A need to temper those tantrums

The Straits Times, February 20, 2007
By Endy M. Bayuni


INDONESIA must cease letting knee-jerk reactions interfere in its foreign policy. They are irrational and childish, often do more harm than good, have the potential to backfire as well as do no good to Indonesia's international reputation, which, frankly speaking, badly needs shoring up.

Jakarta's abrupt decision to stop sand exports to Singapore was one of these poorly thought-out policies. Coming so close to its failure to secure an extradition treaty with Singapore, it is obvious Jakarta's sand ban was a signal of its displeasure with the Republic.

Confirmation that the two issues were linked came when Mr Primo Alui Joeljanto, director-general for Asia, the Pacific and Africa at the Foreign Affairs Ministry, told this newspaper the ban was to put pressure on Singapore to sign the treaty as well as to resolve bilateral border disputes.

In other words, the ban, which extended to China, was chiefly designed to hurt Singapore. And hurt it it did. Singapore had been relying on imported sand from its neighbouring Indonesian province, the Riau Islands, for its massive reclamation projects.

Following the ban, share prices of Singapore construction companies slumped. It will also have to look elsewhere for its sand, which will likely cost more because of the longer shipping distance.

But whether this will force Singapore to sign the extradition treaty is another matter.

Before Mr Joeljanto's announcement, we had to second-guess that the sand export ban was related to the latest delay in signing the extradition treaty. The timing of the two events was simply too much of a coincidence.

The government had earlier said the export ban was taken to protect Indonesia's environment as sand quarrying inevitably leads to the destruction of small islands in the Riau archipelago.

As if to show that Indonesia had not singled out Singapore, the ban was imposed across the board.

No doubt Indonesia acted within its rights. But it did not explain the abrupt decision.

Now it becomes clear that the ban was imposed to punish Singapore, out of Indonesia's frustration and not really over environmental concerns.

This is where the picture, as perceived by outsiders, turns against Indonesia. There sits tiny Singapore, a 'little red dot on the map', practically being bullied by its giant neighbour Indonesia.

Many Indonesians, including the jingoistic nationalists in Parliament, may perceive the export ban as a justifiable act in the face of Singapore's arrogance. But the perception outside is that Indonesia is taunting its smaller neighbour over matters that, frankly, could and should be resolved through diplomacy.

The fact that Indonesia did not resort to diplomacy, but instead threw fits and tantrums, speaks volumes about the quality of its negotiators.

At one extreme, this is a picture of David versus Goliath. A less extreme view is one of a giant Indonesia suffering from an inferiority complex.

And this is not the first time in the nation's diplomatic history that it has thrown fits and tantrums because it could not get its own way.

Last year, Jakarta recalled its ambassador to Australia in protest over the granting of visas to a group of Papuan asylum seekers. This was an unnecessary move that made the situation worse and took months to repair.

Earlier on, Indonesia had almost rhetorically declared war on Malaysia over the overlapping claims on an area off Borneo believed to contain oil reserves.

And remember when Indonesia abruptly cancelled a visa-free facility to Australia in 1984 and forced planeloads of Australian tourists to turn back, just because then president Suharto did not like what he had read in an Australian newspaper?

Were all these acts done in the name of nationalism? Perhaps, if one interprets nationalism in its narrowest sense. But is it not also in the name of nationalism that Indonesia should try to enhance and polish its international image through more civil conduct.

The nation seems to have forgotten that in times of crisis, such as during the tsunami and earthquakes of these past three years, it was close neighbours like Singapore, Malaysia and Australia that arrived immediately with assistance.

The trouble with Indonesia's knee-jerk reactions that punish or taunt its neighbours is that the nation's leaders seem to assume that no consequences will follow, and that these foreign nations will just sit back and accept the punishment in their stride.

We take it for granted that they would not retaliate.

Certainly, no one expects Singapore to retaliate, but one can still think of many ways Singapore can hurt Indonesia, if it wants to.

This, and earlier episodes of fits and tantrums in the diplomatic history of the nation, show that Indonesia has yet to come to terms with the responsibility that comes with being a nation as big as it is, the world's fourth most populous.

Instead, Indonesians continue to live as one big nation being led by leaders with small minds.

JAKARTA POST

ACTING IN HASTE
The trouble with Indonesia's knee-jerk reactions that punish or taunt its neighbours is that the nation's leaders seem to assume that no consequences will follow.