Lately, analysts have been questioning the direction of Indonesia's next foreign policy under President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono and vice-president-elect Boediono.
While it seems obvious that Indonesia will still adhere to the sacrosanct principle of an "independent and active policy" with regard to international issues, the implementation of our foreign policy in the coming term requires a precise and comprehensive level of priorities.
If we take a look at previous governments, we may notice that their top priority agendas were successively: fostering development and economic growth during the Soeharto era; engaging political liberalization during B.J. Habibie's interim; promoting democracy, human rights and eradicating corruption practices during Abdurrahman Wahid's cabinet; fighting terrorism during Megawati Soekarnoputri's presidency and regionalism (Southeast Asia) during President Yudhoyono's tenure.
Then what might be the top priority of Indonesia's next foreign policy?
To answer this question, we need to have a clear understanding of today's international situation.
First of all, there are four issues that can be defined as follows: the "return in force" of the United States of America; the assertion of China on the world chessboard; a "europasian" Russia and ultimately the volatile Middle East with Iran as the sole great regional power. It is towards these aforementioned poles of power that nations or regional organizations will position themselves and seek their national interests.
Second, the US is still leading the world, whether we believe it or not, but President Obama's foreign policy seems to have a preference for multilateralism and cooperation with other nations. His recent engagements in Russia, China, Africa, Latin America and the Muslim world has created a new tone, if not a rupture in American diplomacy.
Regarding this matter, presidential spokesman Dino Patti Djalal correctly mentioned that Indonesia needs to have a clear idea of US foreign policy so that we might best serve our interests. Furthermore, in this new prospective multi-polar world, key issues such as global climate change and global energy sector will certainly encourage new geopolitical realignments.
Thus the Middle East is once again the region that warrants closer examination. We have to keep in mind that the Persian Gulf, which embraces countries such as Iraq, Saudi Arabian, Kuwait, the United Arab Emirates, Oman and Iran, is the biggest supplier zone of oil to the world. It is no coincidence that this tense region has been under US surveillance since 1945.
"With great economic growth comes great consumption in energy", might say a geopolitical adage; the control, the access or the exploitation of natural resources becomes evidently crucial for world powers.
Taking note of this brief analysis, perhaps Indonesia should be more proactive in the Middle East and not only play a figurative role in religious forums or organizations.
There are good prospects that the Obama administration may need Indonesia to help find a viable political solution for conflicts in the Middle East.
An innovative and audacious approach was attempted during Wahid's presidency in 1999, even though it was rejected by the Indonesian parliament.
The former foreign affairs minister, Alwi Shihab, proposed to open ties with Israel although only in the economic and trade sectors. Not to mention that this would have benefited Indonesia financially, the political move was primarily aimed at making Indonesia more influential in the Middle East peace process, while at the same time creating a channel with the US-Israeli lobby.
In retrospect, we may concede that it was just a matter of time. We have to remember that our country had just begun its democratic transition and was experiencing separatist and religious conflicts.
Additionally, when the "war against terror" was initiated by the Bush administration, Indonesia's credibility was put to the test, as Jakarta and Bali were both targets of terrorist attacks.
Clearly, a general critique of Indonesia's foreign policy will reveal that our intentions did not match our capability to take action internationally. Those missed opportunities should create greater awareness in the near future.
As a crossroad of world politics, the Middle East should be a top priority on Indonesia's strategic agenda. If concrete and rational actions - starting with an effective lobby - are taken, we might gain politically, economically and symbolically. Not only would we affirm our identity as the world's biggest moderate Muslim country, but also as a leading democracy in Asia.
Let us hope the upcoming government, in concert with its new foreign minister, will support and use our professional diplomatic corps in striving for Indonesia's interests.
In the meantime, Indonesia should not be reduced to playing an auxiliary role in its region or on the global stage. Furthermore, it is only through strong state sovereignty that Indonesia will be proactive and create policy breakthroughs.
The writer works as assistant researcher at the Acad*mie Internationale de G*opolitique, Paris,
| 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|