TheJakartaPost

Please Update your browser

Your browser is out of date, and may not be compatible with our website. A list of the most popular web browsers can be found below.
Just click on the icons to get to the download page.

Jakarta Post

Note on priorities for the 2015 Bandung Conference

What legacy can we expect from the ongoing commemoration of the 60th anniversary of the Asian-African Conference (AAC)? While people in Bandung and Jakarta may feel the excitement of the event, the rest of Indonesia and the world wonder about the significance of this high-rank gathering

Dinna Wisnu (The Jakarta Post)
Jakarta
Thu, April 23, 2015

Share This Article

Change Size

Note on priorities for the 2015 Bandung Conference

W

hat legacy can we expect from the ongoing commemoration of the 60th anniversary of the Asian-African Conference (AAC)? While people in Bandung and Jakarta may feel the excitement of the event, the rest of Indonesia and the world wonder about the significance of this high-rank gathering.

For those who follow history, the AAC marked Indonesia'€™s contribution to the world community at a time when bipolarism ruled and many countries in Asia and Africa were undermined in global politics because of their statuses as Third World countries and colonies. Indonesia persuaded four other countries to invite the first gathering of 29 countries from the Asian and African continents.

The success of convincing China, the then rising influence, to pledge respect for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of others, to settle borders peacefully and to abstain from aggression and threats were remarkable achievements of that time. It created confidence over the improved future of the new and emerging economies.

The 60th year commemoration of the 1955 AAC cherishes those moments. More importantly we shall recall the strategic meaning of coming together to push a multilateral agenda. We have seen that tough challenges that are usually only handled domestically or bilaterally are more effectively discussed and handled as global problems.

Against this experience, let us evaluate where the 29 Asian and African countries who attended the 1955 AAC are in terms of current struggles. Afghanistan, Yemen, Syria, Iraq and Libya are listed as fragile states under threat from terrorism, insurgencies and civil war. Violence against humanity exists with arguments for pre-empting some groups from ruling, or for creating security and stability.

Other countries are challenged by persistently low economic growth, diseases, deep income inequality and transnational crimes. There are also territorial disputes among members of the 1955 conference, like that over the South China Sea.

What came in 1955 was a pledge to find solutions through dialog, a dominance of trust over suspicion and a condemnation of ruthless methods that violate human rights so that they would become less important in current struggles. Unilateralism is the growing trend to solve internal challenges in the Middle East and Africa. When the rulers in Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Libya and Yemen failed to convince other countries about their capacity to rule, unilateral strikes were launched. The United Nations cannot do much most things because members choose to find solution outside the multilateral framework. Iran is seen with high suspicion despite its diplomatic outreach to explain its intentions for its nuclear enrichment program.

The ASEAN countries failed to cement regional pressure that would stop China from building reclamation projects in the South China Sea and to respect the claims raised by members of ASEAN. Once again multilateralism failed because China pushes for a bilateral approach in any attempt to calm down tension and suspicion in the South China Sea.

What we should be concerned about is that the challenges in Asia and Africa are now seen as merely domestic problems, bilateral issues and as something that can be solved through economic cooperation. This was the reason why in 2005 the Asian and African countries that comprised the 1955 AAC members started up the New Asia-Africa Strategic Partnership. This is why the similar tone of desire for improved economic cooperation appears in the 2015 commemoration and why China is needed to play a crucial role in Asia and Africa because of its vast economic potential and its '€œBelt and Road'€ initiative.

While bringing in economic cooperation (or investment) may be useful, we should take note of the grudges that are floating around with regard to the existing framework of cooperation and approach.

First, the AAC commemoration may pledge improved economic cooperation with mutual benefits, but since there is a larger income inequality and income-generating potential among members of AAC, the terms of agreement would most likely be imbalanced.

It is no secret that the development initiatives of China, for instance, are packaged in a deal that would include sending Chinese workforces and families to execute the projects in the recipient countries.

Even if China does not '€œexport'€ its workforces, its diaspora is among the largest in the world. This is also true of India. Of course, these highly populated countries are also striving to end poverty domestically, but what'€™s in for the workers in the hosting investment countries?

Second, many development projects may no longer be associated with the need to reform political systems or to enforce financial transparency: for instance, those coming from China. To civic society, this is problematic because the lack of transparency and of an open political system would hinder checks from the public on the politics of foreign cooperation.

Our friends in Africa raised concerns over the inevitability of accepting terms of agreement from investors because they have no idea what the terms are and thus they cannot raise ex-ante analysis on the implications of those terms.

Third, there is not much alternative funding of developments from the Western world. Loans coming from international financial institutions have tough terms about political reform and market openness that many African and Middle Eastern countries cannot meet or for which they cannot qualify.

Worse, entering the Western market has become more challenging because of sustainability certification and a traceability requirement.

Fourth, problems of deep poverty, lack of basic life needs, lack of food and nutrition are isolated as social humanitarian issues, which puts these challenges in the lower priority list unless the national economic pie is enlarged.

So, if in this 2015 AAC Commemoration some social justice issues are raised, that'€™s a good start. But we need tools and a path for action. Economic growth may be necessary to alleviate some socioeconomic challenges faced by Asian and African countries, but it is not sufficient to end the misery faced by the millions living under insufficiencies, conflicts and fear.

We should create a more level playing field in this era of global market integration, such as by ending the technological illiteracy that has prevented many workers from being counted as skilled laborers. We should voice what micro and small business units deserve from the global value chain.

Countries should refrain from exercising foreign policies that worsen trust and tensions in a region. We must discuss the importance of respect for territorial boundaries in conflict areas. Just as the 2015 AAC Commemoration may pledge support to Palestine, we too must find a platform to ease tension in the South China Sea and to stop activities that would erode trust among neighbors in the region.

With these, we shall hope that the Bandung spirit inspires our convening leaders to make a difference.
_____________________

The writer is associate professor in political science, Paramadina Graduate School of Diplomacy, Jakarta.

{

Your Opinion Matters

Share your experiences, suggestions, and any issues you've encountered on The Jakarta Post. We're here to listen.

Enter at least 30 characters
0 / 30

Thank You

Thank you for sharing your thoughts. We appreciate your feedback.