O

n Dec. 13, 2011, Indonesians commemorated Hari Nusantara (Indonesian Archipelago Day). The commemoration was modest; a ceremony led by Vice President Boediono was held in Dumai, Riau. As part of the celebration, many quarters in Indonesia had expressed a sentiment that invoked the Nusantara glory during the times of the old kingdoms.

Indonesians continue to appreciate the strategic significance of the archipelago. The 1953 Djoeanda Declaration provided a solid doctrinal foundation of the archipelagic perspective. Through the lens of Wawasan Nusantara, Indonesians see the unity of land and water that comprise the modern Indonesia. With the adoption of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea in 1982 and its ratification by Indonesia in 1985, this perspective has a strong legal basis both nationally and internationally.

Wawasan Nusantara has been guiding the country’s strategies in preserving its sovereignty and territorial integrity. It has also navigated the country’s foreign relations and diplomacy, especially on issues that relate to territorial borders and affect the country’s territorial integrity.

Does geography really matter to a country’s foreign policy?

History has recorded cases where a state’s behavior toward its neighbors and other states beyond its region was dictated by the geographic imperatives. In the 15th and 16th centuries, for example, the Russian Empire was advancing a policy toward securing ports in the Baltic Sea and the Black Sea that remained warm during winter and open for maritime activities for commercial as well as military purposes. The quest for warm water ports was driven by the absence or lack of such ports in the empire’s territory, while the need for the empire to sustain its economy was dire.

In the past, a country’s geographical limitations drove it to pursue a policy of spatial expansion. This was also one of the factors that instigated the territorial adventures carried out by many countries in the past and which also led to the emergence of the colonial era. However, in an age like today, where countries abide by the principles of international law and those enshrined in the UN Charter, such an expansive foreign policy seems unlikely.

The relationship between geography and foreign policy has also for a long time attracted many thinkers, statesmen and strategists. For example, in the February and April 1938 editions of the American Political Science Review, Nicholas J. Spykman delved at length into the subject of geography and foreign policy. Based on an extensive study, Spykman argued, among other things, that in relation to the geographic and historical systems of reference, both world and regional locations determined one country’s foreign policy toward another.

While statesmen are generally aware of the relevance and significance of their country’s geography on their country’s foreign policy, statesmen of countries with specific geographical gifts, such as land-locked countries, small countries or small, island countries, have had made a more explicit stand on their foreign policy.

For example, in a speech on “The Challenges to Small Nations’ Foreign Policies” in July 1995, Singapore’s minister for national development and the second minister for foreign affairs, Lim Hng Kiang, outlined the foreign policy commitments of Singapore, which were as follows: “(i) it must learn to coexist with its neighbors, (ii) small nations must be useful and relevant for the international community, (iii) small nations must create a sense of community in their immediate regions and beyond, (iv) an international system based on the rule of law is of critical importance to all small nations, (v) diplomacy is a key element in the foreign policy of small nations.”

For Indonesia, the archipelagic underpinning is the logical and built-in part of its bebas aktif foreign policy. This foreign policy carries with it the archipelagic interests of the country. It is dedicated to the stability and prosperity of the country as well as to the common peace, stability and prosperity of the region and the global community of nations. Thus, its operational functionality is both inflowing and outflowing.

The efficacy of the archipelagic foreign policy can be seen in many ways.

First, it helps define priorities that meet the archipelagic needs. To go beyond border diplomacy, Indonesia could mainstream the archipelagic dimension into the international agenda that affects its interests, such as on the issues of development, climate change and food and energy security. The foreign policy would be synchronized with relevant national policies, for example in tapping the archipelagic potentials of the six development corridors as well as the connectivity design as outlined in the Master Plan for the Acceleration and Expansion of Indonesian Economic Growth (MP3EI).

Second, it helps define the choice of foreign policy instruments, in particular when archipelagic challenges arise. Trade would be a viable instrument when the need for supporting the integration of the domestic market is strong. Outwardly, it would be useful to support the integration of regional markets, such as in Southeast Asia, of which the region itself has an archipelagic portion. A military instrument could also be used, for example, to support a maritime component in a peace mission. This is what Indonesia has been contributing to the Integrated Mission Task Force (IMTF) within the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL).

Third, it helps locate the imperatives that emerge at the crossing point between national security policy and foreign policy. Those imperatives would include, among other things, developing a national policy that takes into account the precepts and directions coming from both national security policy and foreign policy; ensuring the tactical and strategic capacity to respond to traditional and non-traditional security challenges; and managing the strategic depth that the archipelago offers. Essential in tackling these crossing points is diplomacy, especially in the fields of defense and security.

The archipelago has been with us since the beginning of time. We were born archipelagic, and Indonesia will always be an archipelagic country.

The writer is an assistant to special staff to the President for international relations. The opinions expressed are his own