indonesia's
effort to promote peace and stability in South Asia and the
Middle East with the country's economic interests in the Asia-
Pacific, particularly North America, and Western Europe.

The writer works at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.