Using foreign policy to deal with domestic problems

Using foreign policy to deal with domestic problems

Fabiola Desy Unidjaja, The Jakarta Post, Jakarta

Activities at the foreign ministry this year demonstrated that
foreign policy can be advantageous to domestic interests.

Trying to regain its international stature by using foreign
policy to address many domestic problems, the ministry launched a
number of initiatives that were warmly greeted by neighboring
countries.

Undertakings such as international conferences on illegal
migrants, money laundering and the Southwest Pacific Dialog were
organized by the ministry to address domestic security problems.

Minister of Foreign Affairs Hassan Wirayuda called the
initiatives "intermestik" policy (the intermingling of
international and domestic politics), underlining that the
conferences were held to support Indonesia.

"It was in our own interest that we launched such initiatives,
as we can learn from developed countries how to deal with such
crimes," Hassan said.

During the conference on illegal migrants, attended by more
than 30 countries, Jakarta successfully shifted the burden from
its shoulders and made the issue a regional problem.

Accused of not doing enough to stop people-smuggling,
Indonesia convinced the international community that it would be
impossible to handle the issue unilaterally as it also involved
the migrants' origin and destination countries.

At the Southwest Pacific Dialog, the country managed to secure
support for its sovereignty over strife-torn Papua province from
the other five participating countries: Australia, New Zealand,
Papua New Guinea, the Philippines and East Timor.

In addressing pending issues with the former province of East
Timor, Jakarta also chose to take the lead to settle the problem
at the soonest possible time and hosted a tripartite meeting
between Indonesia, East Timor and Australia to address delicate
problems arising from East Timor's secession from Indonesia.

Although Indonesia received support and knowledge from the
international community through these initiatives, the country
still has a long way to go to really address its domestic
problems.

Australian National University scholar Siswo Pramono considers
the current foreign policy similar to the country's "crisis
diplomacy" during the 1945 to 1950 period.

"Indonesia should learn from the 'crisis diplomacy' during the
1945 to 1950 period, a time of marathon negotiations (i.e.
Linggarjati, Renville and the Round Table conferences) and Dutch
military aggression, in attempts to find a better way to manage
the current multidimensional crisis," Siswo stated in an article
published on Aug. 30.

Since the crisis hit in 1997, Indonesia has been forced to
keep a low profile in the international community, as the
country's credibility in the international fora has deteriorated
somewhat.

Political instability hit the country after the downfall of
former strongman Soeharto in 1998, when he bowed to pressure from
hundreds of thousands of protesters and appointed then vice
president B.J. Habibie to take over the helm.

Even under two successive presidents, Habibie and Abdurrahman
Wahid, Indonesia was unable to regain the international respect
it once commanded, and it was not until Megawati Soekarnoputri
assumed the country's presidency in July 2001 did traces of
respect and credibility trickle back.

International confidence in the government's ability to
resolve the country's multifaceted problems has slowly increased.

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs, underlining the importance of
communicating its activities to the public, appointed four
middle-ranking officials in charge of public relations. Active
diplomacy and enhanced public relations efforts in the past year
proved fruitful as the country regained its international
stature.

Some policies, however, need to be reconsidered. For example
the frequent overseas trips of President Megawati, which many
critics claim were conducted without clear purpose and had little
benefit to Indonesia's foreign policy. The visits, according to
the critics, yielded only memorandums of understanding, many of
which cannot be implemented.

Given the country's economic situation, the President should
have made foreign visits that would have benefited Indonesia and
its people, so say the critics. Besides, the President's trips,
called "high-level diplomacy" measures, more often than not
overshadowed the success of "ministerial-level diplomacy"
initiatives.

As was the case with Hassan's "intermestik" policy, which was
able to convince the other five nations participating in the
Southwest Pacific dialog to acknowledge Indonesia's sovereignty
over Papua, where two separatist groups have failed in their
attempts to establish an independent state.